• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Budget M24 inspired start

KCode

Sergeant of the Hide
Full Member
Minuteman
Mar 25, 2019
208
129
For a loosely inspired M24 build do you guys see any advantage or disadvantage to a new Remington 700 ADL in 30-06? I was thinking basically I'd have a 700 action for $500 or so, it would be a long action, and later I could rebarrel it in 308 if I wanted. However since I have a Garand I already load for 30-06 so maybe keep it 30-06 but a M24 profile barrel later.

Does this make any sense at all as a starting point? Before anyone says anything, I do not wish to buy a used rifle.
 
I’ve bought a few of the new rem arms model 700’s and they are good to go. Finally it looks like the new owners are doing something right.

Bolt lugs don’t need lapped and they all include a Timney trigger now which is 10 times better than the x mark pro.

Might as well build a 30-06 if that’s what you load for. Loading 308’s in a long action is just finicky.
 
Start for what, specifically?

If you want a solid M24 profiled barreled action, you can get the .308 20" version from Aero for $1,150 - 25% = $862 right now. Supposedly could stack the 15% off email marketing list discount to get it down to $733.
 
Yeah you just buy a 30 cal blank with an m24 profile and have your gunsmith thread and chamber it for you.

I think this is the route I will go eventually. Planning on making this an as I go build. I have to give the amazingly nice lady at HS Precision a thank you for pushing me towards going the 700 route over the Howa 1500.
 
You could buy the Remington 700 Long-Range model, its comes with a heavy profile barrel, HS Precision stock and 30-06 chambering. Unfortunately you do not get a detachable magazine, but that can be added later by a gunsmith.
 
For a loosely inspired M24 build do you guys see any advantage or disadvantage to a new Remington 700 ADL in 30-06? I was thinking basically I'd have a 700 action for $500 or so, it would be a long action, and later I could rebarrel it in 308 if I wanted. However since I have a Garand I already load for 30-06 so maybe keep it 30-06 but a M24 profile barrel later.

Does this make any sense at all as a starting point? Before anyone says anything, I do not wish to buy a used rifle.
A 30-06 is certainly as good or better than a 308; it is the same bullet but has more flexibility in loads. Using an off the shelf 700 Remington dose not come close to an M-24. It is all in the stock. The foundation for the action and a free floating barrel. Then as far as the optics goes to be "equivalent you would need to spend at least twice what you spent for the rifle to just come close. Better to save your money till you can get that will perform for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bar_n
Well since
I wrote the above I came into an original M24 not a europtic clone it is a short action which means it was issued to the marine core. I love it shoots great. As I said save your money and get what you really want.
 
I sit corrected the Marine version and the army version both used the Remington 40X action except as designated M40 the Marines used the short action. Quoted below is the write-up in Wikipedia. Sorry for the misstatement.

Differences between M24 and M40[edit]​

The U.S. Marine Corps also uses the Remington 700/40x action as the basis for its M40 Sniper Weapon System.[25] The primary difference between the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marine Corps rifles is that while the U.S. Marine Corps M40 variants use the short-action version of the Remington 700/40x (which is designed for shorter cartridges such as the .308 Winchester/7.62×51 mm NATO), the U.S. Army M24 uses the Remington 700 Long Action.[25] Despite the fact that the M24 comes fitted with a 7.62×51mm NATO barrel upon issue, retaining the longer action allows them to reconfigure the rifle in dimensionally larger cartridge chamberings if necessary (which has been the case during the longer engagement distances during Operation Enduring Freedom). Long actions also increase reliability and reduce jamming by reducing the angle of cartridges leaving the magazine and permit long, low-drag heavy-for-caliber bullets to be loaded in short-action cartridges that otherwise would not fit in short-action cartridges, magazines and receivers.

The U.S. Army reconfigured their M24 rifles to M2010 Enhanced Sniper Rifles rechambering the original M24 rifles to .300 Winchester Magnum. The USMC M40A3 uses a 25 inches (635 mm) Schneider barrel and the U.S. Army M24 used a 24 inches (610 mm) Rock Creek 5R barrel.

I am just as happy, I have a great respect for the Marines their endurance at Guadalcanal, for instance, did not do them sufficient recognition.
 
I sit corrected the Marine version and the army version both used the Remington 40X action except as designated M40 the Marines used the short action. Quoted below is the write-up in Wikipedia. Sorry for the misstatement.

Differences between M24 and M40[edit]​

The U.S. Marine Corps also uses the Remington 700/40x action as the basis for its M40 Sniper Weapon System.[25] The primary difference between the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marine Corps rifles is that while the U.S. Marine Corps M40 variants use the short-action version of the Remington 700/40x (which is designed for shorter cartridges such as the .308 Winchester/7.62×51 mm NATO), the U.S. Army M24 uses the Remington 700 Long Action.[25] Despite the fact that the M24 comes fitted with a 7.62×51mm NATO barrel upon issue, retaining the longer action allows them to reconfigure the rifle in dimensionally larger cartridge chamberings if necessary (which has been the case during the longer engagement distances during Operation Enduring Freedom). Long actions also increase reliability and reduce jamming by reducing the angle of cartridges leaving the magazine and permit long, low-drag heavy-for-caliber bullets to be loaded in short-action cartridges that otherwise would not fit in short-action cartridges, magazines and receivers.

The U.S. Army reconfigured their M24 rifles to M2010 Enhanced Sniper Rifles rechambering the original M24 rifles to .300 Winchester Magnum. The USMC M40A3 uses a 25 inches (635 mm) Schneider barrel and the U.S. Army M24 used a 24 inches (610 mm) Rock Creek 5R barrel.

I am just as happy, I have a great respect for the Marines their endurance at Guadalcanal, for instance, did not do them sufficient recognition.
P. S. However, The left side of the receiver is stamped Remington 700 M-24
 
Ohhhh boy.

Better get us some photos of this rarity. Receiver markings, barrel markings (if "factory"), a few of every angle of the action would help.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: TheBigCountry
Ohhhh boy.

Better get us some photos of this rarity. Receiver markings, barrel markings (if "factory"), a few of every angle of the action would help.
I don't know how rare it is? I think they probably made a total of less than 4000 M-24s (including M-40s) The Marines wanted it as a short action so they did; that they just didn't change the markings.
I would put this back out the this group and ask anyone who has a Remington 40x military that went to the marines as a M-40 how is it labeled.
 
I don't know how rare it is? I think they probably made a total of less than 4000 M-24s (including M-40s) The Marines wanted it as a short action so they did; that they just didn't change the markings.
I would put this back out the this group and ask anyone who has a Remington 40x military that went to the marines as a M-40 how is it labeled.

An M24 marked *short* action used by the Marines would be quite the thing to see.

I have an M24 myself. It was one of the rebuilt ones that Remington Defense took old serviceable parts off of and placed a new barreled action in before they sold.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stevo86
An M24 marked *short* action used by the Marines would be quite the thing to see.

I have an M24 myself. It was one of the rebuilt ones that Remington Defense took old serviceable parts off of and placed a new barreled action in before they sold. Just to talk guns for a min. I picked up a 40X in 223 Rem which I am going to have my grand daughter shoot the M-24/40 my grandson will use.
I have to do some work on it so possibly tomorrow i will get it out of the safe and take a couple of pictures
 
  • Like
Reactions: USNavy06
Hopefully it’s not one of those abominations that PTG put out.

I do have a Remington defense short action with all the “M24” markings and m24 profile barrel but the receiver is just marked Remington 700.
 

Attachments

  • 87A86F74-76B1-4656-B1D3-201EF7FA7E31.jpeg
    87A86F74-76B1-4656-B1D3-201EF7FA7E31.jpeg
    498.3 KB · Views: 53
  • AF990481-CC2E-4956-BAEE-C6C8C9E601F5.jpeg
    AF990481-CC2E-4956-BAEE-C6C8C9E601F5.jpeg
    504.2 KB · Views: 54
Last edited:
Except, by definition, a M24 was never built on a short action......
An interesting side note, there was one version of the M24 that was actually built with 1968 vintage 6257xxx serial number range M40 receivers. The Army AMU received something like 30 to 40 M40's from the Air Force in the mid-2000's, and the AMU pulled them apart and rebuilt them as short action M24's. They even custom ordered short action HS Precision M24 stocks for these unique rifles. They are a type of shooting team M24, but like you said, the actual sniper M24's as we know them, are all long action receivers. The CMP even sold one back in 2018. Check it out, it's pretty cool, and it's a legit short action M24 made from an M40 receiver:

https://cmpauction.thecmp.org/detai...M40-clone-with-Leupold-Mk-4-Scope-REM-6257235

This is only 1 of 2 times that M40's and M24's have ever crossed paths like this (I can't remember clearly right now, but I think the 3 M40A7, yes A7, prototype rifles that Remington made for the Marines were built with actual M24 receivers). It has absolutely nothing to do with anything else in this thread, I just wanted to respond to this one post with a cool piece of US military history.
 
Last edited:
I don't know how rare it is? I think they probably made a total of less than 4000 M-24s (including M-40s) The Marines wanted it as a short action so they did; that they just didn't change the markings.
I would put this back out the this group and ask anyone who has a Remington 40x military that went to the marines as a M-40 how is it labeled.

Less than 4,000 M24's? Where are you getting this number from? Remington made tens of thousands of M24's, literally a shitload of them. M24's are not rare in any way whatsoever, countless original M24 rifles and receivers were released for sale in the past few years.

There's a lot more differences between the M40 and M24 receivers than how they're marked. It's an apples to oranges comparison, they're completely different receivers. Also, the original M40's were built in 1966 and the first M24's were built about 1988. So, the Marines didn't decide not to change any markings on the receiver, as you suggest. The first M40 receivers pre-date the first M24 receivers by over 2 decades, the M40's came first.

You also mention the Remington 40X, which has different markings than the Remington 700. The 40X receivers were only used on a few prototype M40's, a few prototype transitional M40A1's, and possibly used on at least 1 M40A1 that was built in the mid-1990's (5 of the 40X receivers were found at RTE in 1995 and returned to Remington, they were traded for 5 Model 700 receivers).

You ask if anyone here has owned any of these rifles, I'm responding to this post because I have owned these rifles. I've owned 2 original 6 digit USMC M40's from 1966 (I sold 1 last year, I still own one), I own an original 7 digit 6257xxx M40 from 1968 (probably Air Force used), I own an original USMC used prototype transitional M40 that's built on a Remington 40X receiver, I've owned 2 of the 5 original USMC Remington 40X receivers that were at RTE and returned to Remington (as I mentioned in the previous paragraph, I sold 1 stripped receiver for $8,000 years ago, and I still own the other receiver, it's the earliest known USMC PWS built M40A3, built at PWS in February 2001), I own 5 original Army used M24 receivers with a "C" serial number prefix and "US" rollmark, I've owned a Remington M24 rebuild rifle that had original Army used take-off parts with a new "RR" prefix serial number M24 receiver, and I also own a bunch of other M40xx rifles in different variations. Not to mention my extensive research on almost all US military sniper rifles from circa 1900 to current issue, and my immense collection of original USMC M40xx take-off parts. I've made tons of posts about the M40 series of sniper rifles on this forum over the years, some of those posts are stickied to the top of the Vintage Section on this forum because of the information I posted in those threads. I served in a Scout Sniper Platoon and have first-hand experience with the M40A3. I do a ton of volunteer work for the USMC Scout Sniper Association, and I'm on the board of directors at the Marine Scout Sniper Heritage Foundation. You asked if anyone in this group has any of these rifles, I'm pretty sure that I meet this qualification.

So, to answer your question, all USMC M40's are marked "Remington Model 700". They don't say "M40" on them, and they certainly don't say "M24" on them.

I want to think it is one that was made for the Marines

If your receiver has "M24" stamped on it, then it was not made for the Marines. I highly doubt that you have an original USMC M40 receiver of any type. There's only about 15 or so original circa 1966 USMC M40's in private hands, none of them are loose receivers (some were built with loose receivers that were found, but I'm unaware of any currently loose USMC M40 receivers). If an original USMC 1966 stripped receiver popped up for sale, it would easily sell for $25,000+. I'd immediately pay that price if someone offered me a legit 1966 USMC 6 digit serial number M40 receiver! Did you pay $25k+ for your receiver? Probably not. There are some other receivers out there that have some interesting history, and those are $10,000 each for a stripped receiver. The 5 USMC 40X receivers that were at RTE in 1995 are each $8,000+. Original Army M24 receivers that are "C" prefix and "US" marked will cost a collector $2,500+. RR serial number prefix are the cheapest of the M24 receivers. What did you pay for your receiver?

Almost everything you've posted in this thread has been incorrect. However, I'm willing to look at any photos you post and maybe help you figure out what you actually have. I've never seen a short action receiver that's also marked with "M24" from the factory. I have seen scum bags who mark receivers with "M40" and "M24" themselves, and try to pass the receiver off as a military receiver. Without seeing your receiver, it sounds like you have a short action Remington 700 receiver that someone marked "M24" at some point. I'd be extremely surprised if you had an actual factory Remington made short action receiver that was M24 marked. Either way, this would never have been a USMC receiver. Post some photos and we can tell you what you have.

You should also look at my post in the thread that I link to below. I posted photos and information about 2 of my original M40 receivers (made in 1966 and 1968). This is probably the first time these 2 generations of M40 receivers have ever been photographed together, and I also discovered that the "US" rollmark on the receivers is in different locations. Both of these original M40 receivers are marked "Remington Model 700".

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/new-m40-receiver-information.7164938/
 
Last edited:
Less than 4,000 M24's? Where are you getting this number from? Remington made tens of thousands of M24's, literally a shitload of them. M24's are not rare in any way whatsoever, countless original M24 rifles and receivers were released for sale in the past few years.

There's a lot more differences between the M40 and M24 receivers than how they're marked. It's an apples to oranges comparison, they're completely different receivers. Also, the original M40's were built in 1966 and the first M24's were built about 1988. So, the Marines didn't decide not to change any markings on the receiver, as you suggest. The first M40 receivers pre-date the first M24 receivers by over 2 decades, the M40's came first.

You also mention the Remington 40X, which has different markings than the Remington 700. The 40X receivers were only used on a few prototype M40's, a few prototype transitional M40A1's, and possibly used on at least 1 M40A1 that was built in the mid-1990's (5 of the 40X receivers were found at RTE in 1995 and returned to Remington, they were traded for 5 Model 700 receivers).

You ask if anyone here has owned any of these rifles, I'm responding to this post because I have owned these rifles. I've owned 2 original 6 digit USMC M40's from 1966 (I sold 1 last year, I still own one), I own an original 7 digit 6257xxx M40 receiver from 1968 (probably Air Force used), I own an original USMC used prototype transitional M40 that's built on a Remington 40X receiver, I've owned 2 of the 5 original USMC Remington 40X receivers that were at RTE and returned to Remington (as I mentioned in the previous paragraph, I sold 1 stripped receiver for $8,000 years ago, and I still own the other receiver, it's the earliest known USMC PWS built M40A3, built at PWS in February 2001), I own 5 original Army used M24 receivers with a "C" serial number prefix and "US" rollmark, I've owned a Remington M24 rebuild rifle that had original Army used take-off parts with a new "RR" prefix serial number M24 receiver, and I also own a bunch of other M40xx rifles in different variations. Not to mention my extensive research on almost all US military sniper rifles from circa 1900 to current issue, and my immense collection of original USMC M40xx take-off parts. I've made tons of posts about the M40 series of sniper rifles on this forum over the years, some of those posts are stickied to the top of the Vintage Section on this forum because of the information I posted in those threads. I served in a Scout Sniper Platoon and have first-hand experience with the M40A3. I do a ton of volunteer work for the USMC Scout Sniper Association, and I'm on the board of directors at the Marine Scout Sniper Heritage Foundation. You asked if anyone in this group has any of these rifles, I'm pretty sure that I meet this qualification.

So, to answer your question, all USMC M40's are marked "Remington Model 700". They don't say "M40" on them, and they certainly don't say "M24" on them.



If your receiver has "M24" stamped on it, then it was not made for the Marines. I highly doubt that you have an original USMC M40 receiver of any type. There's only about 15 or so original circa 1966 USMC M40's in private hands, none of them are loose receivers (some were built with loose receivers that were found, but I'm unaware of any currently loose USMC M40 receivers). If an original USMC 1966 stripped receiver popped up for sale, it would easily sell for $25,000+. I'd immediately pay that price if someone offered me a legit 1966 USMC 6 digit serial number M40 receiver! Did you pay $25k+ for your receiver? Probably not. There are some other receivers out there that have some interesting history, and those are $10,000 each for a stripped receiver. The 5 USMC 40X receivers that were at RTE in 1995 are each $8,000+. Original Army M24 receivers that are "C" prefix and "US" marked will cost a collector $2,500+. RR serial number prefix are the cheapest of the M24 receivers. What did you pay for your receiver?

Almost everything you've posted in this thread has been incorrect. However, I'm willing to look at any photos you post and maybe help you figure out what you actually have. I've never seen a short action receiver that's also marked with "M24" from the factory. I have seen scum bags who mark receivers with "M40" and "M24" themselves, and try to pass the receiver off as a military receiver. Without seeing your receiver, it sounds like you have a short action Remington 700 receiver that someone marked "M24" at some point. I'd be extremely surprised if you had an actual factory Remington made short action receiver that was M24 marked. Either way, this would never have been a USMC receiver. Post some photos and we can tell you what you have.

You should also look at my post in the thread that I link to below. I posted photos and information about 2 of my original M40 receivers (made in 1966 and 1968). This is probably the first time these 2 generations of M40 receivers have ever been photographed together, and I also discovered that the "US" rollmark on the receivers is in different locations. Both of these original M40 receivers are marked "Remington Model 700".

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/new-m40-receiver-information.7164938/
I now lay down corrected you are certainly a person I want to be friends with. If you don't mind I will keep this thread and contact information. I will post pictures of what I have perhaps you can view them and determine its gestation. You are a wealth of information, you might consider writing a book. I have a book on 1911s which is a great reference One on US sniper rifles I think would be a hit in the gun community.

Thank you for your information.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USMCSGT0331
Hopefully it’s not one of those abominations that PTG put out.

I do have a Remington defense short action with all the “M24” markings and m24 profile barrel but the receiver is just marked Remington 700.
I would like to send pictures but I can't get them from my i phone to the computer but I think I can resolve this; one of the pictures i took i put a rule with the action length is about 3.5 inches long visually that looks to me like a short action but I am told it is a long action either way I like it and it shoots well.
Sorry for any ruckus I caused.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USNavy06
You do realize your phone has email?
You do realize you can log into the website from your phone?
You do realize your phone IS a computer?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Watch_this71
Yes but the job I had was 24 hr 7 days a week avoiding email on my phone was a little attempt at quiet. I just never g ot around to changing it.
pirate308 please comment