• 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!

  • The site has been updated!

    If you notice any issues, please let us know below!

    VIEW THREAD

Kicking around the .375 E to replace 50 cal. in the ELR-SR role.

Terry Cross

Terry Cross

Dingleberry
Supporter
Commercial Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
Mar 15, 2003
2,606
9,016
Alexandria, LA 71303
www.kmwlrs.com
  • Like
Reactions: stefan73, sodakhunter, UKDslayer and 3 others
Terry Cross said:
Link to decent article on a possible 50 cal replacement already being discussed here.
www.twz.com

Barrett .50 Caliber Sniper Rifle Replacement For SOCOM May Fire A Smaller Round

A gun in a smaller caliber could replace the iconic .50 caliber Barrett, as well as Mk 15 rifles, in U.S. special operations inventory.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
Click to expand...
I think at some point someone is going to question having a giant heavy action while getting the same performance as something smaller and lighter. I understand that there is an argument that the 50 BMG primers are more consistent at very cold temps but I've never seen data to actually back that up. Not that logic and reason have a damn thing to do with government purchasing...

BMG with a modern projectile has proven to be pretty capable even out to 2 miles. For real world applications, it would seem that the ability to swap between a monolithic and Mk-211 would be pretty useful. Honestly, a dumb version of the XM-25 round would seem to have a hell of a lot more merit in the field. At long ranges a round that can fuck up someones day with a close shot rather than a direct hit is a world of difference.

-Alex
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dogtown and lash
The main advantage of .50BMG for a long time has been payload ability. Having something similar to Mk211 in a smaller bullet would be a priority before any rifle could even be considered, I would think.
 
Dogtown said:
The main advantage of .50BMG for a long time has been payload ability. Having something similar to Mk211 in a smaller bullet would be a priority before any rifle could even be considered, I would think.
Click to expand...
Lehigh had a multipurpose round in 338 for a while so it isn't like you can't CNC a bullet and stuff it with whatever filling you want. Even an 833 grain 50 cal bullet like spotter tracer is marginal as a payload though. There is a reason actual HE rounds in 50 are essentially collectors items rather than a production round. Even in 14.5mm there really aren't HE rounds. With 20mm you get all the way up to 11 grams of HE which means the KE of the projectile is still probably higher in most cased than the explosive energy. That changes as you get further/higher/slower of course. Those aren't really made with antipersonnel in mind so with optimization maybe you could get a 20mm with a burst diameter large enough to be meaningful. I don't see anything in the realm or antipersonnel grenade that ever saw combat use smaller than 30mm though. The 25x59 is the smallest diameter long range shoulder fired grenade I can find and it never saw service. I wonder if something that small with a contact fuze is big enough to matter. Maybe the air burst capability was the only thing that gave it a practical use...

-Alex
 
  • Like
Reactions: cuirc
Aren't the 338 and the 375 so close to each other capability wise that it would be wiser to go with one of them? It seems as if the list of cartridges kept in inventory is growing faster than ever.
 
762libertarian said:
Aren't the 338 and the 375 so close to each other capability wise that it would be wiser to go with one of them? It seems as if the list of cartridges kept in inventory is growing faster than ever.
Click to expand...
Depends on the purpose/mission. I would say no in this application. Especially since we have more room to add goodies in the 375 for other needs.
 
Who won the contract?
 
Since the 338 LM performance is close to halfway toward the 50 cal; and still "comfortable" to shoot, They should leave well enough alone. The 375 would be maybe halfway between the 338 LM and the 50 cal , so I don't see the point. Certainly a 50 Cal can do things that a 375 no matter how hot won't. Don't screw with something that works just to keep the ordinance folks busy!
 
cuirc said:
Since the 338 LM performance is close to halfway toward the 50 cal; and still "comfortable" to shoot, They should leave well enough alone. The 375 would be maybe halfway between the 338 LM and the 50 cal , so I don't see the point. Certainly a 50 Cal can do things that a 375 no matter how hot won't. Don't screw with something that works just to keep the ordinance folks busy!
Click to expand...
Not entirely.

375EnABELER:
1000 meters = 6.5 Mils
2000 meters = 20 Mils
2500 meters = 31 Mils

.50 Cal M33 Ball:
1000 meters = 9.3 mils
2000 meters = 35 mils
2500 meters = 56 mils.

Given the same wind speed of 25mph under ideal atmospheric conditions the wind holds at 25mph are at 2500 meters:

375 EnABELR = 10 Mils
.50 M33 = 17 Mils

The project requirements are 2500 meter engagements. Which do you think would be easier on the shooter? Also at 2500 meters:

375 EnABLER = 1000 ftlbs Energy @ 1040fps
.50 33 Ball = 1100 ftlbs Energy @ 870fps

So the difference isn't very big. You can also see the velocity is starting to fall off a lot for the .50 cal. By Comparison at 1000 yards a 140gr 264 will have around 700ftlbs of energy. So the 375 still has a lot left in it. The rifles built were 28 inch to 32 inch vs the .50 Cal systems at 38 inches. So lighter, easier to move around etc etc.

And the .375 does it at a cheaper cost per round.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lash, kthomas, CSTactical and 2 others
7mmShooter said:
The 375 has its merits for sure, but the 50 with a 750gr Amax or similar is a lot closer than M33 Ball.
Click to expand...
You cant blame applied Ballistics for using hornady advertising tactics. After all the enabelr was designed shorter to fit into a standard cheytac mag to use optomized bullets. Unlike the bmg in standard mags. but if you optamize a bmg with 850 plus grain monolithic high bc bullets the enabeler will not even be close. But remember we are talking about military application in nato spect actions and mags .
 
  • Like
Reactions: hohlspitz and W54/XM-388
DocUSMCRetired said:
Not entirely.

375EnABELER:
1000 Yards = 6.5 Mils
2000 Yards = 20 Mils
2500 Yards = 31 Mils

.50 Cal M33 Ball:
1000 Yards = 9.3 mils
2000 Yards = 35 mils
2500 Yards = 56 mils.
Click to expand...
M33 is a straw man.

800 Grain Gen 2 Lazer:
1000 Yards = 6.5 Mils
2000 Yards = 18.7 Mils
2500 Yards = 28.1 Mils

That calculation is here at essentially sea level with pretty modest velocities achievable in a 32" barrel. 50 is a caliber that there is an existing supply chain and active weapons systems for.

There is certainly room for a lighter platform that is capable at long ranges. I think the larger bolt face on the enabler and correspondingly heavy action work against that goal. I remember hearing Bryan or Mitch say that the cold weather ignition with the 50 cal primer was one of the reasons for it but the current brass is LMR pocketed so I guess it didn't matter enough. What actual advantage does the enabler have over a CT?

-Alex
 
  • Like
Reactions: stefan73 and Terry Cross
Sandow the Heretic said:
M33 is a straw man.

800 Grain Gen 2 Lazer:
1000 Yards = 6.5 Mils
2000 Yards = 18.7 Mils
2500 Yards = 28.1 Mils

That calculation is here at essentially sea level with pretty modest velocities achievable in a 32" barrel. 50 is a caliber that there is an existing supply chain and active weapons systems for.

There is certainly room for a lighter platform that is capable at long ranges. I think the larger bolt face on the enabler and correspondingly heavy action work against that goal. I remember hearing Bryan or Mitch say that the cold weather ignition with the 50 cal primer was one of the reasons for it but the current brass is LMR pocketed so I guess it didn't matter enough. What actual advantage does the enabler have over a CT?

-Alex
Click to expand...
It is not a strawman, since I am using approved military rounds. If the 800 grain gen 2 Lazer gets approved then we can bring it in. But it is also important to note the contract criteria was to use smaller lighter rifles. A lot of our testing was asked to be done on 28 and 32 inch barrels. If you did this with the .50 the muzzle velocity would too low to be competitive.

Also to get those kinds of numbers with the .50cal you would need to be pushing 3050fps out of a 32 inch barrel. That isn't happening safely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash
DocUSMCRetired said:
It is not a strawman, since I am using approved military rounds. If the 800 grain gen 2 Lazer gets approved then we can bring it in. But it is also important to note the contract criteria was to use smaller lighter rifles. A lot of our testing was asked to be done on 28 and 32 inch barrels. If you did this with the .50 the muzzle velocity would too low to be competitive.

Also to get those kinds of numbers with the .50cal you would need to be pushing 3050fps out of a 32 inch barrel. That isn't happening safely.
Click to expand...
Hornady Amax is also an approved projectile.

My calculation was done at 2850 which is entirely doable in a 32 inch barrel.

-Alex
 
DocUSMCRetired said:
It is not a strawman, since I am using approved military rounds. If the 800 grain gen 2 Lazer gets approved then we can bring it in. But it is also important to note the contract criteria was to use smaller lighter rifles. A lot of our testing was asked to be done on 28 and 32 inch barrels. If you did this with the .50 the muzzle velocity would too low to be competitive.

Also to get those kinds of numbers with the .50cal you would need to be pushing 3050fps out of a 32 inch barrel. That isn't happening safely.
Click to expand...
When was the .375 Enabler and approved military round?
 
Sandow the Heretic said:
Hornady Amax is also an approved projectile.

My calculation was done at 2850 which is entirely doable in a 32 inch barrel.

-Alex
Click to expand...
I ran the numbers. To get 6.5 mils out of the 800 grain requires 3050fps. At 2850 your holding 37 mils. To match up to the .375s you would need to push 3050fps. Hornady AMAX would need 2900fps.

Out of the rifle requirements for barrel and other parameters you are looking closer at around 2300 - 2400 FPS. Which would give you the following for the .50 BMG under the new requirements:


1000 meters = 12 mils
2000 meters = 37 mils
2500 meters = 57 mils.

You are not going to get even close to 2800 fps if you follow the project guidelines for weight, barrel length, and other aspects.

.375 EnABELR has already been selected as the replacement, after years of success at this point down range. It proved to be a better option. The only question now is who will build the new rifle, and what will the final design look like. We don't have a dog in this race either way so it is exciting to get to sit back and watch what they come up with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stefan73
750gr Amax at just 2850fps… standard Sea level conditions using the AB G7 for the 750gr Amax

1,000yds = 6.3mil
2,000yds = 19.7mil
2,500yds = 30.7mil
 
7mmShooter said:
750gr Amax at just 2850fps… standard Sea level conditions using the AB G7 for the 750gr Amax

1,000yds = 6.3mil
2,000yds = 19.7mil
2,500yds = 30.7mil
Click to expand...
Now show me how you will get that out of a 28 inch barrel.

Also the rifle must weigh less than 22lbs, no more than 18lbs barrel attached with an empty magazine. Bolt action, magazine fed. Peak recoil with suppressor attached must be less than 25 ft-lbs. Length of pull is 14.5 inches, Suppressor is 8.5 inches. Total length is 56 inches. That leaves you 33 inches for the action and barrel to make those numbers work.

Make it work with a 750gr amax at 3850 fps and stay inside the rifle criteria.
 
Last edited:
DocUSMCRetired said:
I ran the numbers. To get 6.5 mils out of the 800 grain requires 3050fps. At 2850 your holding 37 mils. To match up to the .375s you would need to push 3050fps. Hornady AMAX would need 2900fps.

Out of the rifle requirements for barrel and other parameters you are looking closer at around 2300 - 2400 FPS. Which would give you the following for the .50 BMG under the new requirements:


1000 meters = 12 mils
2000 meters = 37 mils
2500 meters = 57 mils.

You are not going to get even close to 2800 fps if you follow the project guidelines for weight, barrel length, and other aspects.

.375 EnABELR has already been selected as the replacement, after years of success at this point down range. It proved to be a better option. The only question now is who will build the new rifle, and what will the final design look like. We don't have a dog in this race either way so it is exciting to get to sit back and watch what they come up with.
Click to expand...



IMG_7131.PNG

IMG_7132.PNG

IMG_7133.PNG
 
7mmShooter said:
750gr Amax at just 2850fps… standard Sea level conditions using the AB G7 for the 750gr Amax

1,000yds = 6.3mil
2,000yds = 19.7mil
2,500yds = 30.7mil
Click to expand...
You can't push amax that fast. It barely can be pushed to 2700. The problem is the bearing surface is massive on a swaged bullet. Damn near an inch long. Most of the time 2650 is where those end up shooting well. Solids have a much smaller drive band and can be pushed faster safely.

-Alex
 
Sandow the Heretic said:
You can't push amax that fast. It barely can be pushed to 2700. The problem is the bearing surface is massive on a swaged bullet. Damn near an inch long. Most of the time 2650 is where those end up shooting well. Solids have a much smaller drive band and can be pushed faster safely.

-Alex
Click to expand...
Max weight of the empty rifle needs to be 18lbs or less as well. And maximum recoil needs to be under 25 ft lbs. That is going to drive your velocity way down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stefan73
Sandow the Heretic said:
You can't push amax that fast. It barely can be pushed to 2700. The problem is the bearing surface is massive on a swaged bullet. Damn near an inch long. Most of the time 2650 is where those end up shooting well. Solids have a much smaller drive band and can be pushed faster safely.

-Alex
Click to expand...
Even at 2650, 36.7 mils to 2500yds. Still way closer to the 375 than what Doc originally posted, that was my point. It’s not the slouch that Doc originally made it look like. Within the limits of the program the .50 doesn’t stand a chance on recoil force alone, anyone can see that.
 
Last edited:
DocUSMCRetired said:
Max weight of the empty rifle needs to be 18lbs or less as well. And maximum recoil needs to be under 25 ft lbs. That is going to drive your velocity way down.
Click to expand...
That is an impossible number for recoil. How is that being measured?

7mmShooter said:
Even at 2650, 36.7 mils to 2500yds. Still way closer to the 375 than what Doc originally posted, that was my point.
Click to expand...
For sure.

-Alex
 
DocUSMCRetired said:
Also the rifle must weigh less than 22lbs, no more than 18lbs barrel attached with an empty magazine. Bolt action, magazine fed. Peak recoil with suppressor attached must be less than 25 ft-lbs. Length of pull is 14.5 inches, Suppressor is 8.5 inches. Total length is 56 inches. That leaves you 33 inches for the action and barrel to make those numbers work.
Click to expand...
Sounds like they specifically wrote their constraints around the .375
With the size and recoil energy parameters, they are effectively blocking any future iterations or evolution of the 50.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HD1911, lash, 7mmShooter and 3 others
Terry Cross said:
Sounds like they specifically wrote their constraints around the .375
With the size and recoil energy parameters, they are effectively blocking any future iterations or evolution of the 50.
Click to expand...
No... DOD always has a wish list. The 375 enabelr is currently the only one that comes close but i am sure it will be obsolite before long and out of the running as advancement happen ever year. Strange how a industry is hindered by a box mag
..
 
  • Like
Reactions: stefan73 and Terry Cross
Asgard1 said:
No... DOD always has a wish list. The 375 enabelr is currently the only one that comes close but i am sure it will be obsolite before long and out of the running as advancement happen ever year. Strange how a industry is hindered by a box mag
..
Click to expand...
Enabler seems like an evolutionary dead end. Market penetration in competition is pretty close to zero. 375 Enabler and 375 Ct have pretty comparable MV and the CT has better data depth and uses a smaller action which works well with the goal of reduced weight. I would think that the larger bolt face would also mean heavier brass/ammo. I'm open to rational explanations as to why it may be better, I just haven't seen one.

-Alex
 
Sandow the Heretic said:
Enabler seems like an evolutionary dead end. Market penetration in competition is pretty close to zero. 375 Enabler and 375 Ct have pretty comparable MV and the CT has better data depth and uses a smaller action which works well with the goal of reduced weight. I would think that the larger bolt face would also mean heavier brass/ammo. I'm open to rational explanations as to why it may be better, I just haven't seen one.

-Alex
Click to expand...
The enabelr does not use a larger action then the cheytac it uses a cheytac action and cheytac box the enabelr is formed or made from the 585 nyatti brass .200 mark is larger in diamiter aprox .660 once fireformed. But the rim is rebated to cheytac .637 simply put its a atempt to compete performance with the cheytac with more box room for higher bc longer bullets. But performance wise it fell short. Same weight rifle lesser performance as the cheytac.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stefan73
cuirc said:
Since the 338 LM performance is close to halfway toward the 50 cal; and still "comfortable" to shoot, They should leave well enough alone. The 375 would be maybe halfway between the 338 LM and the 50 cal , so I don't see the point. Certainly a 50 Cal can do things that a 375 no matter how hot won't. Don't screw with something that works just to keep the ordinance folks busy!
Click to expand...
338lm is garbage.... It's 2024
 
  • Haha
Reactions: lash
Asgard1 said:
The enabelr does not use a larger action then the cheytac it uses a cheytac action and cheytac box the enabelr is formed or made from the 585 nyatti brass .200 mark is larger in diamiter aprox .660 once fireformed. But the rim is rebated to cheytac .637 simply put its a atempt to compete performance with the cheytac with more box room for higher bc longer bullets. But performance wise it fell short. Same weight rifle lesser performance as the cheytac.
Click to expand...
Damn... I don't know why it is stuck in my head that this is a necked down and shortened BMG case. Rarer than rocking-horse shit in competition so I think I've only seen two. Guess I should have done the math. Necking down to 338 is doable on a BMG case but Skip said the barrel life was atrocious.

Shorter cartridge OAL is solvable with bullet and chamber design alone. Seems like that would have been the obvious solution if the only upside is lower OAL.

-Alex
 
Huskydriver said:
338lm is garbage.... It's 2024
Click to expand...
Everyone is entitled to there opinion. I like it. I might also like a new cartridge based on the 375 it certainly as am impressive drag coefficient. Since I wrote the tread some information was given me which makes me maintain an open mind on the proposed changes not that that matters!
Yours for good shooting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stefan73
Dogtown said:
I want to agree, but I’d just say in 2024 there are better options for most applications where it was once a top contender. Its kind of like .308WIN today vs twenty years ago: sure, it gets the job done but there are better options now.
Click to expand...

Exactly... I can't see any reason to run a 338lm with today's cartridges
 
.338LM Improved is a much better .338LM, but with .33XC you can get virgin brass. Shooting .50BMG all day in the Army felt like I was giving myself a concussion; shooting .338LM all day sometimes hurts my shoulder; but I can shoot .300NM all weekend AND it has a much better selection of bullets.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: lash and cuirc
Could you be more specific:
I get less than 1/2 MOA with it at 100 yds with a MDT brake it is almost comfortable to shoot. I does the job. Only issue I can see is the cost per round
 
Dogtown said:
.338LM Improved is a much better .338LM, but with .33XC you can get virgin brass. Shooting .50BMG all day in the Army felt like I was giving myself a concussion; shooting .338LM all day sometimes hurts my shoulder; but I can shoot .300NM all weekend AND it has a much better selection of bullets.
Click to expand...

I agree. 338lm is just not relevant anymore
 
Just because there has been progress on a cartridge is no reason to bad mouth the original cartridge that served a purpose quite well for several years. By that logic we would get 243 SM and stop using the 243 because an improvement has been made! no reason to bad mouth a good cartridge!
 
  • Like
Reactions: stefan73
cuirc said:
Just because there has been progress on a cartridge is no reason to bad mouth the original cartridge that served a purpose quite well for several years. By that logic we would get 243 SM and stop using the 243 because an improvement has been made! no reason to bad mouth a good cartridge!
Click to expand...
243 blows as well along with 308win since im committing blasphemy might as well go all in
 
  • Haha
Reactions: lash, cuirc, Dogtown and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
2019 SHOT Show (ELR-Specific): Day 4 (Friday, Jan 25, 2019)
Replies
2
Views
952
Longshot85
Longshot85
Top Bottom
Back