I don't know about best, but when I got my check and I was looking for an accurate long range rifle that wouldn't cost me $10,000+ up front, I put the HTI on order in .50 and .375CT (chassis in two payments, barrel paid for, suppressor started interim --kinda like layaway). I'd have gotten .408, but .375 will use Sierras for fodder. Anyway, the .408 Cheytac Intervention holds the record on the tightest group at distance, 16" at 1 mile. That's a point target. I'd say that is the true measure of a bolt gun. I decided to go with the Nightforce Beast because I don't think I can jam an SN-9 on it, though 40x in this case might be useful. Beast also has 120 mils of elevation, until I find better I'm going with it. I like USO scopes, love the TPAL, user friendly, they just do it for me and always have, but I have to go with Nightforce on this elevation.
I'm hoping this HTI in .375 will be close to the .408 performance with the slick machined bullets. I thought they made the .375 to outdo the .408? Anyway, it'll be MY premier bolt gun.
TRG42, AI rifles, particularly their .338's (longest kills). I looked into those. The Barrett's didn't impress me, nor did the lower end models. I thought of building a custom action, which may have been best.
Following has to do with semi's, but they are getting more relevant in the sniper sphere. Plus it sheds light on some of the above.
As for .mil shit, there are a lot of parameters that go into selection of a weapon, politics being just part of it, price another. If they chose the best, I wouldn't have trained SDM's with 4MOA spec. Colt M4's to take out 600m point targets. They'd have gotten us M110's instead, SR25 ECC's with 1-8x USO DFP scopes even better. And regular infantrymen would have gotten Noveske or similar, NOT Colt.
Ever seen the receipt for a .mil rifle? NIB Colt M4 with mag, sling and BFD: just over $600 in '01 or '02. I got to open my box and put my rack number on my own weapon and I kept that weapon like it was my own --never let me down, I only had one M4 issued the whole time I was in, even as a SAW gunner I kept that M4. This was w/o the rail, which they paid about $100 for and doesn't FF. Military can do better. Instead, they just "make do". Look at the XM107? It came with a Leupy scope NOT suitable for that weapon at ALL. Accuracy was shit for what they billed it to do. And when SDM's did complain in force, everyone got different shit: some got the M110's, many got modified M14's (which, to our chagrin, we couldn't get signed out! In storage since 50-60's, they had demil orders that had to be rescinded first!) Lots of soldiers bought their own uppers for SDM uppers, and some their own optics as well.
To show how bad it is at the unit level, I was sent to go down the street to buy a bunch of Olympic Arms shit to test out. It was thought they had some credibility due to the fact they tested our SOPMOD kit independently (which now makes me wonder about that). Total fucking fail from asshole to appetite, I won't go into it, but Oly wasn't interested in making weapons (or uppers, that was all we needed) that were up to par, and here I mean basic milspec at minimum, prefer above. But that was how desperate we were then.
I'd have to DOWNGRADE in order to get full army milspec on my .mil type weapons. Shit, even my NOD's, mount and helmet are better than what they issue. Military bolt guns have things to bring to the table, but "best" isn't one of them. Best all around perhaps, given the mission. Army just isn't interested in sub-MOA groups and tight groups past 1000m using the LR118, which is what they use.
Ergo, chances are the military sniper rifle isn't the best one available. It is the most suitable one available that can be made in numbers. Exception may be the AI rifles some Commonwealth countries use.