Bolt Action Sniper Rifle

[JDGray]

Thanks for the read My 20" barrel is plenty accurate, maybe Savage read those articals, too

I don't personally like the Choate folding stock so I'm planning to get the one with the regular Savage LE1 stock.

Didn't care for it either, looked funky, but the little slop didn't hurt accuracy much. The new fixed stock I have now, did help a bit.

 

[geojap]

I really like my FN PBR XP. PBR = Patrol Bolt Rifle. It's made to me a police marksman's rifle and will shoot sub-MOA out of the box. If I had less money to spend, I would have bought a Savage. FN is ceasing production of these rifles right now so you can get some different PBRs and PBR XPs at CDNN Investments right now for about $650-750.

 

[MCMXI]

How accurate does a rifle need to be in order for it to be considered worthy of the title "sniper" rifle? Is MOA good enough, 0.5 MOA? So many folks here post photos of groups that they've shot or talk about how their rifle is sub MOA, etc, but how many of those people (with their "sub MOA" rifle) can shoot sub MOA from 100 to 1000 yards lying down on the dirt with a bipod or backpack, NOT using a sandbag under the butt or padding under their elbows or any other aid. Sure, I can duct tape my rifles to the bench with supports front and rear and put bullets through the same hole all day long but that doesn't mean **** in the real world. It doesn't matter if your rifle will shoot 0.5 MOA when it's totally supported. Can YOU shoot sub MOA lying in the mud or on some gravel, when it's raining, when it's 100F and 90% humidity, when you've just hiked up a 500ft incline, when it's 0F with the wind blowing 20mph etc .... I bet that most rifles, even the cheaper ones, are better than most people in terms of potential accuracy.

I wish everyone would post ALL of the conditions when they post their targets ... it sure would reveal a whole lot and cut through much of the BS. How about showing five shot groups shot in one minute off the ground with a bipod and no other form of rest or support. Are your groups still going to be sub MOA? This is where rifle ergonomics and shooter skill come into play and where bipods with cant/fore/aft adjustment are useful but the groups may suffer.

I've been reading about shooting matches such as F class recently and I'm not particularly interested in doing that the same way that benchrest doesn't interest me. It seems to me that F class is just a part of long-range shooting i.e. reading the wind, calculating bullet drop etc. It's important stuff but is it really practical when you have the rifle supported on a rest, or have the butt sitting on a sandbag. On a side note, I'd like to see a three-gun sport based entirely on the practical application of shooting. A handgun, a carbine with optics AND BUIS (that have to be used) and a long-range scoped rifle. You should have to carry everything that you need to shoot the ENTIRE match, all ammunition, water, food, magazines, with only bipods/backpacks allowed as rests. Maybe that sport exists already.

I'm shooting a tactical match for the first time this weekend. The longest section is 10 shots in 70 seconds at 600 yards lying on the ground with a bipod but no other support. I'm probably going to fail miserably but how else can one learn PRACTICAL shooting skills? Am I going to shoot sub MOA with my "sub MOA" rifles ... I VERY much doubt it.

 

[nksmfamjp]

Lot of good posts, so I'll add something a little different.

Sniper - A sniper is usually a highly trained marksman that shoots targets from concealed positions or distances exceeding the capabilities of regular personnel. Snipers typically have specialized training and distinct high-precision rifles. In addition to marksmanship, military snipers are also trained in camouflage, field craft, infiltration, reconnaissance and observation techniques.

Based on that, I'm a sniper and I didn't even know it! I just was calling myself a long range hunter. Antelope mostly.

All the snipers I see are shooting rifles from improvised field rests or from standard field positions and they carried the rifle to the shooting spot.

To me, that puts these boundries on a 308 Sniper Rifle.
- < 15 lbs
- Positional aspect is more important than the clamp it in a vice accuracy
- Needs to shoot accurately to the maximum range for the lethality of the round. For a 308 on deer size game, 800 yards seems a reasonable distance to deliver sub-14" accuracy. So, basically in the shooter's hands 1.75 MOA. Now, subtract .5 MOA shooter error and .25 MOA for calculation error. and you need a 1 MOA rifle or better.

This requirement screams, find me a good out of the box rifle, get a laser range finder and a good scope.

In my case, I bought a Savage 12 BVSS, put a Burris XTR 3-12x50 mil dot on it in TPS rings and then I carry and shoot it with a TIS cuff sling.

I can hold 3 prone shots in .5" at 100 yards. I shoot 190 bergers out of a 300 WSM case.

My friends Savage 10FP,I think, shot a 5 shot .25" group at 100 when he let me shoot it.

Mine is bedded and his is unbedded in the stock HS Precision stock. So, in a nutshell, I think Savage can meet your demands. I would spend my money on the sling(TIS), scope( have no issue putting a $3000 USO on a near stock Savage), scope mount, rangefinder, and good spotter.

A custom rifle will guarantee you groups 1/2" or better, but it might cost you $6000 to get there. I would much rather put my money in the scope.

On a side note, I'd like to see a three-gun sport based entirely on the practical application of shooting. A handgun, a carbine with optics AND BUIS (that have to be used) and a long-range scoped rifle. You should have to carry everything that you need to shoot the ENTIRE match, all ammunition, water, food, magazines, with only bipods/backpacks allowed as rests. Maybe that sport exists already.

I think it's called war, but if you can set it up so the targets don't shoot back, I'm in!

 

[Bubbles]

A custom rifle will guarantee you groups 1/2" or better, but it might cost you $6000 to get there. I would much rather put my money in the scope.

That seems a bit high. One of ours with a half MOA guarantee will cost less than $5000, and that includes a Leupold scope and a Pelican hard case.

Got to agree that there's no sense putting a ton of $$$ into a nice rifle and then topping it off with cheap glass.

 

[Boba Fett]

1858
*really long quote left out to save space, read it above if you want*

I totally agree with you 1958. How you or your rifle performs on a bench in perfect conditions is pretty much worthless for the real world. It serves to get your scope setup and to have some fun, but after that knowing how to adjust to environmental differences and learning the ability to shoot from real world positions is why I want to attend the sniper school.

I may never use what I learn against another person, but it can't hurt when I go hunting either. And just like a CHL, I consider the class a worthwhile investment, again, even if I never have to use my training against another person. (Lord willing, I never will)

I'm probably going to fail miserably but how else can one learn PRACTICAL shooting skills?

Answer:
www.sniperschool.com

Take a look at some of the videos too...pretty interesting stuff.

 

[lej]

When looking at a close group on a target i dont see the shooters ability only the rifles

 

[Boba Fett]

When looking at a close group on a target i dont see the shooters ability only the rifles

Interesting. When I see a close group, I see the shooter's ability and the rifles potential.

An excellent rifle in the hands of a shooter with no training or ability isn't going to make a good grouping on it's own.

On the other hand, an accomplished shooter with a cheap/crappy rifle can "make" the rifle work and get a good grouping.

How do I know this? Because I have had firearms that I was a terrible shot with and in the hands of the ex-Marine firearms repairman/god of marksmanship at my range, he made perfect little half-dollar sized holes in the target. Sure, I could hit the target, but he could hit where he aimed. His ability was showing the gun's full potential.

People have ability, guns have potential. You need the person's ability to unlock the gun's full potential.

Again, this is why I want to get some actual training at the sniper school. I want to be able to unlock my rifle's full potential by acquiring ability through instruction and practice.

 

[lej]

Sorry Boba Fett, was probably a bit of a throw away comment on my behalf, was more referring to the pictures posted of small groups on the net- no offence intended to the shooters, im sure there are many incredible marksman among them, simple fact is a photo cant tell that story, it can only provide target feedback, as per 1858's comments. I commend your enthusiasm and attitude, with it im sure you will achieve the level of skill you are seeking with the rifle. The only part of what you said that I will disagree with is "making" a cheap/crappy rifle work, you cant make an inherently inaccurate rifle shoot better, a 2moa rifle is a 2 moa rifle, if that’s the best it can do it wont matter who is behind the trigger! If I have taken your mean the wrong way then please accept my apologies.

My honest opinion you are better off getting into competitive shooting to improve your marksmanship, i.e. joining a club than attending a sniper school. Marksmanship is only one part of sniping, and I don’t know if subjects like field craft will assist in that area. Anyway for what its worth

 

[Marcus5aurelius]

Savage 10fp +1

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Sorry, Boba Fett, I must take STRONG issue with this statement:

On the other hand, an accomplished shooter with a cheap/crappy rifle can "make" the rifle work and get a good grouping.

Just not the least bit true at all; in fact, I'd be hard-pressed to think of a more incorrect statement, at least as I understand that statement. If the rifle is "crappy", to me that means it is inaccurate. No amount of skill can "guess" in which direction the rifle is going to miss on *this shot* and adjust hold to make up for it.

Here's why you misinterpreted the results as relayed in this anecdote, to come up with your belief:

How do I know this? Because I have had firearms that I was a terrible shot with and in the hands of the ex-Marine firearms repairman/god of marksmanship at my range, he made perfect little half-dollar sized holes in the target. Sure, I could hit the target, but he could hit where he aimed.

Sorry, but that means the gun wasn't crappy at all, but rather quite capable, so it doesn't support your premise or statement.

His ability was showing the gun's full potential.

EXACTLY! And the gun's full potential was in fact a HIGH potential; therefore it was not at all "crappy", by definition. Cheap, possibly, but not crappy. Just like pretty much all Savage and Stephens rifles.

The RIFLE's accuracy level AND the SHOOTER's skill level are 2 of the three legs of the tripod (the third one being ammo). All 3 legs of the tripod are sine qua non to get a good result - all of them are "without which nots"; or in other words, necessary conditions. No matter how good two of the three legs of the tripod are, the tripod fails without the third leg. You can't "make up for" a missing leg.

 

[Boba Fett]

lej
referring to the pictures posted of small groups on the net- no offence intended to the shooters, im sure there are many incredible marksman among them, simple fact is a photo cant tell that story, it can only provide target feedback

I get what you were saying now and yeah, that is very true.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
*long quote, edited to save room, read above*

No amount of skill can "guess" in which direction the rifle is going to miss on *this shot* and adjust hold to make up for it.

I may have worded that poorly, but I think you pretty well picked it a part to get at the heart of what I was saying.


My gun was pretty crappy, it was just that he could overcome the crappyness of it. He even said that it was a pretty awful gun.

What I was trying to say (and did so rather poorly as Tad pointed out) is that if you take a $6000 gun with all the bells and whistles and put it in the hands of an accomplished shooter, he's going to do very well. Now, a crappy/cheap rifle that doesn't have the perfect stock, trigger, and bipod, the same shooter can get the just as good results out of that rifle.

I did not mean to imply that an accomplished shooter will make up for the guns complete inability to hit the same place twice, but I think that is how I came across. Sorry about that Thanks for pointing it out Tad!

 

[Olympus]

EXACTLY! And the gun's full potential was in fact a HIGH potential; therefore it was not at all "crappy", by definition. Cheap, possibly, but not crappy. Just like pretty much all Savage and Stephens rifles.

 

[nwilliams]

Thread is utterly silly... as is the original poster.

That was completely inappropriate in my opinion. It's really sad when posters sink to that level of immaturity.

Sorry I just thought I should say something because it bothers me. Lot of good posts otherwise on here, I too am in the market for a new tactical bolt gun, but I can't decide what I want yet, I like that PBR though.

 

[jbech123]

What I was trying to say (and did so rather poorly as Tad pointed out) is that if you take a $6000 gun with all the bells and whistles and put it in the hands of an accomplished shooter, he's going to do very well. Now, a crappy/cheap rifle that doesn't have the perfect stock, trigger, and bipod, the same shooter can get the just as good results out of that rifle.

Ummm, no he can't. While the great shooter may well do better than you, a GA precision rifle is cpable of half MOA, whereas the average cheapo remington 710 will do about 1.5 MOA. There are statistical outliers, but if an accomplished shooter could do the same thing with either gun, they would buy rifles for 5K.

 

[pgeleven]

+1 on Savage 10FP. price may not be an issue as much as quality glass, training and the right guy behind the trigger; but its not hard to find a good off-the-shelf/out-of-the-box shooter. many will disagree with me but i cannot justify spending thousands for a rifle just because of the name brand, it wont make me a better shooter. also, i wont back any name brands i have not shot. the Accuracy International does look pretty and fancy, but ill probably get the same groups with my Rem 700 in the factory stock it came in.

so to recap, 10FP with the 24 inch barrel is my recommendation but the most accurate gun is determined by the individual shooter, not the pricetag

also, the OP needs to realize the can of worms he opens up whenever using the word 'sniper' to start his thread, all kinds of mayhem ensues. history repeats itself once again on here

 

[BADUNAME27]

Value in a rifle.

This subject always creates long heated debates over what is better, costs, accuracy, yada yada. Proof of this is the last few pages of this thread.

I make these things. I do it for a living and I think I'm pretty good at it. That's not meant to sound cocky and I don't wish to be thought of that way. Lets call it self confidence.

I'll explain this in as modest a way as I can so that I don't sound like I'm just trying to beat my chest or sound like a salesman.

In 1993 I was a Marine deployed to the country of Somalia. It was my first deployment of its kind and it seemed that everything that could go wrong with my gear chose to do so during that time. That stuck with me and I never forgot it.

How this applies to sniper rifles is ensuring the end user has a piece of gear that doesn't fail. For the last 2 years and 9 months I have worked in Iraq as a security contractor. Mr. Murphy and his law loves combat zones. I am certain of this. My time here ends in less than a month and I will return home to go back to building rifles again. This time under my own name.

If you want to own a rifle that looks impressive on the bench during Sunday morning coffee and doughnuts at the range with the boys then by all means buy what ever is most affordable, put a big scope on it, and paint it all black. You'll be a winner every time and no one (especially me) will hold it against you.

On the other hand if you need a rifle purposely built to work, work, work, and work some more then certain things should be meaningful to you. Things like:

A bolt handle that won't break off at the solder joint when a case gets stuck
A rifle that will survive a fall off of a building
One that won't suffer a 4MOA zero shift when it's 135F outside because the forend sagged and is now making barrel contact.
A rifle that retains zero no matter how many times it is removed and reinstalled in the stock.
A chamber that will run ammunition through it that wasn't assembled in a laboratory and hasn't been stored in one of those nifty green boxes Midway sells.
A rifle that will deliver both reliable and predictable accuracy in a broad spectrum of climates and rates of fire.

Those are the kinds of things your hard earned money should be paying for in a custom/severe duty firearm. Target rifles painted black aren't sniper rifles. Just as snipers endure a nasty bit of school to earn that job description, the gear should also have a right of passage. (I am not a sniper by the way nor have I ever been one)

Last is just overall quality and presentation. When is the last time you saw a rifle that was fitted together well? By well I mean the ejection port actually lined up with the one cut in the stock with radius's in the corners that match. The bolt handle inlet mirrors the bolt handle? The floor metal was fitted without gaps between it and the stock? The action actually sits on waterline (it's radius) and isn't buried or sitting proud? How about a barrel channel that actually points in the same direction as the barrel? We won't even get into bedding.

A Timex and a Rolex will both tell time, but which would you rather wear?

Above all else guys a sniper rifle has to work. It must always go bang first. If it quits doing that then it just became a big tomato stake and the operator may end up being a statistic; something no one wants on their conscience.

I know some here will argue cost, cost, cost and make no mistake a rifle built to a higher level of quality is not the most affordable thing in the world. If price is the most important factor then you'll find what works for you.

If you'd like to see more, PM me and I'll be happy to show you.

Cheers,

Chad

Chad Dixon
LongRifles Inc.

 

[Thumper_6119]

I recently purchased a Remington 700 5R w/Stainless 24" bull barrel for my long range precision rifle. 1:11.25" twist. NF NXS 5.5-22x50mm scope.

 

[MCMXI]

Chad, EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT post!!

but its not hard to find a good off-the-shelf/out-of-the-box shooter. many will disagree with me but i cannot justify spending thousands for a rifle just because of the name brand, it wont make me a better shooter. also, i wont back any name brands i have not shot. the Accuracy International does look pretty and fancy, but ill probably get the same groups with my Rem 700 in the factory stock it came in.

AI rifles aren't meant to be range queens. They're expensive because they're built to withstand harsh environments. Heck, you might even get better groups out of the box with a 700. I bet my two AI clones are more accurate than any AI rifle but I don't delude myself that they'd do just as well on the battlefield. Try to disassemble your 700 bolt in the field without tools to remove sand and dust. Now drop your rifle on the ground 20 times, throw it in/out of a HMMWV 50 times, bang the scope against some rocks ... how confident will you be that your first shot will find its target.

 

[pgeleven]

Now drop your rifle on the ground 20 times, throw it in/out of a HMMWV 50 times, bang the scope against some rocks ... how confident will you be that your first shot will find its target.

given those circumstances, i wouldnt feel comfortable with ANY first shot. even the M24 we carried in the back in a padded case, i didnt feel 100% on it even though we had welded the rings to the receiver. i think you and i see eye to eye on his topic

 

[SilentStalker]

It all depends on what you want and how much you want to spend. There are tons of rifles out there that are great rifles for sniping. Here is my list of recommendations for starters:

Savage, Remington 700 (off the shelf or custom build), Tikka T3, Sako TRG 22/42 (I love mine), Springfield Whitefeather, Accuracy International, SIG Blaser, Steyr has something new out that fits this category, etc. etc. the list goes on and on. Some are better than others in terms of name, accuracy, reliability, usability, maintenance (course a bolt action rifle is pretty simple no matter who it is made by), etc. etc. There are also tons of military surplus rifles out there that would suit your needs as well. Perhaps telling us a little more about what you want to do with this would help. For example, what caliber do you want to use, how far would you like to shoot, etc.?

 

[Prion]

.308 Battle Rifle/Carbine and why?

Oooops, never mind. Supposed to be a new thread.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Post Number 22 of this thread is the wisest thing I've read on this Board in quite awhile.

The Army never should have renamed its sharpshooters "snipers." B4 school is on the dream sheet of every video-game playing cellar dweller who walks into the AFR front office -- despite the fact that they are precisely the sort of people who make the LOUSIEST sharpshooters. I'm convinced that's half the reason B4 school requires a psychological examination and an out-of-the ordinary CO rec.

 

[BADUNAME27]

Quote:
Now drop your rifle on the ground 20 times, throw it in/out of a HMMWV 50 times, bang the scope against some rocks ... how confident will you be that your first shot will find its target.
given those circumstances, i wouldnt feel comfortable with ANY first shot. even the M24 we carried in the back in a padded case, i didnt feel 100% on it even though we had welded the rings to the receiver. i think you and i see eye to eye on his topic

Ever heard the story about the day the USMC tested the original Unertyl scopes for the M-40? I used to think it was myth until I met someone who was there.

1984, MCB Quantico, VA:

The whole gamut of "who's who" was there on the ranges shooting in a variety of manners. Scopes knobs were twisted back and forth all morning and rounds were going down range at a feverish pace.

Then its break time. Someone suggested pulling the scopes off the guns and then reinstalling them to see how much zero shift there was.

John Unertyl's son took a scope off of a rifle, then walked over and grabbed a GP medium wooden tent stake. He used that scope as a hammer to drive about half the length of that stake into the ground. (that in itself is a feat for those who know how long those tent stakes are)

The scope was then put back on the gun and it was shot at 300 yards with no alteration to the windage or elevation settings prior to the "test".

The shot group had moved 5/8th of an inch from where it had been before being used as a hammer.

The Marine Corps reportedly stopped all additional tests and placed an order on the spot.

True story.

I was on the design/development team for the Scimitar tactical rifle offered by Dakota Arms, Inc. I have personally shot those guns and then bounced them down concrete hall ways/parking lots/tossed from building roof tops to see if they'd fall apart.

Probably the single biggest "almost" embarrassment of my career came in 2006 when a Field and Stream editor showed up to evaluate this rifle. I did these same abuse tests in front of him and we watched the first round go right over the top of the target at 600 yards. It wasn't until afterward that I noticed the yardage cam had moved from the 600 to 1000 yard setting. Once it was dialed back it repeated its original zero.

-oops.

Wasn't the guns fault, it was the dope behind the gun.

It is possible to build these things like tanks.

Good shooting,

Chad




__________________

 

[.38 Special]

Post Number 22 of this thread is the wisest thing I've read on this Board in quite awhile.

Thanks, mate! I sort of consider myself a clearing house for wisdom. Even though I do get regular PMs from the moderators telling me to knock it off.