Why 7.62 in sniper rifles?

[HankB]

I'm not a trained military sniper, but . . .

I think the guys using 7.62 sniper rifles are probably able to be employed more flexibly than guys using .50 Barretts. I really wouldn't want to be dropped somewhere 25 miles from nowhere and have to maintain concealment on my own or as part of a 2-man team for a week or more if I had to lug around a 35 pound .50 rifle, ammo, plus all my other gear.

The military 7.62 sniper rifles are about a third the weight, and the ammo is lighter too. Out of a bolt action, the ammo ought to stay supersonic up to 1000+ yards so the accuracy will be there out to that range, the signature is much less than a .50, and ammo is readily available, so it's a more practical choice for general issue.

A .50 will do things no 7.62 will . . . for that matter, it will do things no .300 WinMag will. So the .50s unquestionably have their place. But easily portable for extended deployments it ain't.

 

[Waffen]

I hear the same arguments from inexperienced hunters who look at a ballistics chart and see that the 30-378 Weatherby would make the ideal elk or deer rifle for 800 yard shots, but all of them have never shot a 30-378 nor have seen a game animal at 800 yards, and in all likelyhood will never take a shot at game at more than 1/4 of that distance.

And what about thoes people (myself included) who have shot the 30-378 at that distance?

You suggest the .300WM however it's just about a 15% increase in preformace, why not make the selection of cargriges as broad as you can? If you bump it up to a .338-378 or .30-378 you have acomplished the goal. Something with a good bit more power than a .308, however it does not require the lugging of a .50

The round looks good on paper because it is good. Also what kind of argument are you trying to make?

 

[1911 guy]

No argument

I was under the impression the original post was looking for our opinions on an answer, not an argument. I never said the .338 wasn't a good round. I DID say that several countries are adopting it with a degree of success. With the optics required to make a clean hit on game at the afforementioned 800-1000 yds, how many 200 yd shots did you pass up?

 

[Kalashnikov]

I would use either a 30-06 or a 54R. Why? The 06' was good enough for Carlos Hathcock and the 54R was good enough for Zaitzev(sp).

 

[Mike Hull]

The 06' was good enough for Carlos Hathcock and the 54R was good enough for Zaitzev(sp).

He used the 30-06 only in the early part of his sniping career. The Marines quickly switched over to 7.62x51, and Remington 700 rifles as their sniper program got organized.

It will do anything the older cartridges will do, and without the drawbacks of the rimmed russian round.

People look at the tallies of snipers in WWII like Zaitsez and think it must have been the best round/rifle combination going, but they fail to realize that a great many of his kills were made a Stalingrad, where range was short, and targets were plenty.
I'm not saying he wasn't a good sniper, he was, but comparing the rifles/cartridges he used, to todays sniper rifles, and cartridges is just not a good comparison.

If you think I'm wrong, get a MN sniper version, and shoot it side by side with the equivilent of an M40A3, or M24, or even the stock factory Remington 700P's, or VS/VLS, not to mention the Savage 10LE series chambered in .308. There will be no comparision. Even the SVD falls short in comparison, accuracy wise.

They were good in there day, but things have changed.

 

[Kalashnikov]

The biography I read of hathcock said he used a winchester model 70 in the 30-06 until the explosion that nearly killed him, so please correct me if I am wrong And true Zaitzev did make over 200 kills (242 to be exact) at stalingrad where targets were plenty and range was short. The point I wanted to illustrate was that while the new cartridges are all very nice, the older, more proven battle cartridges are the only thing I would want to take out in a sniper rifle. YMMV

 

[Mute]

I think there is the wrong assumption that a more powerful round (.300WM or .338 Lapua) would do a better job. It will do a better job beyond 900 yards, but I'll bet that most sniper engagements take place under 800 yards. In these shorter distances, the more powerful rounds don't offer any huge advantages, but does have the disadvantages of more recoil and muzzle blast. Also, the sniper would not be able to carry as many rounds of the more powerful ammo.

 

[Zak Smith]

In these shorter distances, the more powerful rounds don't offer any huge advantages,

Accurately judging or measuring wind and distance are critical to making hits.

A higher BC and/or faster bullet reduces the errors associated with each of these factors.

308 drops an additional approx 77" (6 1/2 feet) from 800 - 900 yards. A ranging error of 20 yards will cause a error on the POI of about 15". For 300WM (190SMK), it's only about 60" from 800-900, or about 12" for 20 yards. For 338LM, it's more like 50" and 10".

In a 10mph wind, 308 will drift about 74" (just over 6 feet) at 900 yards. 300WM (190SMK) about 58", and 338LM 39-43" depending on the bullet (250 vs 300gr). If the shooter misjudges the wind by 1mph over the flight path (due to changing terrain or variable wind), it might mean a miss for 308 but a hit with 300/388.

A higher BC and/or faster bullet increases the margin of error.

 

[Zak Smith]

_Bullet_           _BC_ _MV_         0     200     400     600     800    1000 | YARDS
338LM 300SMK      0.77* 2850 >    0.00    1.64    6.84   16.10   30.05   49.40 | wind (inches)
338LM 250SCNR     0.675 2950 >    0.00    1.79    7.50   17.74   33.28   54.99 | wind (inches)
338WM 250SCNR     0.675 2750 >    0.00    1.97    8.30   19.69   37.00   61.22 | wind (inches)
7RM 168gr VLD     0.648 2950 >    0.00    1.87    7.84   18.60   34.98   57.97 | wind (inches)
300WM 190gr SMK   0.53* 2970 >    0.00    2.27    9.66   23.22   44.39   74.85 | wind (inches)
300WM 155 Scenar  0.508 3300 >    0.00    2.08    8.82   21.14   40.28   67.80 | wind (inches)
300WM 210gr VLD   0.640 2900 >    0.00    1.94    8.15   19.35   36.45   60.47 | wind (inches)
308 155 Scenar    0.508 2830 >    0.00    2.56   10.94   26.46   50.74   85.56 | wind (inches)
308 175 SMK       0.51* 2700 >    0.00    2.81   12.06   29.27   56.42   95.43 | wind (inches)
260 140gr VLD     0.620 2925 >    0.00    1.98    8.34   19.84   37.42   62.22 | wind (inches)
260 123gr Scenar  0.540 3000 >    0.00    2.21    9.38   22.51   42.89   72.01 | wind (inches)
300RUM 168SMK     0.46* 3600 >    0.00    2.07    8.78   21.12   40.64   69.65 | wind (inches)
300RUM 210VLD     0.640 3100 >    0.00    1.77    7.42   17.58   33.00   54.66 | wind (inches)

338LM 300SMK      0.77* 2850 >   -2.00   -2.67  -23.77  -69.33 -144.41 -255.47 | drop (inches)
338LM 250SCNR     0.675 2950 >   -2.00   -2.41  -22.32  -66.12 -139.49 -249.79 | drop (inches)
338WM 250SCNR     0.675 2750 >   -2.00   -3.08  -26.74  -78.25 -164.47 -294.35 | drop (inches)
7RM 168gr VLD     0.648 2950 >   -2.00   -2.42  -22.52  -66.94 -141.75 -254.95 | drop (inches)
300WM 190gr SMK   0.53* 2970 >   -2.00   -2.46  -23.26  -70.46 -152.56 -281.63 | drop (inches)
300WM 155 Scenar  0.508 3300 >   -2.00   -1.62  -17.78  -55.43 -121.47 -225.68 | drop (inches)
300WM 210gr VLD   0.640 2900 >   -2.00   -2.59  -23.62  -70.03 -148.33 -267.12 | drop (inches)
308 155 Scenar    0.508 2830 >   -2.00   -2.96  -26.73  -80.74 -175.57 -326.21 | drop (inches)
308 175 SMK       0.51* 2700 >   -2.00   -3.48  -30.35  -91.36 -199.21 -372.17 | drop (inches)
260 140gr VLD     0.620 2925 >   -2.00   -2.52  -23.27  -69.30 -147.31 -266.27 | drop (inches)
260 123gr Scenar  0.540 3000 >   -2.00   -2.37  -22.57  -68.41 -147.90 -272.21 | drop (inches)
300RUM 168SMK     0.46* 3600 >   -2.00   -1.08  -14.34  -46.41 -103.98 -197.31 | drop (inches)
300RUM 210VLD     0.640 3100 >   -2.00   -2.01  -19.81  -59.57 -126.72 -228.37 | drop (inches)

 

[hillbilly]

I don't think anyone is saying that .308 is the "best" round for pure long-range accuracy.

It's just "good enough" and is chosen for all sorts of other reasons.

It's like police cruisers.

There are lots and lots of faster, more powerful, more manuevarable cars than the Crown Victoria.

But, the Crown Victoria is the almost universal police cruiser because it's "good enough" for all sorts of situations.

And with real, actual military sniping in the field, there are lot more considerations to factor in other than just long-range accuracy.

hillbilly

 

[Jonathan]

Don't overlook that .308 is one of the better choices if you're looking to field a compact, lightweight rifle. While this isn't really in common use, it should be.

Even better, put a suppressor of it. You could keep the overall length very short with a .308.

 

[Mr. Loud Guns]

I have alot of rifles that can be considered sniper rifles but the only one that I consider to be a true long distance weapon is my 50 BMG what a gun what a gun.

 

[Mike Hull]

The biography I read of hathcock said he used a winchester model 70 in the 30-06 until the explosion that nearly killed him, so please correct me if I am wrong And true Zaitzev did make over 200 kills (242 to be exact) at stalingrad where targets were plenty and range was short. The point I wanted to illustrate was that while the new cartridges are all very nice, the older, more proven battle cartridges are the only thing I would want to take out in a sniper rifle. YMMV

In the early part of his sniping career he did, like I stated above.
The M70 Winchester(pre 64 version) were the standard long range "target" rifles used in inter service matches in the States, by the rifle team members , and were converted hastily into sniper rifles with long barrel mounted unertl scopes like the Marines used in WWII on the 1903A1 sniper rifles.

Many were using store bought civilian versions of the 700 Remingtons(lightweight hunting versions) with standard scopes on them.

But when the sniper program got officially organized, he used a 700 Remingtom varmint type in .308, called an M&P now. It had the heavy varmint type barrel. It did not have the putrid high gloss finish, and had a semi beavertail forend.

These had OD Redfield 3-9X scopes, with accu range rangefinders in them(the same that civilians could buy except for the color). In other words, two stadia wires that would subtend 18", I believe. That was the average measurement from the shoulders, to waistline(or top of back to bottom of chest on a deer). You put you target in the stadia's, and increased, or decreased power till the target fit, and read the range on a scale that extended up from the bottom of the field of view.
That's the rifle he did most of his shooting with, and it's on display in the Marine sniper museum(in Quantico I believe, but could be wrong on the location).

That's right from both books by Charles Henderson about Carlos Hathcocks life, and exploits(the official autobiographer).

The same type of rifle was used by Chuck(?) Mawhinney too, who's official number of kills was higher that Gy. Hathcocks.

They figure that Carlos Hathcock had over 300 kills, but he only counted what was witnessed, or could be proven beyond a doubt(not to mean that Mawhinney didn't do the same).

There's nothing wrong with the older 30-06, but the Marines, and the other services use what is the norm. 7.62 is the standard nato round, shoved down their throats by us, so we use it.
It really does everything the 06 did, and often better, so why have another cartridge in the supply chain.

The 7.62X54R was OK in it's day, but I doubt there are any sniper rifles chambered for it today that could stand a side by side accuracy test with what's available today in either military or civilian versions of the M40, or M24
chambered in .308/7.62 nato

 

[Ivy Mike]

Well, my intent wasn't to start a pissing match.

I was just curious as to why 7.62x51 was the standard sniper round. To be honest, I know why we use it. The round is short compared to other rounds and doesn't require a large action. Rifle size can be kept down and ammo is widely available even though I'll bet snipers probably get their own ammo for certain missions.
The other large problem I see with magnum rounds is the magnum report. The .308 is quieter than some of its larger brethren. Important if you can't ensure that there is no one else around. I wouldn't want a magnum report giving me away to a squad of nasties tramping around the bush around me.

BTW, I don't think we can count out the 7.62x54R as a good long range cartridge. The thing hasn't been updated in years and the rifles that shoot it have never been the best quality...at least not the ones we see here in the USA.
Given a good rifle and match ammo, the 7.62x54R could probably be competitive with the 7.62 NATO. I'm not saying it would be better, but just consider what it could do with a level playing field.

A counter bored mil-surp 91/30 is not on the same level as a Remington 700. Even the Finn's don't compare that well. They are accurate, but they are still old, cheaply made rifles that shoot the cheapest crap the Soviets could turn out in bulk.