Are bolt guns obsolete?

[bkb0000]

Saw the thread about the remington modular sniper rifle, noted all the modularity.. folding stock, rails all over, adjustable everything, shortish barrel, drop-bottom mag, and it struck me- why the hell isn't it auto?

So educate me, bolt-gunners- why is the bolt-gun still in service? isn't the AR platform proven to be just as accurizable as any bolt gun, given the right barrel/trigger-puller combo?

and if not, what are the differences? is there a distance that the AR, in any given caliber, just cannot reach? perhaps simple ergonomics? technology lags?

for the record, i've only ever owned 1 bolt gun, and haven't fired the thing in half a decade.. i know very little about bolt gunning, and almost as little about the technical side of precision shooting in general.

[Thomas M-4]

I believe the bolt gun still has a long future. Simple very accurate, very strong and can handle larger cartridges than what most auto loaders are designed to handle. And there are still plenty of high tech developments coming out for the bolt action.
I like to visit this site a lot of very nice bolt action builds and very good info in general if you check out the guns of the week there are some nice tactical bolt actions.
http://www.6mmbr.com/index.html

[Thomas M-4]

I still have not seen an AR post a 1.564'' 5 shot group at 1000 yards.
http://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek050.html

[BAC]

I agree with Thomas. It's possible for auto-loaders to approach bolt gun accuracy and sometimes match it, but a bolt gun has a lot more leniency and can be made accurate with a lot less fuss than an auto-loader. Take virtually any caliber in existence and if there are rifles of both categories chambered for it, the bolt guns will almost without exception be more accurate more of the time, and often at the same price point.

Also, autos by virtue of their being autos require a little sacrificial pressure to cycle the weapon, meaning a little less juice behind whatever pill they're pushing. It's a simple matter of physics, but you'll get a little more distance out of bolt guns than auto-loaders. Whether this is a practical or a purely academic argument... I dunno.


-B

[JStor]

Bolt guns will not become obsolete. They are the action of choice for hunters and accuracy aficionados because of their rigidity, simplicity, strength and cost effectiveness. They may evolve, but the basic platform will remain unchanged and available as long as arms companies are in business.

What I would like to see is a lower similar to an AR15 lower that is standardized for the standard 2.5 inch case length, with a bolt action upper that can be attached or removed with two pins like an AR. A whole family of rifles, carbines etc. could evolve, for those who aren't wedded to traditional style bolt guns. We see some of these design characteristics in what some call "tube guns," but no company has offered a "standardized" lower and upper receiver to build on. A company doing billet lowers and receivers should be able to come up with the ultimate bolt action modular design that will accept an A2 stock and various free floating fore-end tubes. Maybe there is such a thing and I simply haven't heard about it.

[ZDL]

***********

[Zhurdan]

Obsolete? Nahhh. I guarantee that I can put rounds on target at 600-700 yards all day long with the bolt rifle below, but to do that with my AR....mmmmmm not so much. They have their applications. Putting meat in the freezer is as good a reason as I can think of. at least for me.

FN SPR .308
http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r127/Zhurdan/rifles2-1.jpg

*please note... I've never taken a shot on an animal outside of 150 yards. It just doesn't seem right for some reason.

[JiMfraRED1911]

Saw the thread about the remington modular sniper rifle, noted all the modularity.. folding stock, rails all over, adjustable everything, shortish barrel, drop-bottom mag, and it struck me- why the hell isn't it auto?



Simple. SOCOM wants a .338 LM accurate out to 1500m. Show me a semi-auto MILITARY (launching brass 20 yards is a big no no) sniping rifle in .338 LM that has solid first round hit capability at that type of extreme range. Making a .338 LM gas gun is a monumentally stupid undertaking.

[ZDL]

***********

[Zhurdan]

Why is that?

Because I have all the confidence in the world, that if I make a mistake on a piece of steel, it isn't going to run off and suffer until I find it.

[kaiservontexas]

As been stated + lower profile. Sometimes one does not want their head sticking so high up. In fact the Finnish sniper Simo Häyhä did not like having a scope on his rifle for that very reason. He wanted a super low profile if there is any other way to put it.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

It seems that from public info that the role of the sniper has changed in the past few years from taking one (or a few) shots, to there being opportunities to engage more than one target at a time. I think Travis' video from Iraq is a great demonstration of this. It seems to me that the mission has changed from classic sniper to a super-rifleman and the gear has changed to accomodate this.

I don't know if the engagement distances, bleak terrain in current AOs, the fanaticism of the combatants differ so much from the classic jungle and European battlefields that the requirements have changed for the shooter and this is expressed in the selection of the gun. It seems going into battle with stripper clips of ammo is getting less popular.

[tylerw02]

Bolt guns have their place and always will. A bolt action can be taken through some very harsh environments and still function. There are very few parts to wear or break, the get better velocity, and don't eject spent cartridges several feet. Bolt guns are for when extreme accuracy is demanded for one shot.

[Thomas M-4]

It seems that from public info that the role of the sniper has changed in the past few years from taking one (or a few) shots, to there being opportunities to engage more than one target at a time. I think Travis' video from Iraq is a great demonstration of this. It seems to me that the mission has changed from classic sniper to a super-rifleman and the gear has changed to accomodate this.

I don't know if the engagement distances, bleak terrain in current AOs, the fanaticism of the combatants differ so much from the classic jungle and European battlefields that the requirements have changed for the shooter and this is expressed in the selection of the gun. It seems going into battle with stripper clips of ammo is getting less popular.

The sniper role has changed and the introduction of the M-110 is a major step forward. The Russians where far ahead of the west with the Draganov SVD in the DMR role and in urban terrain where multiple targets have to be engaged in a short period of time. But the need for a long range [beyond 1000 meters] high precision long range engagements will need more power than the 7.62 nato 800 meter effective range can deliver. The 338 lapua magnum fits that role and the best way to use that round is with a precision bolt action rifle.

[GlockWRX]

I'm not a precision shooter, so I'm so far out of my lane I couldn't find it with a map and a helicoptor. But....

I think the 7.62 NATO bolt action precision rifle is being superceded by 7.62 NATO autos. I think the bolt gun still has a use in places where a long range, single shot is required. But calibers like the .338 Lapua are better suited for that than the 7.62 NATO. Longer range, flatter trajectory, more lethality.

Being an ignorant layman, I'm going to go ahead and stick my foot in my mouth all the way and actually suggest a three weapon 'system' for use by a sniper team:

Weapon #1: 16" to 18" SPR precision style AR with a 1-4x variable scope.
Weapon #2: 18" to 20" precision AR in 7.62 (M-110 or similar)
Weapon #3: Precision bolt gun in .338 or similar.

For urban operations or missons that will require engagement of multiple targets at ranges up to about 800 yards, the M-110 is the precision rifle with the SPR as the support weapon. For missions that require engagements at longer ranges, the .338 becomes the precision rifle, with the M-110 in support (or stick with the SPR; shooters choice). This gives the team the ability to engage mulitple targets at less than 800 yards, while still allowing engagement of individual targets out to 1500. The mission dictates which weapon systems to use.

Both the auto and the bolt gun have their uses, and there is (or should be) room in the armory for both. At ranges of 800 yards or less, trading the marginal increase in accuracy of a bolt gun over the multi target engagement capability of an auto seems to be sub-optimal.

I think the bolt gun shines in calibers that we can't yet make into autos, like the .338.

[CALSHOOTER]

There is still a place for bolt rifles and the military still sports them even with some of the new auto sniper weapons out there. Civilian wise I still have fun as I'm sure others do.:D

[RAM Engineer]

Simple. SOCOM wants a .338 LM accurate out to 1500m. Show me a semi-auto MILITARY (launching brass 20 yards is a big no no) sniping rifle in .338 LM that has solid first round hit capability at that type of extreme range. Making a .338 LM gas gun is a monumentally stupid undertaking.

Actually, IIRC, SOCOM did NOT specify a caliber. Just an range and accuracy standard. This leaves it up the the Offerors (whoever they may be) to propose a cartridge. If a company thinks 338 Norma Magnum, or some Cheytac round, etc would be better, they are free to propose that option with no penalty.

[tylerw02]

I hope we do see some new rounds as there ARE better rounds than the .338 Lapua. The Lapua was just first out out of the gate and has the great advantage of a track record in foreign military use as well as great components for the civilian use--anything Lapua touches turns to gold.

[sinister]

The sniper's mission and target dictates the tool/weapon selected.

Low rate of fire/high precision requires a different tool than short range snap shots, running / multiple targets with a make-a-hit-anywhere standard.

The state of the art bolt action offers both precision and simplicity. Autoloaders give rate-of-fire at the sacrifice of some accuracy and perhaps a little reliability.

Autoloaders can be made exceptionally accurate. The shortfall usually comes from the shooter.

[JiMfraRED1911]

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=116fa51be1b2d9f94a904038845fb00c&tab=core&_cview=1

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=7c3671c8b65d782bbbfe7da8228f827e&tab=core&_cview=1

[tylerw02]

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=116fa51be1b2d9f94a904038845fb00c&tab=core&_cview=1

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=7c3671c8b65d782bbbfe7da8228f827e&tab=core&_cview=1


"2) The action shall be manually operated and available in left and right hand "

There we have it. The Feds don't think it is obsolete.

[bkb0000]

"2) The action shall be manually operated and available in left and right hand "

There we have it. The Feds don't think it is obsolete.

but the other one says


2) The action can be either manually or gas operated and available in left and right hand versions.

[tylerw02]

but the other one says

It sure does, but they are accepting both. If they thought it was obsolete, they'd suggest only semi-autos.

[RAM Engineer]

I love reading requirements packages. Thanks!

These appear to be two successive Sources Sought/Market Surveys/RFIs. These often evolve based on vendor feedback to previous RIFs, market research, and user requirements re-evaluation.

Notice the first one specifies .338 caliber ammunition, whereas the second one deletes that requirement and keeps the range and accuracy requirement.

Sinister would know better than me (about many things :D) but I would suspect that prior to the first notice they weren't convinced that a semi-auto would be able to meet their requirements. Something changed their mind and now "manual operation" is a threshold (T) and Semi-auto is an objective (O).

[sinister]

338 Big Mag self-loaders are certainly within the realm of possible. Not sure they currently compete with bolt actions for cost and accuracy.

Maybe three or four current manufacturers.

[GlockWRX]

"2) The action shall be manually operated and available in left and right hand "

There we have it. The Feds don't think it is obsolete.

Also note that the range requirement is 1500 meters. That's out of the 7.62 NATO performance envelope. I think a 1.0 MOA semi-auto 7.62 NATO makes the 1.0 MOA 7.62 NATO bolt gun obsolete. But until there is a 1.0 MOA semi-auto that can reach 1500 meters, there will still be bolt guns.

[tylerw02]

Also note that the range requirement is 1500 meters. That's out of the 7.62 NATO performance envelope. I think a 1.0 MOA semi-auto 7.62 NATO makes the 1.0 MOA 7.62 NATO bolt gun obsolete. But until there is a 1.0 MOA semi-auto that can reach 1500 meters, there will still be bolt guns.

It all really depends on the situation, both are tools in the toolbox. When a singular well placed shot is necessary after a long trip through harsh environments without leaving a trace (spent cartridge), the bolt-action still has its place.

Personally, I think there is another advantage that seems to be neglected by the military. A bolt-action can be built very light while maintaining velocity and accuracy via 20" bbls, new stock technology (Manners comes to mind), and with maximum reliability. Precision bolt-actions can weigh much less than ten pounds without sacrificing accuracy or reliability.

The M40A3 seemed like a joke to me and should be replaced as it was heavy; designed specifically for prone shooting of an inferior cartridge at a range that pushes the limitations of the round. I'd much rather have a modified M40A1 or something along the lines of a Tactical Operations T51, XM3, etc.

[goodoleboy]

The application makes all the difference. The modernizations of semi-auto designated marksman/sniper rifles have made the older bolt guns that did that job sort of obsolete. Anything that requires quick follow-up shots or engaging multiple targets at extended ranges would be better suited to a semi-auto application. IMHO

Long range precision shooting (competition or short to mid range police sniper applications) would be better suited to a bolt gun. Want the best of both worlds, get an accurized semi-auto and give it to your spotter, and you carry the bolt gun.

[Alaskapopo]

The application makes all the difference. The modernizations of semi-auto designated marksman/sniper rifles have made the older bolt guns that did that job sort of obsolete. Anything that requires quick follow-up shots or engaging multiple targets at extended ranges would be better suited to a semi-auto application. IMHO

Long range precision shooting (competition or short to mid range police sniper applications) would be better suited to a bolt gun. Want the best of both worlds, get an accurized semi-auto and give it to your spotter, and you carry the bolt gun.

I agree with most of what you said except the police gun issue. The average leo sniper shoot is 55 yards. The longest ever was in New York at just over 400 yards. At these distances the extra accuracy you get with a bolt gun is a moot point. However the follow up shots are very valuable especially when dealing with intermediate barriers like glass. I am a firm believer in the Semi Auto sniper rifle for LEO uses.
Pat
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Semi%20auto%20rifles/GAP1r10.jpg

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Semi%20auto%20rifles/LarueSideview.jpg

These guns (mine) are too heavy. The Anchorage Police Department has gone with SR25's with a 18 inch barrel and a medium contour barrel and fiberglass float tubes to cut weight down. Honestly you don't need a .5 moa rifle for a leo sniper. 1 or 1.5 moa is plenty. However having rapid follow up shots can be essential.

I think bolts still rule in certain military applications where you are going to be shooting a specific target without support behind enemy lines. Then you want to be as far away from the target as possible to magnify your ballistic advantage and to gain a head start on troops that will be looking for you.
Pat

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Of course, the SR25 is probably close to 10x as expensive as a base Rem700 actioned rifle? I know there is a lot more than just the price of the gun, but I would think that has to have some impact on keeping bolt guns in use.

PoPo- Would most LEO sniper operations be accomplished with a bolt gun?

Does the 300Win Mag meet the 1500m requirement, or is that .338 Lapua type territory?

[Thomas M-4]

Of course, the SR25 is probably close to 10x as expensive as a base Rem700 actioned rifle? I know there is a lot more than just the price of the gun, but I would think that has to have some impact on keeping bolt guns in use.

PoPo- Would most LEO sniper operations be accomplished with a bolt gun?

Does the 300Win Mag meet the 1500m requirement, or is that .338 Lapua type territory?


The 300 Win Mag can get out that far with the right load but the .338 Lapua will be far more effective at that range. The .338 fits external ballistics wise and energy wise midway between the .50bmg and the 7.62x51

[kennith13]

I think that as long as we are using explosive powder to reach out and touch people, there will always be a place for the bolt action.

As a fighting force, our military is more and more commonly finding themselves in overly dynamic situations. We are now fighting at a bigger intelligence disadvantage than ever before, due to our mission requirements. We still have plenty of intelligence, it just doesn't extend to the minute level of detail on which our normal operations are based. It is possible to know that a building is supposed to be full of people that don't like you. It is not possible to know that the toilet overflowed and three of them are now across the street, in the building behind you. Likewise, it is possible to know a great deal about a place you wish to attack, but it is not possible to know every threat along a way traveled by a convoy.

When you are no longer the antagonizing force, you give up some forms of advantage. This mandates the ability to direct precision fire at the spur of the moment, with little prior warning. As opposed to seeking out a target with advanced planning and finding a well covered position from which to engage, now we are more likely to be engaged by an enemy doing just that, as we go about our normal protective duties.

You are going to see a lot more weapons designed with accuracy in mind, but also with higher rates of fire in mind as well. You need that when you are the one being attacked, and the situation is not the other way around.

In a way this will be a great help to our readiness as a nation. We are becoming experts at a new type of warfare. The average soldier today is developing skills that were only fostered in more specialized units in the past, and our entire way of fighting a war is reinventing itself. I believe that the new ways are better for modern warfare. Our troops learn quickly, and they are now more effective within the ranges that are commonly experienced in combat. So are their precision weapons. That said, not all contact occurs within these ranges, only most of it.

There is always a time to be on the offensive with a well planned engagement. When that is the case, there is always a place for a heavy bolt gun, watching over the more mobile forces. Likewise, there is always a place for long range engagement of the enemy, and the modern soldiers that fill this role have some of the best fighting bolts ever made with which to execute their duties.

We still need them. We just need more ready capability in the average small unit for the type of fighting we can expect to endure nowadays.

[Alaskapopo]

Of course, the SR25 is probably close to 10x as expensive as a base Rem700 actioned rifle? I know there is a lot more than just the price of the gun, but I would think that has to have some impact on keeping bolt guns in use.

PoPo- Would most LEO sniper operations be accomplished with a bolt gun?

Does the 300Win Mag meet the 1500m requirement, or is that .338 Lapua type territory?

Most situations could be handled with a bolt gun but a Semi does offer some real tactical advantages for us.
Pat

[goodoleboy]

IMHO, bolt guns will always have their place (if you don't feel that way, pm me for my address and you can give me your "obsolete" bolt guns :)). Semi-auto rifles will always have their place. Both have their pros and cons. I don't think semi-autos will ever equal the accuracy potential of top notch precision bolt guns, but sometimes 1 moa is sufficient enough to get the job done and still have a good follow-up shot without having to rebuild your base after working a bolt.

The best question to me is: "Is a top-notch semi-auto accurate enough for your particular application." Sometimes 1 moa is good enough, sometimes you want that edge that you can get with a .5 moa bolt gun.

[Alaskapopo]

IMHO, bolt guns will always have their place (if you don't feel that way, pm me for my address and you can give me your "obsolete" bolt guns :)). Semi-auto rifles will always have their place. Both have their pros and cons. I don't think semi-autos will ever equal the accuracy potential of top notch precision bolt guns, but sometimes 1 moa is sufficient enough to get the job done and still have a good follow-up shot without having to rebuild your base after working a bolt.

The best question to me is: "Is a top-notch semi-auto accurate enough for your particular application." Sometimes 1 moa is good enough, sometimes you want that edge that you can get with a .5 moa bolt gun.

Some semi's give .5 moa as well. But then again some bolts give .25 moa. My idea is this. under 500 yards go with a semi in .308. or 6.8 or 6.5. Over 500 yards go with a .338 laupa, .300 win mag in a bolt.
Pat

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Some semi's give .5 moa as well. But then again some bolts give .25 moa. My idea is this. under 500 yards go with a semi in .308. or 6.8 or 6.5. Over 500 yards go with a .338 laupa, .300 win mag in a bolt.
Pat

As a civy, that is why I moved away from getting into an AR10 platform. An 18inch SPR/JP rifle will work out to 600, especially if paper or steel targets are the offender, and beyond that a Bolt rifle in 300Win mag, or maybe 6.5 Creedmore. Lapua when I win the Lottery. I can understand if you are having to worry about terminal ballistics that a AR10 makes a lot of sense, but to me the accuracy of the AR10 type (Was it LittleLew that has a brother that had a M110 in Iraq and it shot 1.5MOA in the real world- I think I screwed up 3 of the 4 details in this sentence?) fades out at the point that its terminal ballistics difference vs 5.56 becomes important. Still want one of the Iron Ridge AR10s and have it worked up by GAP though ;)

How much of this is driven by the mass tactics like Travis' video shows vs. the devolvement and distribution of body armour to BGs that will make it so that either multiple hits or .338 Lapua is needed.

[Hootiewho]

The sniper role has changed and the introduction of the M-110 is a major step forward. The Russians where far ahead of the west with the Draganov SVD in the DMR role and in urban terrain where multiple targets have to be engaged in a short period of time. But the need for a long range [beyond 1000 meters] high precision long range engagements will need more power than the 7.62 nato 800 meter effective range can deliver. The 338 lapua magnum fits that role and the best way to use that round is with a precision bolt action rifle.


Alot of all of this is based on where we are currently fighting and the type of war we are currently fighting. If the war was in a more wooded/natural setting, especially a jungle where you may only get the chance for one shot and reliability due to field conditions was most important, a bolt gun may be the best option.

[Thomas M-4]

A bolt action will also generally have a lower sound signature suppressed than a semi auto would have.

[Alaskapopo]

Alot of all of this is based on where we are currently fighting and the type of war we are currently fighting. If the war was in a more wooded/natural setting, especially a jungle where you may only get the chance for one shot and reliability due to field conditions was most important, a bolt gun may be the best option.

I have seen an Armalite key come loose. That is about the only thing I have not had go wrong on an Oly. They are pure trash.
Pat

[Killjoy]

A lot of good points made here, both pro-bolt gun and anti-bolt gun. One aspect not mentioned is the psychological element of using a bolt gun. In addition to simplicity, accuracy and everything else mentioned here, John Plaster in Ultimate Sniper, writes of the psychological finality of bolting a gun and concentrating on the single shot. Consistency is everything in precision shooting and concentrating on the shot at hand is paramount to achieving pinpoint accuracy. The sniper concentrates on the one shot, and making that same perfect shot every time. Its an unachievable goal, but the minute a sniper stops striving for it, he will begin to let his skills decline. With a semi-auto one always has the psychological "out" of thinking "maybe if I miss, I can hit with the second shot". Its a fine point, but from a training perspective, especially for law enforcement who must be perfect every time they pull the trigger in the real world, a valuable one.

I took LE sniper at Blackwater earlier this year, and many drills involved hitting multiple targets under time limits, and using a bolt gun wasn't much of an impediment. And with those same rifles, we still hit 12-inch steel plates out to 800 yards, a bit of a stretch for most .308 gas guns.

[Abraxas]

Saw the thread about the remington modular sniper rifle, noted all the modularity.. folding stock, rails all over, adjustable everything, shortish barrel, drop-bottom mag, and it struck me- why the hell isn't it auto?

So educate me, bolt-gunners- why is the bolt-gun still in service? isn't the AR platform proven to be just as accurizable as any bolt gun, given the right barrel/trigger-puller combo?

and if not, what are the differences? is there a distance that the AR, in any given caliber, just cannot reach? perhaps simple ergonomics? technology lags?

for the record, i've only ever owned 1 bolt gun, and haven't fired the thing in half a decade.. i know very little about bolt gunning, and almost as little about the technical side of precision shooting in general.

I personally think that, like many other things, it depends on the role that it will be used for. So in answer to the title, no they are not obsolete, they just fill certain niches.

[Alaskapopo]

A lot of good points made here, both pro-bolt gun and anti-bolt gun. One aspect not mentioned is the psychological element of using a bolt gun. In addition to simplicity, accuracy and everything else mentioned here, John Plaster in Ultimate Sniper, writes of the psychological finality of bolting a gun and concentrating on the single shot. Consistency is everything in precision shooting and concentrating on the shot at hand is paramount to achieving pinpoint accuracy. The sniper concentrates on the one shot, and making that same perfect shot every time. Its an unachievable goal, but the minute a sniper stops striving for it, he will begin to let his skills decline. With a semi-auto one always has the psychological "out" of thinking "maybe if I miss, I can hit with the second shot". Its a fine point, but from a training perspective, especially for law enforcement who must be perfect every time they pull the trigger in the real world, a valuable one.

I took LE sniper at Blackwater earlier this year, and many drills involved hitting multiple targets under time limits, and using a bolt gun wasn't much of an impediment. And with those same rifles, we still hit 12-inch steel plates out to 800 yards, a bit of a stretch for most .308 gas guns.


I took my basic sniper course about a year and a half ago. During the last day of the course we had a competition of all the snipers. I was the only one using a Semi auto. I took second place easily beating all but one shooter who was just very very good. I give a lot of the credit to the fact the competition was scored with your time and accuracy and the the fact I had a 20 round mag and never had to reload once during the course of fire. We started at 500 yards and worked our way in. I say for 500 yards or less the semi rules the day.
Pat

[JiMfraRED1911]

This will help clear things up...

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1206278&page=1