View Full Version : The new barrel paradigm....GP LW CHF / P MW SS
wild_wild_wes
09-11-10, 17:30
This is where my AR collection is heading....
For close-in General purpose use, 14.5" Lightweight profile Cold-Hammer Forged barrels:
http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii173/USPx4/M4.jpg
For longer-range General purpose use, 16" Midweight profile CHF:
http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii173/USPx4/UB3-15.jpg
For long-range Precision shooting, 18" Heavy/Mid profile Stainless Steel match-grade:
http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii173/USPx4/UB51.jpg
Next up: close-in Precision (Recce) 16" H/M SS
Concur?
Belmont31R
09-11-10, 17:59
You could consolidate the 1st two with a 14.5" middy. You are only talking about a 1.5" barrel difference between the two.
With how reliable guns like the 14.5" middy have turned out to be theres really no purpose in a 14.5" carbine anymore. With the same barrel length you can get a much smoother gun. SBR's are where carbine gas lengths should be relegated to.
And just thought Id talk about this just because.....but Im actually 2nd guessing the whole 556 precision gun thing. Ive been shooting a lot lately out to 500 and beyond that. Ive self discovered that the 556 sucks as a long range gun unless you are in calm conditions, and even then the round barely has any pop at that distance. Even with heavy 556 rounds I have trouble putting LaRue steel targets down. 308 puts them down with authority. Past 500 even light wind blows the rounds all over the place. I was out a week or two ago, and shooting at 750 with good ammo, and at that range the slightest breeze would blow the round 3-4 feet off target. Other guys with 30's and up had no such problems. Not talking about doping for wind but when you have wind that goes from 5-15 between shots you simply can't dope for that at 750 yards with such a light round. Other guys were shooting 300 magnums with 200 grain + bullets, and smacking the shit out of the gongs. Maybe just hold on the left or right side of the target if the wind picked up. That brings me to wondering what, exactly a 556 precision gun is good for. I can hit 500 yard gongs with relative ease with a reece setup so all the extra weight and glass is rather useless past a reece setup. Basically you can be just as effective with a good quality reece as you could with an SPR.
wild_wild_wes
09-11-10, 18:40
I hear you on the 14.5" middies; in fact I was planning another build using the same barrel as the one in the first pic, but with a DD RIS II and Aimpoint T1, to make the gun more capable (but I had to have a KISS too!). The barrel on the 14.5" CAR in the first pic is one of the new DD Lightweight CHF barrels; these barrels are sweet, something missing from the market for a long time. The 16" CHF is a Centurion heavy-duty barrel; it will be interesting to compare its accuracy potential to the Recce when it is completed. When I have them all and have done a lot of shooting with them, I may mor may not consolidate.
I was IMing with a guy on TOS who did two tours as a DM in Afghanistan, and he thinks heavy 5.56 out of a precision rifle is sufficient out to 700m (he himself has put then down at that range). However, I see he too now has a DM-type AR10....I will be doing one of those as well, as soon as my 5.56 arsenal is complete.
The reason the 30 calibers were performing better at long ranges is because the bullets being used have a better ballistic coefficient than the bullets used in your 5.56/223 ammunition. 55 gr pills in particular are notorious for having low BCs and being susceptible to being blown around by the wind.
Choose a bullet with the proper BC and it will make tagging those long range targets much easier. There is a reason why the AR in 5.56/223 has dethroned the 7.62x51/308 in High Power Rifle matches. They won't hit with as much energy as the 300 magnums, but the punishment to your shoulder will be much less
Magic_Salad0892
09-12-10, 03:33
77 gr. rounds can go out to 750, or 800m.
If I can see a guy put down more than 15 rounds out of a 30 round magazine, on target at 800m with 25-30mph wind. Then I am satisfied. I'll just train.
(Watched a cell phone video of a guy I knew in high school do this with a LMT MRP 14.5'', and did 16 out of 30 with a KAC E3 16.1'' gun.)
You could consolidate the 1st two with a 14.5" middy. You are only talking about a 1.5" barrel difference between the two.
With how reliable guns like the 14.5" middy have turned out to be theres really no purpose in a 14.5" carbine anymore. With the same barrel length you can get a much smoother gun. SBR's are where carbine gas lengths should be relegated to.
And just thought Id talk about this just because.....but Im actually 2nd guessing the whole 556 precision gun thing. Ive been shooting a lot lately out to 500 and beyond that. Ive self discovered that the 556 sucks as a long range gun unless you are in calm conditions, and even then the round barely has any pop at that distance. Even with heavy 556 rounds I have trouble putting LaRue steel targets down. 308 puts them down with authority. Past 500 even light wind blows the rounds all over the place. I was out a week or two ago, and shooting at 750 with good ammo, and at that range the slightest breeze would blow the round 3-4 feet off target. Other guys with 30's and up had no such problems. Not talking about doping for wind but when you have wind that goes from 5-15 between shots you simply can't dope for that at 750 yards with such a light round. Other guys were shooting 300 magnums with 200 grain + bullets, and smacking the shit out of the gongs. Maybe just hold on the left or right side of the target if the wind picked up. That brings me to wondering what, exactly a 556 precision gun is good for. I can hit 500 yard gongs with relative ease with a reece setup so all the extra weight and glass is rather useless past a reece setup. Basically you can be just as effective with a good quality reece as you could with an SPR.
I would disagree with most of the above but to discuss the SPR/recce thought a bit more....
The NSWC who participated in the constructing and testing of both the Seal Recon Rifle a.k.a. recce rifle and the Special Purpose Receiver/Rifle program by in large felt the 16" recce was a waste of resources and time....thus canceling any future work on it and then adopting the SPR which ultimately grew into the mk12 so I think you kinda got the last part backwards in my estimation as the SPR is the keeper if one has to go between them.
End use...
I hunt with my AR's and getting 100fps more with a 16" gun vs. a 14.5" gun more than makes up for the extra 1.5" barrel.
I'll keep my 18" Noveske as well as my 17" Kreiger, seems to be a sweet spot right in there.
wild_wild_wes
09-12-10, 10:10
The NSWC who participated in the constructing and testing of both the Seal Recon Rifle a.k.a. recce rifle and the Special Purpose Receiver/Rifle program by in large felt the 16" recce was a waste of resources and time....thus canceling any future work on it and then adopting the SPR which ultimately grew into the mk12 so I think you kinda got the last part backwards in my estimation as the SPR is the keeper if one has to go between them.
Yes, but the SEAL end users who started the process were dissatisfied with the SPR and built 16" Recces using unit funds.
Belmont31R
09-12-10, 16:08
The reason the 30 calibers were performing better at long ranges is because the bullets being used have a better ballistic coefficient than the bullets used in your 5.56/223 ammunition. 55 gr pills in particular are notorious for having low BCs and being susceptible to being blown around by the wind.
Choose a bullet with the proper BC and it will make tagging those long range targets much easier. There is a reason why the AR in 5.56/223 has dethroned the 7.62x51/308 in High Power Rifle matches. They won't hit with as much energy as the 300 magnums, but the punishment to your shoulder will be much less
Ive shot 77 GR SMK's, TAP T2, and Hornady 75GR BTHP rounds out to 750, and noticed the wind deflection even with those.
Even with a good 556 bullet means they slow down quicker, and the same amount of wind has more effect on them. 30 cal both has more weight (less affected by wind), and retains energy better.
Belmont31R
09-12-10, 16:14
I would disagree with most of the above but to discuss the SPR/recce thought a bit more....
The NSWC who participated in the constructing and testing of both the Seal Recon Rifle a.k.a. recce rifle and the Special Purpose Receiver/Rifle program by in large felt the 16" recce was a waste of resources and time....thus canceling any future work on it and then adopting the SPR which ultimately grew into the mk12 so I think you kinda got the last part backwards in my estimation as the SPR is the keeper if one has to go between them.
Thats fine. I just think a 30 cal SPR/DMR/whatever is a better choice for long range shooting than a 223. Just like the ELR guys are not even shooting 30 calibers but 375's, 408's and 416's. The further out you go the more speed and bullet mass help you. Another example is the Army switching from 308 to 300 win mag because you can shoot heavier bullets at a faster FPS. Just upping bullet mass and speed raises the max effective range from 800M to 1200M.
Edit: Just doing some calcs on KAC BulletFlight a 300WM with a 220GR bullet has less than half (actually closer to a 3rd) the wind deflection at 750 yards than Mk262Mod1 out of a Mk12. The 300WM was a little over 3FT of deflection with a 15MPH wind from side to side whereas the Mk262 was over 104". With Mk262 at 5MPH its about the same as 300WM at 15MPH (35"). So gusty wind out to 750 with Mk262 ranges from between 3-9FT whereas 300WM is about 1-3FT. I think thats a pretty dramatic difference, and Id like to see someone make regular hits on a torso size target with gusty wind like that. Not saying it can't be done but going up to a .30 makes a big difference at that range as I said in my 1st post in this thread.
I would disagree with most of the above but to discuss the SPR/recce thought a bit more....
The NSWC who participated in the constructing and testing of both the Seal Recon Rifle a.k.a. recce rifle and the Special Purpose Receiver/Rifle program by in large felt the 16" recce was a waste of resources and time....thus canceling any future work on it and then adopting the SPR which ultimately grew into the mk12 so I think you kinda got the last part backwards in my estimation as the SPR is the keeper if one has to go between them.
Yes, but the SEAL end users who started the process were dissatisfied with the SPR and built 16" Recces using unit funds.
I am not a current or former elite SEAL operator, nor am I a U.S. military small arms historian. But based on what I've read, I believe there may be truth to both of the quoted statements above. While researching my own SPR build, this is what I've gleened from the all-knowing oracle that is the Internet:
- The need/desire/concept/idea of an accurized M4 ('Recce', or recon/reconnaissance rifle by today's nomenclature)) existed before, and was the catalyst for, the SPR development program.
-The SPR concept - originally only a complete upper receiver before being provided as a complete rifle - was developed into several platforms that are currently in use with various branches of the U.S military.
-Some SEAL teams were unhappy with the Navy's Mk 12 SPR, and have reverted back to accurized M4 'Recce' rifle idea.
To return to wes's question - yes, I concur. Recce next. Try it with an A1 stock. Or not.
wild_wild_wes, I think it boils down to what your definition of long-range vs. close-in is. In the end I think your new #4 rifle is going to end up being a lot like your #2 rifle except with a stainless barrel and the true usage for either (or both) of them simply determined by which optic you choose to put on it.
Could be wrong. Either way I think you'll end up with 4 super sweet rifles.
On a side note: I really want to see Belmont31R and TRIDENT82 in a steel cage, barbed wire, ladder match at Ellismania 6 :lol: Just kidding guys.
...Just doing some calcs on KAC BulletFlight a 300WM with a 220GR bullet has less than half (actually closer to a 3rd) the wind deflection at 750 yards than Mk262Mod1 out of a Mk12. The 300WM was a little over 3FT of deflection with a 15MPH wind from side to side whereas the Mk262 was over 104". With Mk262 at 5MPH its about the same as 300WM at 15MPH (35"). So gusty wind out to 750 with Mk262 ranges from between 3-9FT whereas 300WM is about 1-3FT. I think thats a pretty dramatic difference, and Id like to see someone make regular hits on a torso size target with gusty wind like that. Not saying it can't be done but going up to a .30 makes a big difference at that range as I said in my 1st post in this thread.
Once I took a frog and placed it on a bench and said "Jump frog, jump!" The frog jump. I then cut off a leg and repeated the experiment. It jumped, though not as well. I did the same with two legs removed then three. Both times the frog at least tried to jump. Then I cut off the fourth leg. When the frog was given the order to jump it did not. My conclusion: Without legs, a frog cannot hear.
I use this story to illustrate the point the right observation doesn't always lead to the right conclusions. Mass is not the only factor when calculating a bullet's ability to buck the wind. The 200 grain 30 caliber bullet being used for long range shooting is a long skinny spitzer with a good BC. If you use 30 caliber 200 grain roundnose with a dramatically lower BC, not only will that bullet get pushed around by the wind more, but it will shed velocity faster.
The reason the 5.56 displaced the 308 as the preferred caliber for the 600 yard service rifle matches is because they found the longer 22 caliber bullets have a better BC than the 30 caliber bullets, shoot flatter, buck the wind better and do so with less recoil.
6.5mm bullets have always been long for the caliber and have good BCs. Though launched at slower speeds, their BCs allow them to retain velocity and buck the wind better than 30 caliber bullets launched at higher velocities, and the 6.5s will stay supersonic for a longer distance although they have less mass.
Time of flight plays a large role in resisting wind deflection. A bullet launched at a higher velocity is in the air less time, giving the wind less time to push it around. So if you launch two bullets of the same BC, the one with the higher velocity will have less wind deflection over the same distance.
While mass helps, it's not the whole story, nor is it the most important part. A lighter bullet with a higher BC will fly flatter and buck the wind better than a bullet of greater mass and a lower BC.
It doesn't mean the 30 caliber is a poor choice. It carries more energy. In the case of the 300 magnums launching 200 grain bullets, that energy will be felt at both ends as it will take it's toll in the form of increased recoil
Belmont31R
09-13-10, 16:15
Once I took a frog and placed it on a bench and said "Jump frog, jump!" The frog jump. I then cut off a leg and repeated the experiment. It jumped, though not as well. I did the same with two legs removed then three. Both times the frog at least tried to jump. Then I cut off the fourth leg. When the frog was given the order to jump it did not. My conclusion: Without legs, a frog cannot hear.
I use this story to illustrate the point the right observation doesn't always lead to the right conclusions. Mass is not the only factor when calculating a bullet's ability to buck the wind. The 200 grain 30 caliber bullet being used for long range shooting is a long skinny spitzer with a good BC. If you use 30 caliber 200 grain roundnose with a dramatically lower BC, not only will that bullet get pushed around by the wind more, but it will shed velocity faster.
The reason the 5.56 displaced the 308 as the preferred caliber for the 600 yard service rifle matches is because they found the longer 22 caliber bullets have a better BC than the 30 caliber bullets, shoot flatter, buck the wind better and do so with less recoil.
6.5mm bullets have always been long for the caliber and have good BCs. Though launched at slower speeds, their BCs allow them to retain velocity and buck the wind better than 30 caliber bullets launched at higher velocities, and the 6.5s will stay supersonic for a longer distance although they have less mass.
Time of flight plays a large role in resisting wind deflection. A bullet launched at a higher velocity is in the air less time, giving the wind less time to push it around. So if you launch two bullets of the same BC, the one with the higher velocity will have less wind deflection over the same distance.
While mass helps, it's not the whole story, nor is it the most important part. A lighter bullet with a higher BC will fly flatter and buck the wind better than a bullet of greater mass and a lower BC.
It doesn't mean the 30 caliber is a poor choice. It carries more energy. In the case of the 300 magnums launching 200 grain bullets, that energy will be felt at both ends as it will take it's toll in the form of increased recoil
Aren't those NM rounds firing 80 grain + bullets, and are basically single loaded?
I was just illustrating 2 common commercial rounds not specially loaded rounds that may or may not work from a magazine.
And 308 was what was common in NM before, right? My original comment was based more around the 300WM or other 30 cal magnums. I think my point still stands that at least for commerically loaded or otherwise common rounds the 30 magnums have a lot less wind drift. Also the 556 round I used is the Mk262 which is current mil issue. Outside of something like AMU are those 80+ grain bullets in use by the mil at all? I know sierra makes an SMK up to 90 grains but I don't think its possible to load that to fit in to an AR mag. I also believe the NM guys shooting those heavy bullets are having to use non-standard chambers to get them to chamber correctly. Would a 90 grain SMK even seat in a 556 chamber? Ive seen some off the shelf type 80 grain ammo before, and all times it was warned not to use them in standard chambers.
The rounds I used in those calcs is the 77SMK (Mk262), and 220SMK. They can both be fired from standard chambers.
Wind bucking and drop are a function of two things only: BC and starting velocity. There are plenty of on-line calculators that you can plug data into and determine down range drop and drift values. Velocity will be a function of barrel length, so if you want to max out on V, get a long barrel, carbines need not apply.
You are correct, the 80 grain and longer bullets have been developed for competition and must be single loaded. Wylde chambers handle these fine. The 90 grain JLK may need a longer throated chamber, I'm not sure. I think those only come into play for competitors shooting F-class at 1,000. But standard service rifle competition, just about everyone tops out somewhere between 75 and 80 grains at the 600 yard line and uses a Wylde or NATO-variant chamber. Some even use a SAAMI chamber, but those rounds are loaded shorter and velocities are reduced slightly.
Once I took a frog and placed it on a bench and said "Jump frog, jump!" The frog jump. I then cut off a leg and repeated the experiment. It jumped, though not as well. I did the same with two legs removed then three. Both times the frog at least tried to jump. Then I cut off the fourth leg. When the frog was given the order to jump it did not. My conclusion: Without legs, a frog cannot hear.
I use this story to illustrate the point the right observation doesn't always lead to the right conclusions. Mass is not the only factor when calculating a bullet's ability to buck the wind. The 200 grain 30 caliber bullet being used for long range shooting is a long skinny spitzer with a good BC. If you use 30 caliber 200 grain roundnose with a dramatically lower BC, not only will that bullet get pushed around by the wind more, but it will shed velocity faster.
The reason the 5.56 displaced the 308 as the preferred caliber for the 600 yard service rifle matches is because they found the longer 22 caliber bullets have a better BC than the 30 caliber bullets, shoot flatter, buck the wind better and do so with less recoil.
6.5mm bullets have always been long for the caliber and have good BCs. Though launched at slower speeds, their BCs allow them to retain velocity and buck the wind better than 30 caliber bullets launched at higher velocities, and the 6.5s will stay supersonic for a longer distance although they have less mass.
Time of flight plays a large role in resisting wind deflection. A bullet launched at a higher velocity is in the air less time, giving the wind less time to push it around. So if you launch two bullets of the same BC, the one with the higher velocity will have less wind deflection over the same distance.
While mass helps, it's not the whole story, nor is it the most important part. A lighter bullet with a higher BC will fly flatter and buck the wind better than a bullet of greater mass and a lower BC.
It doesn't mean the 30 caliber is a poor choice. It carries more energy. In the case of the 300 magnums launching 200 grain bullets, that energy will be felt at both ends as it will take it's toll in the form of increased recoil
If you do serious research on wind deflection effects I think you will find wind deflection (and, to some extent drop) depend mostly on the "Delay factor". The delay factor is the difference in flight time between two points in a vacuum vs in air. In other words, the faster the bullet slows down the more the wind affects it. This is the reason better BC bullets buck the wind better. There is no substitute for high BC at long range. At the same range a bullet that launches at 4000 fps with a terminal velocity of 2000 fps will drift more than a 2500 fps bullet that terminals at 2000fps, period. Check it out with any exterior ballistics program that does wind drift.
Hals1
If you do serious research on wind deflection effects I think you will find wind deflection (and, to some extent drop) depend mostly on the "Delay factor". The delay factor is the difference in flight time between two points in a vacuum vs in air. In other words, the faster the bullet slows down the more the wind affects it. This is the reason better BC bullets buck the wind better. There is no substitute for high BC at long range. At the same range a bullet that launches at 4000 fps with a terminal velocity of 2000 fps will drift more than a 2500 fps bullet that terminals at 2000fps, period. Check it out with any exterior ballistics program that does wind drift.
Hals1Dat's what I said :) Or tried to. Your explanation is clearer than my example.
I need to improve my verbiage when attempting technical posts. The other problem is I'm on the east coast and all my reloading data is out west. I need to fix that
Thats fine. I just think a 30 cal SPR/DMR/whatever is a better choice for long range shooting than a 223. Just like the ELR guys are not even shooting 30 calibers but 375's, 408's and 416's. The further out you go the more speed and bullet mass help you. Another example is the Army switching from 308 to 300 win mag because you can shoot heavier bullets at a faster FPS. Just upping bullet mass and speed raises the max effective range from 800M to 1200M.
Edit: Just doing some calcs on KAC BulletFlight a 300WM with a 220GR bullet has less than half (actually closer to a 3rd) the wind deflection at 750 yards than Mk262Mod1 out of a Mk12. The 300WM was a little over 3FT of deflection with a 15MPH wind from side to side whereas the Mk262 was over 104". With Mk262 at 5MPH its about the same as 300WM at 15MPH (35"). So gusty wind out to 750 with Mk262 ranges from between 3-9FT whereas 300WM is about 1-3FT. I think thats a pretty dramatic difference, and Id like to see someone make regular hits on a torso size target with gusty wind like that. Not saying it can't be done but going up to a .30 makes a big difference at that range as I said in my 1st post in this thread.
Believe it or not for change I agree with you and the sentiment behind the horsepower of the .308 in say a m118lr over a 5.56 mk262 in any long range precision application however I had my views at least broadened from a thread on tos the other day. I was confused as to what Marcus Luttrell from the book Lone Survivor was packing to smoke the Taliban leader up in the Hindu Kush Mtns...I had just assumed after not reading the book in so long that Marcus being the actual shooter on that SDVT team aka the sniper, would take the mk 11 mod 0 as its a real deal sniper rifle in a very appropriate caliber vs. in reality what he did have which was a MK 12 and MK 262.....turns out it was the right play as he had numerous volleys of fire with contact burning tons of ammo through the mk 12 over the course of that sad day and then next several days by himself...so just assume he has the much heavier mk 11 with ammo capacity limited to what he brought on his person as none of his teammates would have had any 7.62. So all four were able to interchange ammo and mags and while he gave up some in terms of range and lethality, it was not nearly what he would have given up if he had a mk 11 in the situation that actually transpired in real life.
eta....on the end user comment, I am pretty sure that the actual Seals do in fact dislike the recce as they have made a damn living whacking BG's with Mk 12s for some considerable amounts of time now vs. a concept gun without a MK designation and thus no support behind it. Seals can carry what they what in terms of kit and they do....the MK 12s is one of their very best tools imho.
I own both type guns and although I would hate to do it, the recce would be shelved if I had to take only one.
eta 2:) This is clearly one of my favorite aspects to ARs....and the specific recce vs. spr is maybe my favorite thing to just ponder at a Dr's office or day dream basically about. Its a wonderful topic for discussion and the debate in my eyes even though I have a formed opinion is still clearly open for discussion and I got a new chip in the game coming for my recce so I will have a new opinion I am sure soon on this topic.
I did the same thing WWW, I wanted to have a "set" of ARs for various roles/ranges. I think that an AR15's capability is basically determined by its sights. So I set about getting 3, then 4, then 5 ARs, that had various barrel lengths and optics for their operating envelopes. I wasn't as concerned with barrel profiles or cold hammer forging as barrel length for velocity and barrel quality for accuracy.
The close range carbines 10.5" 14.5" and 16" with Red Dot Sights have; NATO chambers, chrome lined barrels, and single stage triggers, whereas the 16" Recce and the 18" SPR have tweaked chambers, stainless match barrels, and 2 stage triggers.
Close range - LMT 10.5" MK18 Mod C with RDS
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6130/5974652151_164483c9a5_b.jpg
Mid Range - Daniel Defense 16" Recce with med scope 1.5-5
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2775/5798103852_27f3a58174_b.jpg
Long(er) Range - BCM MK12 SPR Mod 3 with long range scope 4.5-14 (the scope on it is from my .308 Bolt Action but will have a 3.5-10 with an off set RDS soon).
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2507/5798104532_b66f6b6a5c_b.jpg
So really the only major differences are optic, barrel length, barrel quality, and trigger.
Rather than consolidating the 10.5" and 16" into a 14.5" I just got an extra 14.5" with a different optic. The latest edition a light(er) weight RDS equipped carbine for the pixies in the family.
BCM 14.5" mid length with RDS
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6085/6077819680_fbd7c80e79_b.jpg
Kinda rounds out a capable collection that has a commonality in feel and function, where real role differentiation is determined by the optic.
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3385/5805308615_40330c1d91_b.jpg
Cameron
Damn Cameron now I'm gonna have to say Hail Marys all night as I'm suffering from envy, hate, lust,... ;) Well done!
and I'm not even Catholic:eek:
I own both type guns and although I would hate to do it, the recce would be shelved if I had to take only one.
Bah. You and I have surprisingly similar preferences (and rifles, for that matter), so I hate reading that... because it means I just might prefer my future SPR over the Recce (provided I ever get around to finishing it).
Now I'm going to spend the next week trying to figure out how to fund an SPR purchase... lol.
Bah. You and I have surprisingly similar preferences (and rifles, for that matter), so I hate reading that... because it means I just might prefer my future SPR over the Recce (provided I ever get around to finishing it).
Now I'm going to spend the next week trying to figure out how to fund an SPR purchase... lol.
Oh snap...you caught me red handed flipping and a flopping:eek:
Crazy you bring this up though because over the last month since that quoted text I made....I finally got the matching Rock SS 16" Recce barrel to compliment, finish and now compare my journey through the NSW-C guns with accuracy being paramount to both guns. While I am preparing some sort of proper evaluation with me currently compiling mostly groups of the two side by side at 100yds I can say that is one helluva false statement I made above and I completely rescind it as already the writing is on the wall if keeping the match grade barrel and other components critical to match accuracy constant.....Less is easily more on this discussion unless discussing 450-600yds performance.. and then I am still not sure as I have not shot either that far nor collected any velocity data. Besides compiling a healthy amt. of groups side by side w. various ammo, I will hope to chrono the typical heavy match loads though both and lastly hit the 600yd range to compile some data in terms of these side by side at LR distances where then the actual extra barrel length of the SPR might bring it back into my picture. Right now with this new recce pushing out 10rd. 100yd groups around .75-.85" with commercial Hornady 55gr. vmax's I am beyond back on board with our shared beloved recce gun.
As you can see they are built with the intention of being relative twins w. both having 10x NF's, match triggers, same free floated rifle length MRP chassis and last but not least the same most amazing Rock SS barrels as the Rock 16" SS recce is the same barrel as the Rock 18" SS SPR just shortened.
http://i55.tinypic.com/11qk7eh.jpg
Recce's first and only to date range trip....
http://i55.tinypic.com/zmkwut.jpg
Rmplstlskn
10-13-10, 19:43
If only I could know what terrain and distance my foe will be... I'd have the right one with me. :laugh:
Rmpl
I love the mission specific weapon. Conversly love the flexibility of the AR platform. My main trainer, go to, is a 16" but have sizes smaller and bigger for the specific "outing."
Love Camerons collection.
wileecoyote
10-14-10, 14:14
I looked around and can't find the exact quote but I'm pretty sure it was Kyle DeFoor who said that the Seals messed around with different lengths for a precision M4 and found that 16" was about right. The 18" didn't add much more to accuracy and velocity when compared to a 16" for typical engagement distances where the 5.56 is effective. He also mentioned that a heavy 14'5" would probably even work. Maybe explains some of the 16" recce versus 18" SPR thinking.
It's interesting to see some of the conventional wisdom being challenged, like Knights with the SR-25 EMC where they went with 16" as the performance loss to 18" was almost negligible and now LMT seems to have come to the same conclusion with the MWS.
I looked around and can't find the exact quote but I'm pretty sure it was Kyle DeFoor who said that the Seals messed around with different lengths for a precision M4 and found that 16" was about right. The 18" didn't add much more to accuracy and velocity when compared to a 16" for typical engagement distances where the 5.56 is effective. He also mentioned that a heavy 14'5" would probably even work. Maybe explains some of the 16" recce versus 18" SPR thinking.
It's interesting to see some of the conventional wisdom being challenged, like Knights with the SR-25 EMC where they went with 16" as the performance loss to 18" was almost negligible and now LMT seems to have come to the same conclusion with the MWS.
I completely agree about the current state of precision based ARs be it 7.62 or 5.56 being interesting to watch and how it is indeed shifting.
When I just wrapped up this recce and saw what its gonna do to the spr....I heard that "Ding" illustrated by the bold text of yours:cool: ...again given the match grade SS barrel and other components critical to accuracy are held constant.
wild_wild_wes
10-14-10, 20:41
I did the same thing WWW, I wanted to have a "set" of ARs for various roles/ranges. I think that an AR15's capability is basically determined by its sights. So I set about getting 3, then 4, then 5 ARs, that had various barrel lengths and optics for their operating envelopes. I wasn't as concerned with barrel profiles or cold hammer forging as barrel length for velocity and barrel quality for accuracy.
The close range carbines 10.5" 14.5" and 16" with Red Dot Sights have; NATO chambers, chrome lined barrels, and single stage triggers, whereas the 16" Recce and the 18" SPR have tweaked chambers, stainless match barrels, and 2 stage triggers.
Cameron
Yes, exactly: it seems best to match the optic to the barrel, and then for the most capable optic/barrel combo, add a better trigger. My Recce will have the Geissele SSA trigger, and the SPR has a DMR trigger.
I've decided to add another to my line-up:
http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii173/USPx4/M4.jpg
I love that barrel! A DD 14.5" Lightwight CHF; but it lacks rails, so I will build another using the same barrel, but with a low-profile gas block under a DD Mk18 RIS II, and for an optic it will have a T1 Aimpoint.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4144/5063206222_523f49fd85_b.jpg
Nice collection, Cameron! I'd turn my 14.5"s into 12"s if California allowed SBRs....
wild_wild_wes
10-14-10, 20:46
I completely agree about the current state of precision based ARs be it 7.62 or 5.56 being interesting to watch and how it is indeed shifting.
Yes, interesting! Some units are re-barreling shot-out SPRs with 16" barrels:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v317/M4Guru/CroppedSPR.jpg
And then perhaps the 5.56 SPR concept will give way to the new 16" 7.62 precision carbines? Tis' the case with several European armies already....
And then perhaps the 5.56 SPR concept will give way to the new 16" 7.62 precision carbines? Tis' the case with several European armies already....
I think that there is a new version of the M110 with a 16" barrel and Magpul ACS being fielded or at least considered. KevinB has made a couple of vague references to it on ST. Sounds like it's basically a new incarnation of the SR25 Battle Rifle.
wileecoyote
10-14-10, 21:49
Agreed. I think A'stan is helping to refine our doctrines and bring back the point that all engagements may not be confined to 300m. I think the addition of 7.62 (M110 carbine?) precision weapons to our units will help give them an additional tool in the toolbox.
Would you guys agree that the 5.56 in a precision rifle is only becoming more of a mainstay in the U.S. arsenal....most just by default would say no, myself included up til a yr or so ago when I became totally convinced as long as our soldiers sport infantry rifles w. 5.56 ammo, we will have accompanying 5.56 light sniper rifles used far more than our 7.62 precision s/a's.
Its taken some time for the US arsenal to get it right between the MK 262 and the MK 12s. The time line is going on 10yrs of development/refinement.....The original Special Purpose Receiver program.....Special Purpose Rifle Vs. Recce Rifle.....MK 12 mod 0/1's.
Would you guys agree that the 5.56 in a precision rifle is only becoming more of a mainstay in the U.S. arsenal....most just by default would say no, myself included up til a yr or so ago when I became totally convinced as long as our soldiers sport infantry rifles w. 5.56 ammo, we will have accompanying 5.56 light sniper rifles used far more than our 7.62 precision s/a's.
Its taken some time for the US arsenal to get it right between the MK 262 and the MK 12s. The time line is going on 10yrs of development/refinement.....The original Special Purpose Receiver program.....Special Purpose Rifle Vs. Recce Rifle.....MK 12 mod 0/1's.
I have no idea, but it would be interesting to know how many Mk 12's are in service versus 7.62 x 51, 300 WinMag, 338 Lapua, etc. precision rifles are out there.
wild_wild_wes
10-15-10, 11:04
Would you guys agree that the 5.56 in a precision rifle is only becoming more of a mainstay in the U.S. arsenal....most just by default would say no, myself included up til a yr or so ago when I became totally convinced as long as our soldiers sport infantry rifles w. 5.56 ammo, we will have accompanying 5.56 light sniper rifles used far more than our 7.62 precision s/a's.
I was exchanging IMs at TOS with a highly experienced Army DM and he says he was highly satisfied with the 5.56 SPRs' performance out to 700m, and he has used his out to that distance successfully.
wileecoyote
10-15-10, 12:28
Would you guys agree that the 5.56 in a precision rifle is only becoming more of a mainstay in the U.S. arsenal....most just by default would say no, myself included up til a yr or so ago when I became totally convinced as long as our soldiers sport infantry rifles w. 5.56 ammo, we will have accompanying 5.56 light sniper rifles used far more than our 7.62 precision s/a's.
I'm not sure. I think our armed forces are struggling with that. I think ideas are coming through like the "taking back the infantry half-kilometer" paper where our experience in A'stan is showing how we've focused on closer range combat.
I think the 5.56 is a fine caliber and Mk 12 seems to be more than capable at longer ranges on man targets but I think barriers become more of an issue. Personally I think the Brits have it right getting the 7.62 DMRs out there, so when the extra range and punch is needed they have it available. The only other point I can think of is you can make a precision 7.62 16" DM that can be used to help clear rooms and such if needed, but I think a guy toting an 18" rifle it gets harder. Not that 2" is a whopping amount but in tight spaces every inch counts.
I'd imagine smaller special units would probably stick with Mk 12s\Recces just for ammo compatibility with their mates. Unless they all start rolling around with 7.62 Battle Rifles and Precision Rifles! But then again what do I know!
I was exchanging IMs at TOS with a highly experienced Army DM and he says he was highly satisfied with the 5.56 SPRs' performance out to 700m, and he has used his out to that distance successfully.
Over the last 1-2 yrs., I have heard maybe 3-4 different end users that fielded the Mk12 (most IIrc in Astan) straight glow about its actual performance on an area on operation and all said that the MK12's get a ton of actually logged rounds down the tube as they are used for a variety of diff. niche d applications....One of them used it heavily to provide an overwatch for advancing units when going into villages and maintained a pair of eyes and gun on a village while the boots on the ground did the various things that needed to be done in the village.
One more had told me that while it was more rare they would take out the MK12s w. clipped on UNS's and silencers and set up an observation hide near roads and such that happened to be frequently laden w. IED's. Talk about a badass mission that could serve no greater cause than dirt napping terrorists setting IEDs.
I'm not sure. I think our armed forces are struggling with that. I think ideas are coming through like the "taking back the infantry half-kilometer" paper where our experience in A'stan is showing how we've focused on closer range combat.
I think the 5.56 is a fine caliber and Mk 12 seems to be more than capable at longer ranges on man targets but I think barriers become more of an issue. Personally I think the Brits have it right getting the 7.62 DMRs out there, so when the extra range and punch is needed they have it available. The only other point I can think of is you can make a precision 7.62 16" DM that can be used to help clear rooms and such if needed, but I think a guy toting an 18" rifle it gets harder. Not that 2" is a whopping amount but in tight spaces every inch counts.
I'd imagine smaller special units would probably stick with Mk 12s\Recces just for ammo compatibility with their mates. Unless they all start rolling around with 7.62 Battle Rifles and Precision Rifles! But then again what do I know!
All you need to back your particular 16" precision 7.62 argument is to hear the feedback from the Brit's in theater as what little Ive heard is awesome.
wild_wild_wes
10-15-10, 23:45
**news flash**
I was just on the Noveske website, and they are now selling stripped N4 barrels, with both regular FSB and pinned low-profile gas blocks. They only have the 14.5" Carbine gas barrels, though.
Kyle Defoor
10-21-10, 18:13
The original whatever you want to call them- Recces, SPRs, MK 12s (we usually just say "sniper M4") had a 16" barrel, Leupold 2.5-10 and a PRI foregrip. They were first used operationally in '93 in Somalia by our guys that were attached to our Southern brethren.
It went to 18" quite frankly because the big Army got involved. Most of us that have a lot of time on one (myself included) think that 16" is better for a number of reasons;
1. 2" does make a difference especially with a can.
2. weight (it's not pounds at this stage it's ounces) and remember that balance has a factor here too.
3. I've shot both together on the same range at the same time. I don't really care what charts and scientists say, me and mine can hit just as good with 16" as 18".
Slight digression- I think most experienced guys will also agree that 24-26" is too long for the 700 as well. 20-22" is fine for what distances most will use it for.
The MK12 is ok as it comes, but, me and majority of the guys that were around me immediatley shitcanned the fixed stock. Some would go with a Geisselle trigger too, and some would put a tube rail back on. All of these little touches were done in house at the shooters home team.
As has been pointed out 5.56 does fine in moderate wind out pretty far. There are an assload of guys both Army and Navy that have slayed passed 600 repeatedly.
For pickin and choosin I tell guys the rules of 4 for caliber;
400 and closer- 5.56 all day
400-800 - 7.62
800-1200- 300 WM
1200-1600 - 338 Lapua
I said a few years ago that bolt action sniper guns would become obseolete at close and moderate distances. I got laughed at. Well, a good friend of mine who I shot with during 2 courses this year and his shooting partner just won the International Sniper Competition at Benning with Larue OBRs.
There's no reason to not have a mag fed snipe gun anymore for 90% of the shooters out there. The manufacturers have simply done too good a job to not use them. On that note, there is already a 7.62 mag fed that has a 12" barrel and will hold 1 MOA to 300 no problem.;)
Good thread guys!
Respect,
KD
Kyle,
Thanks for that info.
Great reply Kyle...I totally agree with all you had to say and I had to shoot the two side by side to see that the 16" was every bit capable as the 18" yet lighter and shorter.
I just got back a bit ago from shooting and I had taken both the recce and spr today and planned to put an equal amt. of ammo through each.....I bet the Recce shot 4 to 1 ratio when all was said and done:D
http://i56.tinypic.com/149ryiw.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/5lqhbp.jpg
wild_wild_wes
10-21-10, 22:54
Thanks for the info, KD!
weight (it's not pounds at this stage it's ounces) and remember that balance has a factor here too.
KD
If a heavier telestock like the UBR would help balance the rifle, would you accept the added weight? Which factor is most important to you- overalll weight, or balance?
I have been looking for that "do it all" carbine for a couple of years and have settled on a modernized recce upper from BCM with the ION SS barrel.
I'm looking forward to getting it out to the range with my 1.5-5X to see what it'll do.
Based upon the info I see in this thread I made a good choice.
I think you did, some do not like to chase the accuracy aspect of ARs but if you happen to than you should have a ton of fun with your new 16" boomstick:)
Shooting gnats @ 100m w. a 16" gun that has a typical 30rd capacity is imho a gamechanger:cool:
I think you did, some do not like to chase the accuracy aspect of ARs but if you happen to than you should have a ton of fun with your new 16" boomstick:)
Shooting gnats @ 100m w. a 16" gun that has a typical 30rd capacity is imho a gamechanger:cool:
I have high expectations of it and hope I'm a happy camper by next weekend. I get about 1 MOA with a RRA heavy barrel now, I'm looking for sub MOA out of this unit.
If it is anything like my BCM SS410 Ion Bond it will be a true sub MOA tack driver. Federal 55gr into less than an inch at 200.
Cameron
I poked around the BCM web site looking for a break in procedure for the ION bonded barrels. They're stainless steel, is it good practice to break these in as you would a bare stainless barrel?
Magic_Salad0892
10-25-10, 11:54
Just out of curiosity: About the BCM Ion Bond barrels.
What is the intended use? And what's the weight like?
Hope this doesn't qualify as a necropost...
Interestingly after owning and shooting both of the 16" Recce and the 18" SPR I showed on page 1 I found exactly what Kyle Defoor meant in this thread about the 5.56 16" being every bit as capable as the 18" and opted to move the 18" SPR on to another loving family, with the ultimate goal of replacing it with a .308.
I am thinking of the barrel paradigm again as I might get the LMT MWS with an 18" or 20" stainless barrel and also SBR the lower and cut a chrome line 16" barrel down to 13". Giving a chrome lined hard use barrel for fast fun at closer ranges and an SS precision barrel for accuracy at longer ranges.
Cameron
Maybe 18" barrels are the new 20" barrel.
I'm really having to give some consideration to condensing my rifles to two 5.56 Rifles for me, and two 5.56 rifles for wife and training.
One 11.5" CHF Suppressed SBR with an Aimpoint
One 16" MW SS Suppressed Light Recce with a low powered variable
Two 14.5" LW Middy Minimalist rifles with an X300 and Aimpoint Micro
On the 18 - I think the real limitation is that without the need for ammunition commonality among teammates, a 16" 7.62 reaches farther than an 18" 5.56, and weighs only a bit more. For the miniscule bit of added range you get with that 2" more barrel in a 5.56, it's becoming a simpler tradeoff to instead put better glass on the 16" and have that be the long range solution.
Littlelebowski
11-30-11, 06:17
I poked around the BCM web site looking for a break in procedure for the ION bonded barrels. They're stainless steel, is it good practice to break these in as you would a bare stainless barrel?
Shoot, repeat. That never hurt anything.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.