Talk about the Second amendment!

[Bobby_3111]

That is a sniper rifle, one of the first sniper rifles. The Springfield 06. And I would put up a sniper rifle against any other rifle no matter the rate of fire. The sniper will always win in a one on one. Even a two on one. And depending on the man a three on one.

Truly spoken like someone who doesnt have a clue.

 

[JackLuis]

Bobby read the article about the Taliban's marksmanship. Then think about the situation, lots of fire is not as effective as single shots well aimed.

Same hold true for firearms information. Some is good, but dangerous, a lot is hard to remember accurately.

The 1903 Springfield in .30-'06 was one of a long line of "sniper rifles", from the Revolutionary War's Pennsylvania Rifles to the Sharps Carbine breech loader used in the Civil War.

The '03 in 30-06 is still used somewhere. Although most Long Range shooters are migrating from the .308/7.62 and .300 mags to 6.5-6.8 mm midrange cartridges like the 6.5 Grendel and even the .260 Remington.

I say let the Taliban and others use the AK-47/74. I'll keep my Ruger 77 thanks. With it I can suppress and harass the forces of evil out to 500 meters.

An accurate arm is good to have and a friend in troubled times, but it is useless in getting you laid.

 

[Bobby_3111]

Bobby read the article about the Taliban's marksmanship. Then think about the situation, lots of fire is not as effective as single shots well aimed.

Same hold true for firearms information. Some is good, but dangerous, a lot is hard to remember accurately.

The 1903 Springfield in .30-'06 was one of a long line of "sniper rifles", from the Revolutionary War's Pennsylvania Rifles to the Sharps Carbine breech loader used in the Civil War.

The '03 in 30-06 is still used somewhere. Although most Long Range shooters are migrating from the .308/7.62 and .300 mags to 6.5-6.8 mm midrange cartridges like the 6.5 Grendel and even the .260 Remington.

I say let the Taliban and others use the AK-47/74. I'll keep my Ruger 77 thanks. With it I can suppress and harass the forces of evil out to 500 meters.

An accurate arm is good to have and a friend in troubled times, but it is useless in getting you laid.

I'm not saying snipers arent good at what they do, i'm saying Zeb doesnt have a damn clue about what he is talking about.

Being a sniper isnt some golden ticket to greatness and being deadly, the terrain and the situation matters as well.

A lot of people just know what they see on TV. They dont have any idea of what happens in the field.

 

[stephen55]

There are snipers and there are sniper rifles...of all kinds....

You people who want the sniper rifles are nuts. I like my 30.06 just fine thankyouverymuch.

If I can shot a quarter minute group with my trusty Krico .300 Win. Mag, I might as well call it a sniper rifle. But as I said, it hardly makes me a sniper. When I'm hunting with one buddy, who likes to still hunt, he says I look like a Mack truck when I'm trying to keep a low profile. And that's in full cammo complete with face paint and a mask. (Before anyone cries Idiot!!, we do that on private property.)

Today, military snipers have very fine rifles, often custom designed and fully tweaked by very skilled armorers. In the good old days, if that is applicable, snipers used stuff like this...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f8/Sergeant_H.A._Marshall_of_the_Sniper_Section%2C_The_Calgary_Highlanders.jpg/566px-Sergeant_H.A._Marshall_of_the_Sniper_Section%2C_The_Calgary_Highlanders.jpg

That's Sergeant Harold Marshall of the Calgary Highlanders during WWII. His rifle is a stock Lee Enfield No. 4 Mk I rifle. It's topped with what today is considered a very crude scope.



Finnish Lance Corporal Simo Häyhä, aka "Valkoinen Kuolema" (the White Death) was a sniper during the Winter War (the Finnish part of WWII) and is regarded by many as the most effective sniper in the history of warfare, being credited with killing up to 542 Soviet soldiers (an average of 5 a day) using a SAKO m/28-30 (Pystykorva) and iron sights??!!!

http://www.mosinnagant.net/finland/images/m28_000.JPG

The most successful woman sniper was the Red Army's Lyudmila Pavlichenko who was credited with 309 kills during The Great Patriotic War. (That's WWII to us in the west.)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/26/LyudmilaPavlichenko1.jpg

She used a standard issue Soviet Mosin–Nagant rifle with a scope.

http://world.guns.ru/rifle/mosin91-30s.jpg

I've got one of these things. Because the bolt comes up to vertical, the scope is offset to the left (how very Soviet ). It looks as clunky as it is pictured. It's also a tack driver. Back in the days when there was a Soviet Union, their competitive shooters did very well with this rifle. Part of the success is due to the ammo. The 7.62x54mmR cartridge, (R for rimmed) is for reasons beyond me, inherently just a great cartridge. I think it has something to do with being rimmed and what this does for head spacing. If anyone knows the answer, please let me know.

 

[SeaCat]

Zeb do you have any clue about the differences between a belt-fed machine gun and a standard M-16A2/A3 rifle?

An M-16 has 3 settings on the selector switch - safety, semi, and burst. Got that? Ok, now a *belt-fed* machine gun has only a safety on it that locks the trigger. Understand all that? Good.

Now when you fire an M-16 you arent firing at nearly the rate of a machine gun with belted ammunition. Even firing on burst you can go through 3 or 4 30-round mag's and still wouldnt come close to the amount of fire coming from a machine gun.

Now read again what Seacat posted -

*It was a design that is to replace the M-16/M-4 rifle. Instead of using a gas return directly to the bold face as the M-16 does it uses a Piston to impart the recoil to the bolt. This allows the bolt and receiver to remain much cooler.

(The test they showed was two large capacity magazines fired quickly through the weapon then they removed the bold and held in a bare hand.)*

Now as for what he said they did on the show "they removed the bolt and held in a bare hand" the bolt is not the barrel. Hell i've feild stripped the damn things after firing them and the bolt will be warm, bordering on hot but not scorching hot as the barrel obviously will be.

Now a lining of the barrel to help cooling on an M-16 maybe i can see that (I never saw it as a problem myself but to each his own). But he wasnt talking about a belt-fed machine gun firing 200 rounds, he was saying an M-16/M-4 going through a couple of large-capacity magazines (In the army we only had 10 and 30 round mags).

Now do you see the difference there ? Or do i need to link videos showing you the difference between weapons?

Nope, no barrel lining of any kind will help with cooling the barrel as that is caused by friction of the round through the barrel. (As well as the expanding hot gases of the explosion of the powder charge.) You can however keep from buring your hands n the hot barrel by covering it with a shroud of some kind, ie. the handguards on the M-16/M-4.

The barrel lining can and will reduce the wear on the barrel caused by firing. (It can also reduce the fouling of the barrel. A good example of this is the Chrome type lining of the M-16 barrels.) The same can be said for the composition of the rounds being fired through the barrel and the charges in the ammunition. (Non jacketed rounds and dirty burning powder will foul a barrel much quicker than jacketed rounds and clean burning powder. On the other hand rounds with harder jackets will wear out the lands in the barrel much quicker.)

That being said the difference between light machine guns and assault rifles is a thin one. If I recall correctly the differences aren't that great.

Cat

 

[Bobby_3111]

Nope, no barrel lining of any kind will help with cooling the barrel as that is caused by friction of the round through the barrel. (As well as the expanding hot gases of the explosion of the powder charge.) You can however keep from buring your hands n the hot barrel by covering it with a shroud of some kind, ie. the handguards on the M-16/M-4.

The barrel lining can and will reduce the wear on the barrel caused by firing. (It can also reduce the fouling of the barrel. A good example of this is the Chrome type lining of the M-16 barrels.) The same can be said for the composition of the rounds being fired through the barrel and the charges in the ammunition. (Non jacketed rounds and dirty burning powder will foul a barrel much quicker than jacketed rounds and clean burning powder. On the other hand rounds with harder jackets will wear out the lands in the barrel much quicker.)

That being said the difference between light machine guns and assault rifles is a thin one. If I recall correctly the differences aren't that great.

Cat

Some metals retain more heat than others, for instance, steel holds heat longer than copper. So if they were to find a metal stronger or as strong as steel and able to disperse heat faster then that would in effect cool the barrel faster if lined on the inside or if it was cheap enough having the entire barrel made out of it. It wouldnt take all the heat away, but it would reduce it.

Now the difference you are referring to for *light machine guns* and assault rifles is very distinct, not thin. One uses belted ammunition and has a faster rate of fire, the other has a magazine and doesnt fire on fully-automatic. That is if we are talking about the more modern weapons of the US Army (The original M-16A1 that came out in the 60's had a fully automatic setting on the selector switch).

 

[SeaCat]

If I can shot a quarter minute group with my trusty Krico .300 Win. Mag, I might as well call it a sniper rifle. But as I said, it hardly makes me a sniper. When I'm hunting with one buddy, who likes to still hunt, he says I look like a Mack truck when I'm trying to keep a low profile. And that's in full cammo complete with face paint and a mask. (Before anyone cries Idiot!!, we do that on private property.)

Today, military snipers have very fine rifles, often custom designed and fully tweaked by very skilled armorers. In the good old days, if that is applicable, snipers used stuff like this...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f8/Sergeant_H.A._Marshall_of_the_Sniper_Section%2C_The_Calgary_Highlanders.jpg/566px-Sergeant_H.A._Marshall_of_the_Sniper_Section%2C_The_Calgary_Highlanders.jpg

That's Sergeant Harold Marshall of the Calgary Highlanders during WWII. His rifle is a stock Lee Enfield No. 4 Mk I rifle. It's topped with what today is considered a very crude scope.



Finnish Lance Corporal Simo Häyhä, aka "Valkoinen Kuolema" (the White Death) was a sniper during the Winter War (the Finnish part of WWII) and is regarded by many as the most effective sniper in the history of warfare, being credited with killing up to 542 Soviet soldiers (an average of 5 a day) using a SAKO m/28-30 (Pystykorva) and iron sights??!!!

http://www.mosinnagant.net/finland/images/m28_000.JPG

The most successful woman sniper was the Red Army's Lyudmila Pavlichenko who was credited with 309 kills during The Great Patriotic War. (That's WWII to us in the west.)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/26/LyudmilaPavlichenko1.jpg

She used a standard issue Soviet Mosin–Nagant rifle with a scope.

http://world.guns.ru/rifle/mosin91-30s.jpg

I've got one of these things. Because the bolt comes up to vertical, the scope is offset to the left (how very Soviet ). It looks as clunky as it is pictured. It's also a tack driver. Back in the days when there was a Soviet Union, their competitive shooters did very well with this rifle. Part of the success is due to the ammo. The 7.62x54mmR cartridge, (R for rimmed) is for reasons beyond me, inherently just a great cartridge. I think it has something to do with being rimmed and what this does for head spacing. If anyone knows the answer, please let me know.

Being a sniper is much more than being able to shoot accurately. It is a mix of field craft, shooting skills and temperment.

If you can shoot accurately out to 1k meters it won't do you a whole lot of good if you stand out like a neon sign. Contrariwise it won't do you a lot of good if you can sneak up to within 100 yards if you can't hit the side of a barn while locked inside it. Being a Chameleon and able to hit anything under the sun won't do a bit of good if you can't pull the trigger and drop someone. (It's amazing how many can't.)

As for the Moisin Nagant. I have no idea why it's so accurate, I've never looked into it.

Cat

 

[stephen55]

I always thought that the greatest cause of heating in a firearm of any kind is the heat of the expanding gas from the burning powder (propellant). Friction between the bullet and the barrel lands also causes barrel heating but nowhere near as much as the gas, or so I'm lead to believe. So anything that gets touched by the gas is going to heat. A gas blow-back auto loading design is going to give you a hotter receiver than a recoil auto loading design, but not by much. Ditto the bolts.

That said, it's the barrel that bears the brunt of the gas. I don't know just how hot this gas gets, but it's nothing to test by holding an incautious finger tip close to the muzzle.

 

[SeaCat]

Some metals retain more heat than others, for instance, steel holds heat longer than copper. So if they were to find a metal stronger or as strong as steel and able to disperse heat faster then that would in effect cool the barrel faster if lined on the inside or if it was cheap enough having the entire barrel made out of it. It wouldnt take all the heat away, but it would reduce it.

Now the difference you are referring to for *light machine guns* and assault rifles is very distinct, not thin. One uses belted ammunition and has a faster rate of fire, the other has a magazine and doesnt fire on fully-automatic. That is if we are talking about the more modern weapons of the US Army (The original M-16A1 that came out in the 60's had a fully automatic setting on the selector switch).

If I recall correctly the M-249 can be fed from either a belt or from the M-16/M-4 Magazines. (Although it does have a history of jambing or misfeeding from magazines because their springs can't keep up with the feed rate.)

I also understand that the new or current M-4 is a three round burst weapon but aren't there variations that fire fully auto?

The M-249's barrel is heavier and designed for quick changes while the M-4's aren't.

The M-249 has a higher rate of fire but it isn't as accurate. It is also heavier.

So from what I have seen and read the main differences between the two are weight, rate of fire, accuracy and sustainability of fire.

They are designed for different roles on the battle field even though they use the same round. (The same can be said for the G-3 and the M-60.) Same round but different roles.

Cat

 

[JackLuis]

Being a sniper is much more than being able to shoot accurately. It is a mix of field craft, shooting skills and temperment.

If you can shoot accurately out to 1k meters it won't do you a whole lot of good if you stand out like a neon sign. Contrariwise it won't do you a lot of good if you can sneak up to within 100 yards if you can't hit the side of a barn while locked inside it. Being a Chameleon and able to hit anything under the sun won't do a bit of good if you can't pull the trigger and drop someone. (It's amazing how many can't.)

As for the Moisin Nagant. I have no idea why it's so accurate, I've never looked into it.

Cat

The 7.62 Moslin Nagant was a fairly strong action and a well balanced case with an adequate neck and enough boiler room considering the propellants of the times to be considered a high velocity round in it's day (~1890's).

Good ones can shoot very well, but a lot of them were drug through the swamps during the GPW and show up pretty ragged.

Compared to a 'real' Snipers rifle it won't hold up to the 6/6.5mm BR's and 6.5X45 Lapua at 300 yards. These are capable of .2 to .5 inch groups of five at 200 meters. The MN would have to be good to shoot groups ten times as large.

But a five inch group is adequate if you just shoot to hit, and can follow up quick.

Soviet snipers worked mostly under 600 yards in most cases, so the 7.62 was adequate. Later Soviet Sniper Rifles were a lot better and they had dedicated Sniper 7.62 ammo.

 

[Bobby_3111]

If I recall correctly the M-249 can be fed from either a belt or from the M-16/M-4 Magazines. (Although it does have a history of jambing or misfeeding from magazines because their springs can't keep up with the feed rate.)

I also understand that the new or current M-4 is a three round burst weapon but aren't there variations that fire fully auto?

The M-249's barrel is heavier and designed for quick changes while the M-4's aren't.

The M-249 has a higher rate of fire but it isn't as accurate. It is also heavier.

So from what I have seen and read the main differences between the two are weight, rate of fire, accuracy and sustainability of fire.

They are designed for different roles on the battle field even though they use the same round. (The same can be said for the G-3 and the M-60.) Same round but different roles.

Cat

They can use magazines but like you said they jam A LOT when used. Now an M-4 was mostly used by the officers and the squad leaders but on all that I saw or used they all had the safe/semi/burst on the selector switch, same as the standard m-16.

As for accuracy well when i used an m249, to me, they were quite accurate when you learned how to control your trigger finger. And that is if you were in the prone position, standing then i'd go with the m-16. And in clearing a room i'd go with an M-4 because of the more compact design.

 

[stephen55]

Being a sniper is much more than being able to shoot accurately. It is a mix of field craft, shooting skills and temperment.

I agree. It's one of the many reasons I wouldn't have made a decent sniper.

I'm a decent shot but when it comes to hunting, my field craft is abysmal. And then, there's the idea that moose can't shoot back.

I read a book about snipers that had a chapter on Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock. One of his missions involved taking out a North Vietnamese general. The guy was known to be frequently in a house in the middle of a very large open field. The distance from the surrounding bush to the house was so great that Hathcock had to get into position by slithering through the grass towards the house. It took him three days, moving only when the meager and gentle wind caused the grass to rustle and thus cover his movement. Now that guy was a sniper.

http://www.marinedevildog.com/mclinks/hathcock.jpg

 

[JackLuis]

Girls with Guns II

and Girls with Guns III

God they burn ammo like they didn't have to pay for it!

Just like the Taliban!

 

[SeaCat]

Girls with Guns II

and Girls with Guns III

God they burn ammo like they didn't have to pay for it!

Just like the Taliban!

Just like a lot of the wana be Gang Bangers at my local range.

Cat

 

[voluptuary_manque]

It helps a lot to be so detached from the general run of humanity that you can coldly regard that human being out fear that I'd have made a rather decent sniper if I wasn't so myopic. I guess this is one case where Asperger's or some related mild autism is an advantage. And probably mild psychosis would also be beneficial.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Actually, if you want to get to be a really good shot, burning up a lot ammo carefully is necessary. I'm planning on somewhere between 5 and 10,000 rounds this summer . . . out of a Beeman airgun! It's a lot cheaper and marksmanship principles are marksmanship principles no matter what you're shooting.

 

[JackLuis]

Shooting aspirin tablets at 10 meters is good practice, with an air gun.

5 meters if you use a pistol.

 

[Katyusha]

As for the video. Eye Candy for some I suppose. I wouldn't want her near me on the range though.

Now put a nice redhead up there with smaller frontal protrusions, a knowledge of firearms safety and possibly the ability to hit her target and I might get interested. (Hey I just described my wife.)

Cat

Or me...didn't know I had a twin. Does your wife have a twin?

 

[Katyusha]

That is a sniper rifle, one of the first sniper rifles. The Springfield 06. And I would put up a sniper rifle against any other rifle no matter the rate of fire. The sniper will always win in a one on one. Even a two on one. And depending on the man a three on one.

Oh sheez. It was a joke, Zeb.

 

[SeaCat]

Actually, if you want to get to be a really good shot, burning up a lot ammo carefully is necessary. I'm planning on somewhere between 5 and 10,000 rounds this summer . . . out of a Beeman airgun! It's a lot cheaper and marksmanship principles are marksmanship principles no matter what you're shooting.

LOLOL

I use a .22 but it's the same idea.

What's a lot of fun for me is hitting the range and out shooting people with high powered rifles with my little .22.

What they don't understand is I have been shooting for way too many years and was original taught by a tight fisted Army Vet. (He would hunt Deer with a .22 Long Rifle and never failed to bring home Venison.) His idea of marksmanship training was to have us run 100 yards through the woods then pick up the rifle and shoot. If you missed you paid.

Cat

 

[voluptuary_manque]

LOLOL

I use a .22 but it's the same idea.

What's a lot of fun for me is hitting the range and out shooting people with high powered rifles with my little .22.

What they don't understand is I have been shooting for way too many years and was original taught by a tight fisted Army Vet. (He would hunt Deer with a .22 Long Rifle and never failed to bring home Venison.) His idea of marksmanship training was to have us run 100 yards through the woods then pick up the rifle and shoot. If you missed you paid.

Cat

A Southern biathlon! Good on that man, I still want a competition designed for the city, rollerblades and .22 pistols!

 

[SeaCat]

Or me...didn't know I had a twin. Does your wife have a twin?

No biological twins but who knows about others?

Are you sweet tasting?

Can you tear paint of the walls with your tongue when angry?

Can you nurture a premie kitten yet stand up to a Biker?

Can you clean up shit or drive a nail? Gut a fish or nurture a baby? Dig a ditch or stand your ground? Deal with a Nor'Easter or a Hurricane and keep smiling? Patch up cuts without flinching or sew a hem?

If so come on down and meet your twin, my wife.

Cat

 

[SeaCat]

A Southern biathlon! Good on that man, I still want a competition designed for the city, rollerblades and .22 pistols!

LOL

Now that sounds like fun, although I have yet to learn how to stop on Roller Blades without running into something.

Cat

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Zeb do you have any clue about the differences between a belt-fed machine gun and a standard M-16A2/A3 rifle?

An M-16 has 3 settings on the selector switch - safety, semi, and burst. Got that? Ok, now a *belt-fed* machine gun has only a safety on it that locks the trigger. Understand all that? Good.

Now when you fire an M-16 you arent firing at nearly the rate of a machine gun with belted ammunition. Even firing on burst you can go through 3 or 4 30-round mag's and still wouldnt come close to the amount of fire coming from a machine gun.

Now read again what Seacat posted -

*It was a design that is to replace the M-16/M-4 rifle. Instead of using a gas return directly to the bold face as the M-16 does it uses a Piston to impart the recoil to the bolt. This allows the bolt and receiver to remain much cooler.

(The test they showed was two large capacity magazines fired quickly through the weapon then they removed the bold and held in a bare hand.)*

Now as for what he said they did on the show "they removed the bolt and held in a bare hand" the bolt is not the barrel. Hell i've feild stripped the damn things after firing them and the bolt will be warm, bordering on hot but not scorching hot as the barrel obviously will be.

Now a lining of the barrel to help cooling on an M-16 maybe i can see that (I never saw it as a problem myself but to each his own). But he wasnt talking about a belt-fed machine gun firing 200 rounds, he was saying an M-16/M-4 going through a couple of large-capacity magazines (In the army we only had 10 and 30 round mags).

Now do you see the difference there ? Or do i need to link videos showing you the difference between weapons?

Oh do get over yourself will you bobby.

I've probably shot more of these than you could list. I was quoting from memory and you call me a liar. Go blow your nose in mommies hanky and get over yourself. Nobody but you cares...I mis-remembered, except you...boohoo aren't you the the smart one. Give me a break.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

No the bolt doesnt get hot either, just warm bordering on hot. If you had ever even used one of those weapons you'd know what the hell you are talking about.

I have probably fired the M16 and it's variants more times than you pick your nose.

Truly spoken like someone who doesnt have a clue.

I'll tell you what you go to one end of the football field I'll go to the other, you can use any weapon you want except a sniper weapon. On the count of three we both started firing. I bet you head is bleeding before you get two rounds off.