Comments on: Remington Modular Sniper Rifle (MSR)

By: Eric

Eric — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 07:05:27 +0000

While a very well designed piece the Remington MSR has way too many adjustable and moving parts on the stock. And, even with the stock folded. it will be a long piece with a suppressor attatched.

A better approach is a bullpup design along the lines of the Desert Tactical SRS which ALWAYS, in every mode, is a shorter unit with an attatched suppressor.

>Would you rather have a bullpup FIXED stock or a folding stock (with possible wobble under recoil) for the best accuracy?

>In a tactical situation, READY TO FIRE, is it easier to hide with a shorter bullpup suppresssed rifle or a longer conventional layout suppressed rifle?

>Is it easier to carry a bullpup rifle or a folding stock rifle?

> Which is faster and quieter to deploy, a bullpup rifle or a rifle with a folded stock?

> Which has the greatest possibility of failure, a fixed bullpup stock or the mechanism of a folding stock?

By: Zuess-A

Zuess-A — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:19:40 +0000

i personally love my m24. i really want to try this thing out though before i judge. i HATE the idea semi auto sniper rifles; so it’s nice to see that this thing is a bolt gun. i do see the need for semi when operating in urban area but not in the mountains or desert. i will always be a bolt man myself. i hate the H.S. precision stocks, i fixed that with a McMillan A5 on my personal 24. the stock on this does look to complicated, but hey if it works… then it works. for those on here that are sitting in a chair judging a rifle when you have never done the job as (8541 and 1sfda) say they have; get a new hobby. i seen triple in action and i can tell you first hand, those fuckers are good at what they do.

Long range shooting is and art form… and how i love art.

By: Fred

Fred — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 06:30:33 +0000

M24 used to be my fav. M24 sucks to me after talking to those who have used it. The Marines loved their M40A1s and hated giving them up! Marines also laughed at the Army guys with those “crutch-looking” m24 rifles! BTW a lot of really good Army snipers despite the mediocre M24s.

By: c_bass16

c_bass16 — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 04:03:08 +0000

for all the negative reviews this has gotten, its hard to deny one thing. It got the US Military Contract…so its gotta work awful well. I know 2 snipers personally…one prefers the M24, the other prefers the M110…both hate the M107. I’d say it has its spot reserved for now.

By: Chicoloco

Chicoloco — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 22:42:03 +0000

1sfda – Ha ha! Glad to hear that you guys have what you need! Now put that baby to work! God Bless..

By: 1sfda

1sfda — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:49:52 +0000

great gun tested prototype in afghanistan certainly serves its fuction, drops a rag better than any mag. i am w you 8541 we are hurting for a long gun. if you have not trigered this rem u are going to enjoy it. secret armchair snipers this weapon system is operational, remington won the bid and got the contract. the light at the end of the tunnel is muselflash.

By: 8541

8541 — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:15:54 +0000

number one for all you armchair snipers, Snipers dont stalk in the real world other then in school, so snaging is not a issue. Being deployed as a sniper in urban, Desert, mountian and triple canopy i think i know what im talking about. As far as the 24 being better? we call it the M24 walking stick cause thats all its good for. we have wanted this long gun for a long time and its about time we have it.

By: mark

mark — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 04:23:25 +0000

1500 yards? my 338 extreme is just getting started.

By: M24

M24 — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:15:58 +0000

I agree Sven on the vegitation issue. In my personal opinion, the M24 SWS is far better than this rifle. The M24 is one of the most effective, powerful, and basic rifles made. You could take an M24 out of the case having no knowledge of it and still effectively shoot it. Though this rifle has good attributes (Folding stock, plenty of room to mount accessories, and extremely easy to modify) I wouldn’t get too excited about this rifle. It has a lot of flaws to work out. There is a reasonthe M24 SWS is still the most used military bolt action rifle.

By: Valhalla

Valhalla — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:42:38 +0000

With all its fancy doodads and stuff, I was hoping for a semi-auto. Not another bolt action, which, while very reliable, and, in the right hands fast, they’ve been done, and this is to REPLACE a bolt action (M40, M24, those type ones)

By: Bolter

Bolter — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 06:34:35 +0000

Quoting Darth Vader: “Most impressive…” If cool looks = effectiveness, this is a winner. Who can tell until extensively tested as far as performance? Congrats to Remington for the extensive effort to market new items.

By: seobserver

seobserver — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 06:52:14 +0000

Seems to be fare from field and KISS principles. But the trend is set, heavier calibers, more of sharpshooter gun than sniper rifle. Still some lapwork to get it silk smooth.
With todays weapens fighting distances sometimes are very long and in build up scenes it might be very close. Where are the 100m emergency sights?
Intresting but not impressed.

Old sniper instructure

By: jdun1911

jdun1911 — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 01:14:16 +0000

There is a finite limit to conventional bullet design. The Sierra’s MatchKing was introduced in the late 1950’s is the best accurate bullet in the market. It is use by snipers and competitors around the world. It is what I use for long range shooting.

It is harder to keep a tight group above 500 yards then below it. This is mainly cause by the surrounding environment. At 1000+ yards optical limitations are apparent.

By: Steve

Steve — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:08:04 +0000

ammunition has also improved significantly. Better consistency means greater accuracy which allows shooting at a greater range.

By: jdun1911

jdun1911 — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 22:50:11 +0000

1 MOA @1500 yards is impressive but to get hits you have to be a master of determining distance, elevation, and windage. Shooting past 500 yards is much harder then shooting below it. It’s like night and day to me.

In WWII scope wasn’t reliable, hence snipers prefer iron sights. Unlike the past, snipers today needs to make kills at longer distance and higher hit percentage.

Larger magazine size is always prefer IMO, especially when snipers are part of a larger operational group. It’s not always one shot one kill and one target.

By: XxleoxX

XxleoxX — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:46:04 +0000

in my opinion the stock is horrendous,and the recoil looks a little rough,the bolt action seems a bit rough,idk what to say >.>

By: Sven Ortmann

Sven Ortmann — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:36:31 +0000

Indeed.
It would be worthy experiment to build a sniper rifle with trigger and grip behind the action and the scope in left or right 45° position for minimum height.
That’s especially useful for semi-auto rifles because folding iron sights could be installed as backup.
A side-mounted scope would also keep away some mirage problems related to hot barrels.

The Finnish snipers of WW2 were experienced hunters and often achieved very much without a scope – some even favoured shooting without a scope at short ranges because it gave a much lower profile.

Sniper rifle magazines should either insert fully into the stock or have a rounded shape. A bold action sniper rifle doesn’t need a large magazine capacity – three cartridges is already enough.

Folding bipods should be turned & folded away from the rifle side that’s close to the ground during crawling (preferably moved to the right).

Adjustable buttstocks are fine, but you really need only two settings; one for each member of the sniper team (sniper & observer change roles frequently due to eye fatigue). It doesn’t need to be that complicated.

By: Wynboniface

Wynboniface — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 02:45:40 +0000

I will stick to low profile bolt-action rifles. Seriously that rifle looks overly clunky and has to high a profile for a real role. What is with these people now a days wanting to mall ninja every damn thing as if it improves the rifle. I can lay more flat and quite with my model 70 pre-64 then that person could ever hope to in such a set up. That thing comes off as a range toy.

By: Freiheit

Freiheit — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 00:09:35 +0000

nick – good explanation of MoA here http://www.scribd.com/doc/4617008/Mils-and-Moa-Simplified

By: Big Daddy

Big Daddy — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 23:59:42 +0000

I’ll tell ya, it looked like the shooter when firing the larger round whichever it was did not have a smooth recoil, it looked as though the second shot would have been way off. I’m no expert but that looked kind of amateurish by the shooter until the last shot which was probably a 7.62mm judging by the recoil and sound. It also looks like the last shot was his last and he could not get the action to work.

The bolt action looked slow and it seemed like it hung up a bit. His sighting would have been thrown off a lot for a second shot. It’s not a smooth action at all.

That weapon looks like it needs some type of recoil system in it’s stock or a muzzle brake rather than a suppressor or a different designed suppressor.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 23:02:46 +0000

Carl, LOL, I can just picture a sniper walking up a hill with half a tree snagged in his rifle for camouflage

By: Carl

Carl — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:57:32 +0000

The vegetation-grabbing rifle… is it a flaw…or a feature? Snipers need camouflage, after all.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:42:36 +0000

nick, it is *way* harder to be that accurate out that far, than it is at 100 meters.

By: SB_Pete

SB_Pete — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:53:18 +0000

BLEH! Sorry Mainsail, I have to agree with Sven. This rifle takes the same approach as the Savage and ends up with the same ungainly results. That stock looks like some kind of chiropractor’s tool, ergonomic sure, but not practical in the field.
The DTA SRS (Desert Tactical Arms – Stealth Recon Scout) is by far the most innovative of the designs in the running for this contest and would be a lot less inclined to take samples of all vegetation in proximity.
That said, it does look to be a better design than the Savage, and it is more modular than the folding AICS chasis rem700 based designs.

As for why the stock folds over the bolt, Steve, I would guess that is to make the left side more comfortable to sling up against your back. I don’t think they were really that worried about people trying to fire these from the hip (or from inside a vehicle) before extending the stock, you know

By: Vitor

Vitor — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:34:44 +0000

What a beautiful design!

By: Eddy Alvarez

Eddy Alvarez — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:13:12 +0000

oh man…
don’t tell my 700p, but I think i’m in love.

By: nick

nick — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:44:27 +0000

What’s the difference between 1MOA at 100 meters and 1MOA at 1500 meters? Isn’t that just saying it’ll shoot about 15″ groups at 1500 meters? Isn’t “at 1500 meters” superfluous information?

By: Roughedge

Roughedge — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:43:35 +0000

I swear that hand guard looks like the VTAC hand guards.
http://store.vikingtactics.com/merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=VT01&Product_Code=JPHG-1M&Category_Code=

By: James

James — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:32:10 +0000

That stock looks interesting. Lots of places to mount stuff I suppose. I sure hope it is made available as a Rem700 replacement stock!

By: Mainsail

Mainsail — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:25:38 +0000

Now that, I like.
Purely on aesthetics, I think it is a great rifle.

By: Sven Ortmann

Sven Ortmann — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:41:01 +0000

At least some people express the opinion that a sniper rifle should look very different.

The key objection in this case would be that the rifle isn’t smooth. It can get stuck in vegetation in many way – a serious drawback for a crawling sniper unless he keeps his rifle in a bag.