It is built on the custom shop's 40-SX action and trigger group and features a 26" barrel with threaded removable muzzle brake, hand bedded McMillian A5 stock, detachable magazine and lengthly top picatinny rail.

The first thing you notice when looking at the rifle is the striking stock design. The butt stock is adjustable every-which-way and can fold for easy transport. The pistol grip is AR-15 compatible, just like the new Savage bolt action Model 10 BAS, so it can be swapped out for something the operator is more comfortable with. The free-floating handguard features rails at 3, 6, 9, 10:30 and 12 ‘o clock positions.

Stock folded. 20″ barrel. Interesting that the bolt is lock closed, but trigger is accessible.

Remington have taken no chances and have designed the rifle to be compatible with all of top contenders for selection as the next US Military long range sniper cartridge. The MSR can be easily switch between calibers by changing the barrel, bolt face and magazine. At the moment it is compatible with .338 Lapua Magnum, .338 Norma Magnum, .300 Winchester Magnum and 7.62mm NATO. The fluted barrels are available in 20, 22, 24 and 27 inches in length and can be swapped out in minutes. Accuracy is 1 MOA at 1500 meters.

It weights 13 lbs with 22” barrel and loaded 5 round magazine and 17 lbs with 22” barrel, scope, bipod, loaded 5 round magazine, and AAC Titan suppressor.

Posted by boottrac at Sniper’s Hide forum.

A video of the rifle in action:

Overall this rifle seems to meet, and in many cases exceed, the SOCOM Precision Sniper Rifle (PSR) requirements. It is good to see Remington MPD (Military Products Division) innovating. They have not introduced new military hardware for quite a long time (aside from the Remington ACR, which they did not design).

More info at Remington.

Hat Tip Accurate Shooter

Marine’s M40A3 Sniper rifle.

One of the key requirements for this system that differentiates it from the existing 7.62×51mm NATO and .300 Win. Mag. sniper systems is that it needs to reach out to 1500 meters with MOA accuracy. Armed forces around the world have long recognized the need for a system that can reach out further than the 7.62mm NATO but is lighter than .50 BMG rifles. Many have adopted the .338 Lapua Magnum chambered rifles to fill this niche. The .338 Lapua Magnum was originally a US Military project but it lost traction and the .300 Win. Mag. is currently used for longer range shooting. The .300 Win. Mag. lacks downrange energy and the lighter projectiles mean greater wind drift at long range (1000 – 2000 yards).

The current Precision Sniper Rifle, as at March 2009, are as follows.

1) The system shall be chambered to safely fire factory produced “non-wildcat” Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturing Institute (SAAMI) or Commercial European standard (CIP) ammunition.

This eliminates some of the fancy odd-ball caliber long range cartridges such as the .408 Cheyenne Tactical (CheyTac). The most obvious choice is the before mentioned .338 Lapua Magnum. The cartridge has been around for a while and manufactures know how to get the most our of the cartridge. Another alternative is the .338 Norma Magnum which is only coming into production this year. It is similar in length to the .338 Lapua but has a slightly shorter and fatter case so it can use heavier and longer bullets which have a higher ballistic co-efficient.

.338 Lapua vs. .338 Norma Mag. Photo from Wikipedia.

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

I think most, or all, entries will be bolt-action rifles. They are easier to make accurate, lighter and more reliable than autoloading rifles. The advantage of a semi-auto is of course rate of fire, but this is not a requirement for this weapons system.

3) With primary day optic and ammunition the system shall provide 1.0 MOA from 300 to 1500 meters (in 300 meter increments) when fired from the shoulder or an accuracy fixture in nominal conditions. This is further defined as 1 MOA Extreme Vertical Spread for all shots in a 10 round group at the stated distances.

1500 meters = 1640 yards.

The rifle is fired from a rest and 80% of the fifty 10 round groups need to be 1 MOA. Note that the MOA is measured only for the vertical spread which eliminates the effects of wind on the measured accuracy. 1 MOA spread is over 10 round groups is much harder than getting 1 MOA for a standard 3 round group!

4) Mean Rounds Between Failures (MRBF) shall be 1000 rounds.

5) The system shall have an overall length no greater than 52″ in full configuration / extended excluding suppressor with a single component no greater in length than 40″.

6) The system shall weigh no more than 18 lbs with a 12:00 MilStd 1913 rail and a loaded magazine with 5 rounds.

7) The system shall be capable of operator breakdown into major components in less than two minutes.

The barrel also needs to be able to be swapped out by the operator within 20 minutes.

8 ) The system will assemble from the major component breakdown in less than two minutes by the operator.

9) The system will assemble from breakdown with no change in weapon zero.

10) The system will have an integral MilStd 1913 rail at the 12:00 position, the rail will be capable of maintaining bore sight alignment and weapon zero while conducting routine firing combined with combat movement and operational training drills.

These are all pretty standard requirements. One other test than will be performed will be drop tests with loaded rifles. The rifles are expected to be able to be dropped 1.5 meters at various angles without firing the chambered cartridge.

Overall they seem very sensible requirements. It will be interesting to see how this competition progresses.

The M1 (.30-06) load pushes a 150 grain FMJ bullet at 2740 fps fps and the M1A (7.62×51mm NATO) load a 168 grain Open Tip Match (OTM) bullet at 2650 fps.

Also from Federal is a Power-Shok hunting load optimized for AR-10 style rifles chambered in .338 Federal. The loads pushes a 200 grain soft point at 2700 fps.

7mm Blaser Magnum, .300 Blaser Magnum, .338 Blaser Magnum and .375 Blaser Magnum
Factory cartridges will be sold by Blaser and Norma and will be available in August along with Blaser R93 rifles chambered for them.

More info here.

by Sven Ortmann, lastdingo@gmx.de, 2008-01-05

Caliber: 9×19 mm and .45ACP (= 11.43×23mm)

This is the standard NATO caliber for pistols and a popular caliber for submachineguns. The only ones who seem to have a strong dislike for this caliber seem to be those U.S. Americans who continue to compare it with .45ACP.

The U.S. American problems with the 9×19mm caliber seem to include a mix of emotions (a Colt M1911 in .45ACP feels much more powerful) and poor quality of the U.S. standard issue 9mm pistols. The latter is as far as I know more a magazine production quality problem than a pistol design problem. The origin of .45ACP is said to lie in combat experience around 1900 in the Philippines where determined Philippinos weren’t stopped reliably by smaller revolver calibers. Tests on live animals in 1904 showed better effects for heavier bullets, but little improvement with velocity. Bullet design has improved a lot since then, and hollowpoint bullets that flatten their nose in soft tissue to increase their diameter are much more effective than simple soft lead bullets. A good 9mm bullet enjoys a similar advantage over a .45ACP soft lead bullet than the latter over a 9mm soft lead bullet. There’s a fundamental problem, though: There’s not much difference in effect on the target if you hit the wrong places and the permanent cavities of pistol bullets are all relatively small. Many body parts are simply not essential enough – their destruction doesn’t stop a determined opponent immediately; no matter whether you hit with .45ACP or 9×19mm.
A new procurement of pistols could easily be a significant improvement over existing 9×19mm service pistols, though. A new pistol could be designed to use reliably both standard 9×19mm and “hot” 9×19mm loadings (higher pressure). The latter would give some extra punch, especially extra penetration. A further improvement is possible by procurement of better bullets. The Russians have a 9mm semi-jacketed exposed steel core bullet that combines AP effect (hard core) with a hollow-point effect (outer parts of the bullets deform and effectively increase the bullet diameter in soft tissue). Such a bullet has enough penetration capability against a combination of a full pouch and a light kevlar vest. An improvement of pistol accuracy is probably more pressing than the caliber; some sort of shoulder stock and easily visible sights (large iron sights as usual on revolvers, for example) could help.

Caliber: 5.56×45mm NATO

This caliber is at the center of a great and long-lasting controversy. Its opponents call it a varmint caliber and report firefights with multiple hits on the same opponent without satisfactory effect. They compare this caliber very often to the supposedly more effective 7.62×51mm caliber. More about that in the 7.62 chapter. Another problem with 5.56×45mm is its rather unsatisfactory ability to penetrate wooden or wall covers. A dissatisfaction with the standard service rifles/carbines of both the USA and the UK (the British solved their problems with an extensive upgrade) and the use of rather short barrels in the U.S. M4 carbine add to the problems with 5.56×45mm.

The defenders of the caliber remind us that even mutilating wounds by much larger calibers and even explosive warheads cannot reliably stop a determined opponent.

The most terrible problem in the 5.56×45mm caliber discussion is the use of anecdotes. Different barrels, ranges and hit locations produce very different effects, so you will always find anecdotes to support your position on this caliber – no matter what’s your position.

There’s (apparently especially in Germany) a stupid rumor about 5.56×45mm and rifle calibers in general that tells about a nervous shock that can kill even with only small injuries. It’s nonsense. A short primer on rifle/carbine bullets; they behave differently in soft tissue than most pistol bullets. They don’t move straight through the tissue all the way. Instead, they begin to turn and usually exit bottom forward. Some bullets break up under the stress of this turn, and the fragmentation increases the destruction of soft tissue very much. A turning bullet doesn’t create a permanent cavity of much greater diameter than its own length; a disintegrating bullet can create a much, much larger permanent cavity.

The ideal rifle/carbine bullet looks like this; it’s able to penetrate cover/armor, it begins to turn in soft tissue immediately and it disintegrates into fragments with devastating effect in soft tissue (terminal ballistics). Good sectional density and ballistic coefficient are important for a good effective range (external ballistics). Finally, some people want it to be lead-free to protect the environment and save costs on shooting range maintenance.

So what does a 5.56×45mm bullet really do? Answer; it depends.

The differences between 5.56mm bullets are noteworthy in terms of cover penetration (heavier is better), but all seem to share a rather disappointing “performance” in soft tissue. The bullet begins to turn later than desired. This means that frontal hits on skinny opponents are often not very effective because the most destructive part – the turning and possible fragmentation – happens too late (the 180° turn isn’t completed before exit).

The other problem in soft tissue is fragmentation. Fragmentation is necessary to achieve a good deal of damage with the small bullet. This requires a good impact velocity and appropriate bullet design. Short-barrelled weapons don’t accelerate the bullet to the originally intended velocity, and the velocity drops rapidly with the distance. 5.56×45mm fired from carbines like the M4 carbine produce very little if any fragmentation in soft tissue at distances greater than about 50-100m.

Carbines and assault rifles should be effective to at least 300m, squad sharpshooters (also known as Designated Marksmen) and light machinegunners should be highly effective out to 400m with good effect. 5.56×45mm doesn’t offer much effect in soft tissue at many relevant ranges unless fired from long barrelled weapons. Barrel lengths of at least 18″ or at the very least 16″ are often recommended. The original M16 assault rifle and many other assault rifle with this caliber have a barrel length of 20″ while the M4 carbine has only a 14.5″ barrel.

There’s apparently not much potential for improvement in the 5.56×45mm caliber: Heavy bullets for improved cover penetration and long barrels for reliable fragmentation seem to be somewhat successful approaches.

Caliber: PDW cartridges (5.7×28mm and 4.6×30mm)

These calibers share the same problems as 5.56×45mm, just even more so (they don’t seem to break up at all).

The short story is like this: Weapons in these calibers are easily controlled in full auto fire due to the low impulse of the cartridges (light bullets). The individual bullets don’t do much to soft tissue (but more than you would tolerate in your own soft tissue).

The strength of these calibers is the higher hit probability (especially for ill-trained support troops) in comparison to 9×19mm and .45ACP. The higher hit count might make up for the lesser effect of individual bullets. A one-vs-one comparison of the wound ballistic effects is therefore misleading. More hits also add to the chance of hitting something really vital.

There are other, less well-known calibers for PDWs (personal defence weapons) than these two. Some use larger calibers, but they’re likely all either similar to my description of pistol or PDW caliber wound ballistics.

Caliber: 7.62×51mm NATO

This is another NATO standard caliber (forced on NATO by the USA against a clearly superior British design). It has been replaced as assault rifle caliber by 5.56×45mm almost completely and was never a carbine caliber. 7.62×51mm is still very widespread as machinegun caliber in NATO armies and is also in use with some sniper/sharpshooter rifles.

The caliber was too powerful for controllable assault rifle full auto fire (well, controllability in bursts was OK within hand grenade range). The cartridges are quite heavy and it’s difficult to carry many of them into action; a major disadvantage for suppressive fires unless you need to suppress enemies who are behind light cover.

The penetration of cover is usually satisfactory, but armor penetration isn’t very good for the simple reason that almost all gunshields, armored vehicles and even some heavy body armor were designed to withstand this caliber and its Russian counterpart, 7.62×54mmR. Only expensive SLAP cartridges (saboted light armor penetrating, performance in soft tissue) have a very good penetration capability at short and medium range.

The external ballistics are under criticism for sniping and more powerful calibers (.300WinMag, .338LapuaMag, 9.3×64mm and even .50BMG, for example) with less bullet drop and less wind sensitivity have become important in sniper rifle procurement since the 90’s.

7.62×51mm is often being attributed with a huge and rarely questioned power against soft targets; knockdown power, manstopping power – no matter how they call it. 7.62×51mm is usually presented as the good example in comparison to 5.56mm. This is – at least for U.S.-made 7.62×51mm standard service cartridges – not fully justified. There are significant differences in penetration till the turning movement begins and in fragmentation. The U.S.-made (standard issue) 7.62 bullets aren’t that much better than 5.56mm bullets (if better at all). They penetrate deeply before turning and don’t fragment much.

There have been much superior (at least in fragmentation) bullets in service (like the German ones) and there’s also a 7.62×51mm cartridge/bullet design that fulfills all expectations for soft tissue damage; it begins to turn and fragment very quickly and has a reliable and devastating effect on soft tissue.

Again; you won’t necessarily stop a determined enemy from firing at you if you don’t hit the right spots – no matter what rifle ammunition you use.

Caliber: .50BMG (= 12,7×99mm NATO)

This caliber is widespread and has loyal fans in the USA and also elsewhere, but it wasn’t adopted in some NATO forces and has some drawbacks.

It was originally a tank-penetrating caliber for machine guns (M2 Browning, later M2HB). Similar cartridges were used during the World Wars by anti-tank rifles (which were only able to penetrate light armor plates). Tanks got thicker armor plating by the mid-1930’s, leaving only light armored vehicles and certain vulnerable spots on heavier armored vehicles as vulnerable to .50BMG. This application has been revived in the 1980’s for long-range and “anti-material” sniping.

There’s no very lively discussion about this caliber in the public. Attempts to replace it focused on intermediate sniping cartridges for long-range and armor-penetrating sniping (like .338LapuaMag), 40×54mm HE cartridges for automatic grenade launchers that replaced many M2HB (.50BMG) machine guns on vehicles and finally a high-tech 25mm air-burst HE cartridge in the failed OCSW program.

The primary problems of .50BMG are weight and volume. Both ammunition and weapon are much bigger than their 7.62×51mm counterparts. The ammunition supply for a .50BMG is usually very small in comparison to the 7.62×51mm alternative. .50BMG is also too heavy for dismounted machine gun use on the move; it can be done (with a tripod), but the effort isn’t justified in most situations.

This caliber is probably only justified if the extra penetration is really necessary. One example: Reconnaissance vehicles need to be able to take on enemy reconnaissance vehicles which are usually armored against 7.62×51mm AP, so something heavier is desirable even for the lightest recce vehicles.

An intermediate machine gun caliber close to the .338LapuaMag sniper cartridge could match the utility of .50BMG in most situations with significantly more ammunition for the same weight and volume.

Both .50BMG and 7.62×51mm are quite well-established and not much under criticism, so there’s no good reason to expect a new, intermediate caliber standard for machine guns.

Ideal caliber discussions

The “ideal” infantry rifle caliber needs to be suitable for rifle, carbine, light machine gun and possibly even squad sharpshooter and medium machine gun applications. Penetration is important, bullet drop and effect at ranges like 400 or 500m is important, soft tissue damage needs to be good and consistent at all ranges and both weight and volume need to allow for a good ammunition load.

Historical and recent conclusions about an ideal infantry caliber almost always agreed on a calibre in the range from 6 to 7 mm. The larger ones tend to have better effect and to be heavier while the smaller calibers in that range tend to offer superior external ballistics (flatter trajectory, more useful at long range).

The optimum is probably close the the center; a 6 or 6.25mm caliber would probably be too close to 5.56mm to convince the 5.56mm critics (maybe for good reasons).

The 6.5mm Grendel and 6.8mm SPC calibers have become famous in the last few years as optimal caliber candidates. Both use conventional cartridge technology – it may be that confidential details from plastic case technology development would favor something like a 6.5-6.8mm plastic cased cartridge instead.

Links for additional reading (and graphics)

There are thousands of possible links, but most would lead you to misleading information.

http://www.rayguncharlie.net/sr/basics/pmrb.html

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Roberts.pdf

http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm

http://www.recguns.com/Sources/IVF1.html

http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/PDWdebunk.html

Keep in mind at this link that bullet technology has advanced significantly since 1904:
http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/1904trial.html

http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/pigboard.html

Bullet categories:
http://world.guns.ru/ammo/bullets-e.htm#sjesc

An overview over PDWs:
http://www.personaldefenceweapons.com

Tactical Weapons reports that is weighs in at 16 pounds (including scope and empty magazine) and will deliver 0.5 MOA at 800 yards. Not too shabby.

Defensive Review reports that it will feature an adjustable straight rearward pull trigger, 10+1 capacity and a 27″ 1:10 match grade barrel.

Those of you with a good memory will remember a previous .338 Lapua rifle from Barrett called the Model 98. This rifle is not based on that rifle, which was a semi-automatic.

The rifle will be available in 2009.

It will be very interesting to see how it stacks up against the incumbents: Sako TRG-42 and Accuracy International Arctic Warfare family of rifles.

Last year the Marines were testing the .338 Lapua TRG-42. I wonder if Barrett has their eye on the Marines.

UPDATE: Barrett have finally published info on the rifle:

MSRP: $4495
Weight: 13.5 pounds (6.12Kg)
Overall Length: 49.75” (126.36cm)
Barrel Length: 27” (68.58cm)
Twist rate: 1 in 10 Right Hand Twist
Scope Rail: 18.125” integral 1913 rail
Safety: Manual Reversible, thumb lever

Broken down

Some more photos (click to expand):

UPDATE: Photos taken by SMGLee taken at AUSA:

Photos by Remigiusz Wilk (REMOV):

Alex-762

Alex Sports Tactical


Alex-338

Very compact

It is so pretty I could not help posting another photo

The Alex-338 weights 6.5 kg without scope and 7.3 kg with the scope, 0.4 kg more than the Alex-762. It has a 5 round magazine. I can’t read Polish and I am unable to find more useful information on the rifles.

Earlier this year US firm Desert Tactical Arms launched a bolt action bullpup rifle at SHOT.

More information here, here and here.

I have done my best to find accurate information about this firearm on the Polish MSPO 2008 website. I do not speak or read Polish so I had to rely on Google Translate. If I got something wrong, please correct me in the comments.

It is unlikely Finland would allow arms exports to South Ossetia. It was probably bought on the civilian market and then exported. I cannot imagine that South Ossetia would have many snipers so this is feasible.

Their squad sharpshooters (or whatever they call them in that part of the world) are probably using the SVD.

I cannot make out if it is a TRG-21 / 22 (.308 Win) or TRG-41 / 42 (.338 Lapua or .300 Win Magnum). I have never seen a photo of a 41/42 without a muzzle break, but I think the 21/22 can have the Sako TRG muzzle break attached, please correct me if I am wrong.

Click to expand the image

H/T: MP.net

This gorgeous beast won’t be ready for some months yet according to Skip Patel, Bushmaster’s executive vice president for research and development. Among other thing, Skip told me, was the need to trim some weight from the rifle, which tips the scales at about 15 pound right now.

Not surprising since Bushmaster acquired Cobb Mfg. last year but still cool.

Cobb MCR 400 .338 Lapua. Photo from SecArms.

John also says that a .416 Rigby may be on the way!

More @ The Gun Shots

With the LR-308’s growing popularity among hunters and competitive shooters, DPMS opened the LR Series up into several other popular calibers to increase versatility.

The LR-338L was designed with one thing in mind…

HUNTING.

The main focus of the rifle is lightweight, fast handling, and single round precision. The 18″ lightweight barrel with custom compensator, carbon fiber hand-guard, skeletonized stock, and lightweight upper receiver, allows this rifle to weigh in under 8 lbs.

The new .338 Federal is a cartridge that provides the energy of a 7mm Remington Mag in a necked-up .308 case. It’s the ultimate big game caliber with 200fps more velocity than a standard .308 round.

The LR-338L is the large game hunting rifle.

It sells for about $1500, depending on how you customize it.

Specs:

Barrel: 18″ Fluted Barrel. 6 grooves, right-hand 1×9 twist, button rifled.
Weight: 7.9 lbs.
Sights: None
Magazine capacity: 19

I wrote a post last year about Orange County Sheriff’s Office has purchasing 14 Alexander Arms .50 Beowulf AR-15 rifles so that they would be equipped to deal with big game escaping from theme parks. A rifle in this caliber would be more appropriate to take on marauding elephants and provide much longer range.