Comments on: Remington Wins M24E1 Army Sniper Rifle Contract

By: usmcsnypr

usmcsnypr — Fri, 11 Feb 2011 23:26:10 +0000

There are good reasons for the 300 win mag.
These are being retrofitted just miles from my home and no matter what they cost they will save Marines and Soldiers lives on the battlefield by enabling those that use them the ability to reach out and touch the bad guy a little more effectively.
Cudos to the change. The new M-24 will hit my shoulder a bit harder but I will be a more effective tool.

By: TC Hunter

TC Hunter — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 01:42:50 +0000

It appears that no matter what the military is stuck on a 30 caliber round. Personally I think that there are better 30 caliber options than the 300 Winchester Magnum.

By: Perry

Perry — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 03:32:23 +0000

I get that it does cost a lot for a system
but for 7400$ I can get more than that.
Is the gov’t that dumb or just bought off?

By: Blood

Blood — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:21:24 +0000

They should choose the Barrett 98bravo in .338 lapua Magnum. Very accurate and also rifle of the years.

Remington M24E1 another tacticool rifle with no use gadget…

http://www.barrett.net/firearms/model98b

By: MCooper

MCooper — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 17:58:09 +0000

When I was a much younger, an fairly in-depth article written about the (then) new M40 for the Marine Corps spoke directly to the subject of cartridge selection, the .308Win, as opposed to other more capable ones well known, and the .300 Win Magnum was mentioned.

The military philosophy of that day held the view that the sound report of anything other than a standard cartridge, such as the .308Win, would increase the vulnerability of a sniper should an enemy recognize a different sounding rifle shot report.

Obviously, with the advent & employment of the .338 Lapua and now the .300 Win Magnum, that ‘old school’ of thought has been put out to pasture.

I do not doubt the need for a more capable cartridge than what the .308Win offers,… however I do wonder if what those ‘old school’ ers were concerned about, will come true.
Yes – I see the suppressors… those may well make the difference… IF they are used.

By: Editor

Editor — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 06:13:25 +0000

You are correct it is the same bore size. So, more correctly is would be a cartridge or chambering conversion. But please note, this is a direct quote from the Remington Press Release:

“The major configuration change for this system is the caliber conversion from 7.62mm NATO (.308 Winchester) to .300 Winchester Magnum to provide soldier’s [sic] with additional precision engagement capability and range.

By: Joeamerica

Joeamerica — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 04:51:39 +0000

“The major change will be a caliber conversion from 7.62mm NATO (.308 Winchester) to .300 Winchester Magnum ”

The 308 and 300 Win Mag are the same caliber. Both are 30 caliber.

You could say they are different cartridges of the same caliber.

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:52:49 +0000

Remington has sold a good number of 5R 11.25 hammer-forged barrels that are good shooters. I can’t say that I’m all that impressed with the optics. There are other scopes it seems could be bought in quantity to keep the price @ $2K that would have better magnification ranges, e.g. 5-25. I suppose a good chunk of it is to pay Horus royalties.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:26:06 +0000

I was involved with one manufacturer that submitted rifles for this trial and I’m very familar with the requirements. The price is not just for rebuilding a rifle. It is for a complete deployable cased system, including high end optics $2K,suppressor $1.3K, stock $1.5K,Bipod, extra mags $8C, etc, etc. It adds up fast.

By: Editor

Editor — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 03:42:21 +0000

Art, thanks for the clarification. I’ve removed my reference to the overpriced hammer. Still I think there are many examples of government procurement that should be called into question, as you suggest.