The Army rolled out the M110 to much controversy, but in response to valid concerns and shifting tactical situations that snipers were encountering overseas. With soldiers fighting in built up urban areas, target ranges were decreased and the number of targets often increased, creating a need for a semi-automatic Sniper system to be fielded Army wide. However, many of us in the Special Operations community felt that the Army was getting the short end of the stick with the M110.
Where is the forward assist?
The first time I laid eyes on the M110 was at the SOF armorers course in Crane, Indiana. Crane’s Subject Matter Expert in sniper systems was giving a class on the rifle when I blurted out, “Where is the forward assist on that thing?” My SR-25 had one so what was the issue? The instructor responded that Colt was the patent holder for the forward assist design and it would have set the entire M110 project back years and millions of dollars to license the design or start from scratch to create something new that performed the same functionality.
Many shooters will no doubt tell you that they never use their forward assist anyway, so who cares? It is a different situation for snipers who may very well stalk into their hide site. In this scenario you are not going to have your semi-automatic sniper rifle loaded inside your drag bag and will need to chamber a round, slowly and quietly, once at your hide site. This is where a forward assist can be of critical importance to the sniper in making sure his first round is properly chambered. The solution we were given by Crane? Stick a cleaning rod in the bolt carrier and jamb it forward.
Scope zero set
Another major failure of the M110 is not the fault of the rifle, but rather the Leupold scope provided with it. There was no zero set on the elevation turret so after you slipped your scales the turret could continue to rotate counter-clockwise, causing the sniper to lose his zero-point.
Shot out barrels
I had a number of colleagues who attended our Special Forces Group’s SOTIC course at Ft. Campbell with their new M110 rifles. More than just a few came back reporting shot out barrels after less than five hundred rounds fired. The guns were dropping up to eight Minutes of Angle (MOA) and becoming hopelessly inaccurate. Snipers and spotters ended up sharing a weapon in many Sniper teams. While I did not have this experience with the M110′s on my team, I had too many Green Berets report this experience to me personally to discount it or chalk it all up to hype. The Army often keeps these types of failures in-house, worried that bad publicity will result in the Army getting something even worse down the line rather than simply correcting the flaws in the system. I’ve been told by soldiers recently rotated out of theater that the new generation of M110′s do not have this issue so it seems this flaw has since been corrected.
The M110 was developed and fielded for legitimate purposes, but in the rush to field a semi-automatic rifle I think that the Army lost sight of the big picture. In my opinion, replacing bolt-action sniper rifles with a semi-auto is short sighted. Bolt guns are much easier to fire, giving the sniper better feedback. Semi-autos are more difficult to master and sadly, many snipers simply don’t get that much range time. As one SOTIC instructor told me, “A lot of soldiers will like the M110 simply because they have nothing else to compare it to.”
Kit Up! contributor Jack Murphy is a former Ranger, Special Forces Soldier and is the author of the military thriller Reflexive Fire.
{ 90 comments… read them below or add one }
We've been hearing about issues with this system since day 1. Makes you wonder why they continued with the program.
Well clear to see whoever "Jack" is, shows to be an ill-informed irrelevant tool with a faulty memory. Lacking fundamental understanding of best practices in special operations and equipment. Another posting spewing silliness… color me shocked.
-The SR25 never has had a forward assist, no matter how you remember it
-7.62x51m barrels of any sort will certainly not "shoot out" at 500rds, more like 10K. Even the over-bore 300WinMag is good for 1500
-a bolt action rifle, in 7.62, is a square range light of day, non operational, schoolhouse, idiots solution for those that can't shoot. Those that can shoot & are in the habit of crushing the enemy overwhelmingly choose a semi auto SR25/EMC/HK417 etc format weapon.
You are, however, both right and wrong, the older SR-25 didn't have a forward assist, but the newer ones do.
- http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sniper-rifles/usa/mk1…
- http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-31…
- http://www.knightarmco.com/sr25.html
PS: Don't you just hate it when people comment under a nickname?
Again, they never have had an FA. If you've used one, you'd know. Stop quoting inaccurate intangible sources like the internet.
Easy there chief…please be respectful of our contributors…here is our comment policy:
"We welcome your comments on our blogs. We ask that you keep your comments on topic, socially acceptable and free from slander, personal attacks, threats, and discrimination. We will moderate and delete comments we find to be beyond acceptable, as well as comments containing phone numbers and email addresses. We will block commenting from users who abuse our policies. You can read the official Military.com User Agreement for more information."
If you don't adhere to the policy, we can't have you post in the comments…
Thanks,
No excuse for the forward assist error. My mistake, it's been corrected. However, I stand by my statements. Barrels "shouldn't" shoot out after 500 rounds, and yet, some did. Thankfully, this issue appears to have been resolved with the latest generation of M110's.
I think that the range of engagements being reported out of Afghanistan are proof enough that completely replacing bolt guns with a semi-auto was short sighted. Your experience may vary. I'm all ears to dissenting viewpoints.
You weren't wrong about the SR-25. The older SR-25 didn't have a forward assist, but the newer ones do.
- http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sniper-rifles/usa/mk1…
- http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-31…
- http://www.knightarmco.com/sr25.html
No, SR's still do not have an FA. You're looking at the brass deflector on the upper receiver.
If a barrel is shot out at 500 rounds there can only be 2 reasons for this to happen. 1. Someone forgot to Chrome the barrels or 2. Someone tried to scimp on the ammount of Chrome used to save money or they didnt monitor the process to insure it was being performed correctly.
Either of the 2 case should not be tollerated.
Sometimes it takes awhile for old brain cells to fire. The forward assist was put there because the original bullet manufacturer for the AR-15 switched powder on the production line to a dirtier one. It was cheaper and had the same ballistics. the AR-15 was also billed as a self cleaning weapon so no one cleaned it. The result was the weapon jammed from the carbon buildup and lack of maintenance. The forward assist was needed to help seat rounds in dirty weapons.
That should not be a problem with modern ammo (especially 7.62) and among snipers who unlike many soldiers actually maintain their weapons.
Easy… you're right the SR-25 never had a forward assist but the M110's do have other issues that make many long for their M-24's. The early M110's did have an issue with the barrels not "officially" but I heard the same thing although I had no issues with a M110 in a controlled setting though. One thing not mentioned are the triggers are crap, half have issues locking up or lack thereof. Yes i'd take a good semi any day but until these issues are worked out I have no issues with the M-24, assign the m110 to the spotters until then.
Sounds like someone has a case of the Mondays.
What’s the deal man? In trying to trash talk Jack, you kinda made yourself look ignorant. 7.62x51mm barrels don’t shoot out after 500 rounds? The whole point of his story was to say that, yes they USUALLY don’t perform this way but in this case they did. Hence the flaw in the weapon. I don’t agree with all of his opinions on TTP’s with the M110, but in no way does that make me think he is ill-informed. Different views are what make us better at what we do.
As I said above it was a manufacturing defect.
BTW I and everyone I knew used my forward assist alot with the old M-16A1s.
I just received an official reply to your post from David A Lutz – Lt. Col. USMC (Ret'd) – at Knights Armament. Will post it at http://hil001.blogspot.com/2010/06/m110-semi-auto…
Thanks EJ! I suspect that this is partially correct. The Army has "gone green" and the HAZMAT people don't like soldiers to use the more "abrasive" cleaners. That said, they were still handing out Strike Hold and other chemicals under the table to SF soldiers, after giving each soldier a lengthy speech about solvents, under the table. This is in addition to what soldiers were buying with their own funds, and what individual units were buying with their government IMPAC card such as Butch's bore shine. Mr. Lutz has a very valid point but I would be extremely surprised to find out that all those "shot out" barrels were merely the result of copper fouling that the SOTIC committee and individual ODA's failed to clean because they were too squeamish about harming the environment.
Of course. And in Murphy's defense, he did, however, confess that his team "did not have this experience with the M110′s", and that "soldiers recently rotated out of theater" told him "that the new generation of M110′s do not have this issue" ;-)
I am the author EJ, sorry for the confusion. It's true, the soldiers I talked to coming off rotation said that they are not having any issues with shot out barrels any more. One common theme I keep hearing though is that the suppressor is inadequate. I will have to develop that angle a little more in the future.
I'm glad that Mr. Lutz is defending his product. If he is correct than I wonder why the people down at Crane are putting out disinformation about the forward assist?
It's cool my friend ;-) I learned over the years that a lot of the "field talk" regarding weaponry, etc. is much the same than politics and religion … 1 in a 100 actually researched the topic, the rest just parrot each other's sentiments. I see it every day in business and amongst my friends … they hear something then perpetuate it without ever questioning what they were told … then when enough of them repeated and believed the misinformation – it becomes the next Gospel Truth ;-) We see it throughout history as well:- the flat earth theory, eugenics, etc.
I find it hard to believe that SF snipers didn’t know the difference between a fouled barrel and a problematic one. I also know that ODA’s are pretty particular about their weapons cleaning products. Fact is, they do use the more harsh cleaners, I know we did all the time. However conventional troops rarely use anything other than CLP.
Curious as to why the Army didn't resurrect a modernized M14 for this role, at least as a basis for comparison with the AR platform. The Navy and Marines did, after all.
They did bring back a modernized M14 for squad designated marksmen, but not specifically for the sniper role.
Right before my unit, a light infantry rifle company, deployed to Afghanistan we were give 8 good old M14 rifle with a new adjustable stock. Still a M14. Unfortunately, the unit leadership never choose to send our "designated marksmen" to the range and fire them!
It is called the M14 EBR, Enhanced Battle Rifle. TACOM took the option for an easy solution, they solicited manufactureres to come up with a design for a synthetic stock with picatinny rails and slapped a scope on it. The action, barrel, and trigger are all still the same. The weapon is ranged and shot to verify it still holds true. It is then issued out to the troops.
That is the problem with a high percentage of these guns we’re talking about here. The fact that the Army doesnt train Its troops to a high standard, means that troops are not “dialed in” enough to properly take care of weapons or identify problems soon enough to avoid failure. It isn’t even the fact that the Army doesn’t train their troops, its the fact that the Army doesn’t know how to train their troops that’s the problem.
Because the M14 has to be worked over constantly. As a battle rifle its perfect, maybe as an SDM as well. As a sniper rifle, no.
This is totally untrue in part. With the redesigned parts, heat treatments, new stocks, and modern assembly methods, the M14 does NOT need "to be worked over constantly. " That is a myth that died years ago along with glass bedding.
A "modernized" M14 i.e. an SEI Crazy Horse, will do just about anything the M110 will do with better durability albeit with a bit more weight.
Should have gone with the original. The Armalite AR-10 SASS. They build the best and back 'em with the best customer service in the buisness. It's way past time for an overhaul of "Procurement" to get our weapons developmet, purchase, distribution and service into the 21st century!
SBFP2012!
Anyone who knows me knows that I have strong opinions about the M110 platform. I worked extensively with the M110 while at NSWC-Crane. It is interesting that the author brought up the lack of a forward assist. I have always been of the side that says you don't really need it. There are more than a few ways to chamber a round quietly in the field that don't involve a cleaning rod (yikes). Forward assist or not, the M110 had a few glitches in the beginning. Barrel issues were number one on the list. The main issue with the barrels was with who was making them. Now that KAC has taken over this manufacturing task, it sounds as if the problem has been corrected. As for the reliability issues, I can't say that I ever had any problems in this area. I never heard any operators in the field having problems either. The M1110 was one of the most accurate military sniper rifles I had ever fired and reliable (for me at least).
The use of the M110, in my opinion, is a necessity that was long overdue. The 7.62x51mm is a great cartridge, but it's a great medium range cartridge. At these ranges, a semi-auto is a much better choice. With a 20in. barrel semi-auto sniper rifle, the sniper can be much more effective at getting to his hide site, as well as getting out. We even found that with a 16in. barrel, a sniper can pretty much hit out to the same ranges effectively, as with a 20in. barrel. With a short rifle like that, a sniper can fight and clear rooms should he become engaged. I say leave the longer range .300 Win Mag to the bolt gun duties. The semi-auto sniper rifle is the perfect platform for the 7.62, especially as TTP's evolve fo the sniper.
It would be interesting to see if the FN Mk 20 out performs the M110. With rifles like the Mk 20 and Larues OBR it seems like SOF would have plenty of other better choices over the M110.
I'm right there with you on this FormerSFMedic.
I would all but guarantee the MK20 and the OBR are more accurate than the M110. I hate to say it, but the MK20 really is a more capable semi-auto sniper rifle than the M110. Not quite as agile, but overall a better weapon. The OBR is ridiculously accurate, and has immaculate fit and finish. The thing is built with amazing precision. And even with all those tight tolerances, its still nearly perfect in reliability. Army SF snipers know very well about the OBR’s awesome performance.
Yea if the story is about SF issues, they really should get the best platform/ what they need. And a mk 20 is my vote because if reliability and parts commonality.
That's why the M-14 in various form is still around. The M-110 is fine BUT in conditions where a M-110 will fail a M-14 will strive.
Just pimp out the HK G3 and u got a good semi/full auto marksman rifle.
“full auto marksman rifle”
Even I think that combination of words sounds off. Not to say that it can’t be done or anything.
It's called the PSG-1. And I SERIOUSLY doubt that the US Army, in these economic times, would buy any of H&K's over-priced products in any substantial quantity.
Hey Neal… Is that what happened to the xm8?
@NGPOG: It's been done on several occasions, but the rate of fire is an issue. It has to be high, like the Dillon, or the vulcan.
IIRC HK stopped producing G3s, which means the US would have to acquire clones, or surplus G3s. Those G3s average 3 MOA, which was deemed good enough for battle rifles of the Cold War.
Using old, 3MOA guns as DMRs doesn't sound like the US way of doing things
Any patent on the forward assist should be long expired by now.
Eugene Stoner was a proponent of having a rifle without the forward assist. The forward assist was an A1 upgrade for the M16, and in my opinion inappropriate under the circumstances. Look at Stoner’s original AR designs and you will not find a forward assist. Stoner worked directly with Reed Knight on the SR25 in 1990. Probably a good reason why Knight left the forward assist on the shop floor.
That forward assist patent deal was the answer given to me by the head of Crane's sniper program. I can do some digging and try to turn up his name.
Yeah well if the Spec Ops guys don't like the M110, why don't they get a MK20 or long barreled MK17? Isn't that why we are spending money on them, for the "Capability Gap" for the 7.62 NATO platform?
Holy cow! Man on the moon and stealth UH60s and a semi-auto rifle is controversial? There must be at least a dozen COTS weapons that would do. If you can't afford any, mark me down as paying for one unit personally. I'll even sell my beloved 2 MOA rack grade M1a to finance it.
In regards to the author stating the Army is replacing standard bolt action sniper rifle with a semi auto. Is that still correct? Isn’t the Army fielding the semi auto 7.62mm M110 along side the bolt action .300 Winchester Mag XM2010? So it seems like the Army has a different weapons for different uses.
The Army is simply using a semi-auto M110 for all 7.62mm sniper duties.The XM2010 will take up longer range duties in the .300 Win Mag. I think what the author is probably trying to get across, is that the standard issue sniper rifle in the Army, which was a bolt action M24, will be completely replaced by the M110. Standard issue being the key words here.
Thanks for the clarification. We were told that the M110 was replacing the M24, period. Later, some .300 Win Mag's rolled in to Group but we had nothing for sniper rifles other than the M110 on my ODA, excluding the Barret of course which is a different ballgame altogether.
Oh ok, thanks for clearing it up
Jack, we had some MK12′s in the armory. A lot of guys loved that rifle, and I think it’s the reason why so many of our snipers wanted the M110. They figured, “why not have all the same capabilities in 7.62mm”.
The SPR was really a pleasure to shoot, very nice rifle. When we started training up Designated Marksmen in the line platoons in Ranger Battalion I was one of the trainers, also worked with them in theater in Afghanistan out on the range a few times. It's an interesting concept and I'd be curious to know how it is working out.
Ya know Jack, that’s an interesting point. I haven’t talked to any of my SF buds about how the MK12 is holding up these days. I know we used it In Iraq and Afghanistan with much success. But I have not heard much about it lately. It’s a fantastic weapon, and I would speculate its still making the grade over seas.
I'm no expert – but how well does the M14 EBR hold up the '110 in the same role? I've fired an EBR and loved it. Never touched a M110 and don't know a lot. I'm just surprised I don't see more about the EBR.
The M-14 isn't sub MOA accurate but its alot more durable and still hold its own in accuracy.
Durable, I’ll give you that. Accurate, negative.
These problems and more were brought to light during the final down select of rifles. However when we got the 110 none of the problems had been fixed. Now they are doing an upgrade to fix a few of the problems with the durability of certain items. Instead of rushing them out of the factory they should of just fixed the issues then. The 110 isn't horrible but it's not great either.
My experience with the M110 has been "positive" although I do believe there are many systems out there that do a better job than the M110. I've personally shot a 110 at the SFSC Course at .5 MOA shot group (5rds) with a certain lot, but that was once, and never again did it shoot anything less than .75MOA but at the same time I've seen different M110s shoot up to 2-3 MOA. But for the most part I've seen 110s in a company shooting around 1-1.5 MOA which isn't bad. People fail to realize that the M110 is just a tool. Use and pick the right tool for the right job. I wouldn't trust a 110 anything past 600m. Although you can take it out to 1k if you got a solid shooter. The tolerances of different 110s may vary and is probably the reason for the difference in accuracy in multiple systems. I will say from an accuracy standpoint the 110 will never match the reliability or accuracy of an M24. My OBR on the other hand will shoot consistently .5 MOA with a 5-8 Round shot groups of M118LR and have the ability to replace bolt gun duties. The M110 is what it is. Just plan your missions accordingly.
The foward assist issue makes no sense. Using that logic, every single AR manufacturer has committed patent infringement.
The LaRue Tactical 7.62 OBR is the solution. It is a sub MOA rifle that is guaranteed for 10,000 rounds. Of the top four rifles at the 2010 US Army International Sniper Competition, three were LaRue Tactical OBRs – 1st , 2nd, & 4th. The 16" polygonal barrels will shoot the same velocity as a standard 18" land & groove barrel. The OBR out shot the M24 and M40 bolt action rifles…causing much wailing and gnashing of teeth by those shooters.
The M14 is not a sub-MOA rifle without a lot of extensive improvements. The OBR comes that way out of the box at a very reasonable price. http://www.larueosr.com
Semper Fi
the Bennelli R-1 300 win mag has a capable 10 round mag. Semi auto,,shoots the distance to take out targets from quite a distance. Its light even with bi-pod attached. Just a thought
I'm in Southern Afghanistan, A CO 1-32 3BCT 10th Mountain Division. Our snipers (two of which were ranked top 15 out of 40 international teams on the Top Sniper Competition, Tilges and Smith) said the exact same thing in this article. They carry both the 110 and the XM2010. The only reason they said they used the 110 more often is because of the terrain and distance which most engagements were at according to their DOPE book and it was much lighter and mobile compared to the bolt action .300 Win Mag XM2010. Most cold barrel shots were accurate within a 2cm shot group at 700m. That's it. Anything further than that was off by nearly 4MOAs and it was pointless to constantly reset the BDCs. The good? .308 BTHP LR rounds, the same as our M14s (which themselves are not that great because of the BDC on that MarkIV is set for the old 168gr round and we have the 175gr rounds)
C7, c8 rifles? Us Canadians can make better weapons in the SAME FORMAT than Americans. Talk about fail.
Shouldn't you be at summer camp?
They do? Funny I thought they were made by COLT!
Shame. Sad little troll, eh?
The 'C' series of AR-15 are actually made in Canada by Colt Canada (formerly Diemaco) which is owned by Colt (durr!). Sad troll is still sad though.
Anyone know why EJ deleted his posts? I'm going to re-post the link here so readers can take a look at Reed Knight's rebuttal to what I wrote in the above article.
http://hil001.blogspot.com/2010/06/m110-semi-auto…
AWESOME!!!
Thank you SOO MUCH for this, it's just what the doctor ordered.
Just use an old M-1 Garand or M-14 sniper rifle or AR-10 308. What is the matter. Too many specialist on rifles. I used both in the Marine corps in late 1960's through 1980's Plus Remington 308's and 30-06 with Uniteral scopes. In Vietnam and reserves. Then later in Calif. National Guard. I use to pick up rifles and hac to re-clean and re-tune up rifles. Army guys just dump rifles into storage and wahat for next guy to clean them and fix them. What a joke are guard was better now somewhat. Now Warrant officer 3 from PFC in Marines to E-6 in Guard and Warrant Officer. I worked my up the ranks. Also cop for 30 years. Special Agent, Narc, Swat and Gang teams. Should of just stayed in the service sometimes. And tried to change things for the better?
"The instructor responded that Colt was the patent holder for the forward assist design and it would have set the entire M110 project back years and millions of dollars to license the design or start from scratch to create something new that performed the same functionality."
Well, that's very wrong. My M4 upper from CMMG came with one and Colt hasn't sued them. Or any of the other AR-10/15 makers. Ever.
I'm not a copyright lawyer brother but I think that it works a little different when government contracts are involved. One way or the other, it sounds like the patent issue was disinformation.
That still doesn't make sense though. Colt is not the only AR manufacturer to sell to the military. I know Bushmaster sold a few thousand rifles a few years back, and lets not forget FN who is the official supplier of M-16's to the military.
I do agree that it sounds like an attempt to dodge the question.
I think it depends on the contract and if the government 'owns' the design (like how it works with the M-16 overall).
Anyway, yeah, it sounds like a typical "I don't know the answer so I will make one up so I don't look bad" things that are so good at propagating terrible information.
Gents, I went through my stack of business cards and found the correct name to go with the claim about the forward assist patent. Shannon B. (SOF Weapons Sniper Program Rep.). That information should be enough for those in the military to get a straight answer without completely violating his privacy by posting his full name, email, and phone number on the net. I was told this by Shannon when I was in the Joint Armorer's Small Arms Maintenance Course which took place 19-29 FEB 2008 at Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center. I'm not just making up the stuff I write about in these articles so now you know the source.
So what you're proposing is to spend $2500 on the overpriced Texican OBR rather than having the armorers we have do about $1000-$1500 on upgrades to get an M14 already in inventory to do the same thing?
Yup, that sounds reasonably priced….for LaRue!
@ Eric- Actually we’re proposing the Army spend a lot more than that. An OBR contracted to the Army would cost 4x that amount. The price of one M110 SASS to the Army is around $11,800. Technically speaking though an OBR by itself doesn’t cost as much as a Knights M110.
Anyway, I think getting an OBR would be a great solution to the problem (if there truly is one). It’s performance would likely be better than the M110 in every way. Acquiring the OBR however wouldn’t be practical. The M110 is still a great system, and the Army should figure out a way to enhance its reliability. The Army already has a solicitation out for this very request.
As for the M14. That rifle is all but obsolete (is obsolete IMO). You said it can do the same thing. IT CAN’T. With the change in TTP’s, the M14 just couldn’t keep up. Sorry brother.
"Colt was the patent holder for the forward assist"
Patents, holding true innovation back since the beginning of the patent system.
can you back that up?
Guys…we're North Americans. Assumedly born with a rifle in our hands. We can make-do (fatally for the foe) with damned near anything, depending on circumstances, can't we? A stick or cleaning rod to help in a forward assist scenario? No prob for the serious shooter and you sure as hell don't have to be an SF specialist. Just know what you have and don't have. 'Would like to have' is always a pipe dream. I regularly get sub-MOA at 100m with my ancient SS .22 Remington. Not suppressed. Not fancy. Just useful. Sigh.
I think the patent concern is bogus. Even if Colt had the original patent, it would be expired by now.
Screw the M14 EBR. Don't know were people get off saying how its sooo good. Usually the same people wanting a larger caliber service rifle/carbine but have never humped the ammo. The fact that you can't do MUCH at all to it, w/o completely fucking your zero and having no commonality with any rifle used right now shows. The Sage stock is garbage. Hollywood nailed it as well, what moron TESTS the M14 on M118LR, gives you a little that says "see, it will shoot X MOA" then has the BDC cap for 168 grain. That and the rifle just takes to much work to maintain its accuracy, with expertise your average soldier, even a Sniper does not have.
M110- I like my M110, if only for the versatility it gives me. Ditto on 600m being the max I will trust it, only because after we deployed we didn't get the chance to take it further then that. Technically it has a forward assist, like all AR10-15 weapons the groove in the bolt carrier can allow you to use your dick-skinners to move the bolt forward if out of battery. Not fun if you just fired off a 20 round mag… but it's there. I'd love to see a 16 inch, but in an OBR. Seems KAC is always having growing pains of some sort or another. From the words of a SOCOM Sniper Competition participant- "I call my 110 "Old Lightning, because it doesn't strike the same place twice." Its an odd gun, hot or cold it doesn't behave the way I would expect most of the time.
Hollywood- INteresting you mentioned resetting the BDC's, I've noticed this issue as well. The optic REALLY needs two things- a zero stop, and locking turrets. I use mine with taped windage and elevation knobs but it would be nice not to have to worry about them shifting about. For some reason with the Mk4 I've never been able to get the "0" to match up when I slip the rings and tighten everything down, always ends up a bit off to the left. The TMR is nice, however I'm curious as to what optic will be chosen for the 16 inch version. Here's hoping it's something Horus and something mil/mil. The 6-20x wouldn't be a bad choice, nor a 1-8x (S&B's offering is bad ass).
Thanks for filling in some of the details Matt. I believe that SOF was gradually shifting it's preference towards Night Force scopes and dumping Leupold. When the new .300 Win Mags came in they came with Night Force scopes. Have any filtered down to your unit yet?
Also, in fairness to Leupold, I used a Mark 4 on my SR25 and never had an issue with it.
We havent’ gotten any yet, we are still deployed with the M110. Not sure when it should get out the conventional guys, I hope I get to play with it before I get out and move to Nat. Guard. The Mk13 300 winmag had some great points, but also some serious points of “fail” in its execution. *Disclaimer* I haven’t monkeyed with the Mk13, I can just relate some key points that I would have issues with on that gun.
Mk13- Gun- Great rifle overall, stock is AI. Awesome. Heavy but awesome. Foldable stock. Overall I can’t fault the basic design of the gun. Two things kill it for me however- The optic, while NF, is not FFP. If anyone has ever tried to mil a target at 10x at close range you know my plight. The surpressor must be “seated” by firing 5 rounds before anything remotly resembling repeatable accuracy. This kinda a killer. Compare the two, the Mk13 and the XM2010 and there is NOOO question which is the superior system. Yes, I’m not big on Leupold optics right now, but the addition of locking elevation (why not windage?), FFP, mil adjustments, Horus H58, and a wide magnification range is much appreciated. Plus a surpressor I can take off/on w/o the seating process the Mk13 had. I’m not to savvy with internal ballistics so I could not say which is more accurate of the two. I imagine both are good enough, or better for government work.
Some units in my division have that, that I know, not sure who.
“Screw the M14 EBR. Don’t know were people get off saying how its sooo good. Usually the same people wanting a larger caliber service rifle/carbine but have never humped the ammo.”
This is the same caliber and ammo for the M110 is it not? Bullets are going to weigh the same.
“having no commonality with any rifle used right”
Exactly how much commonality does the M110 have? Don’t think your replacing the M110′s bolt with one from an M4. If anything the EBR probably has more commonality with all the version being used now; Standard M14, United States Marine Corps Designated Marksman Rifle, M21, M25, M39, and Mk 14 EBR.
Dropping zero is an optics and or mounting problem, not inherent to the rifle. Can’t be too hard to get a bullet drop cap in 175gr. Just put out to bid what you require in a scope and mounts.
Last the stock, like anything ergonomics is what you like. The Troy over the Sage or even EMOD is going to be partially a matter of taste. Just remember your not the only one shooting this system. I’m a big guy so what works for me is not going to be for the average person to use. I like the Sage because it doesn’t cover the action. With high mounts for the scope, leaves lots of room for my paws.
The Sage gives the Mk 14 an overall length of 35″ with stock collapsed to an open stock 41.25″. The M110 is 40.5″ with the buttstock fully compressed without suppressor. Think I rather EBR if pressed to go door to door. Don’t think the 2″ in barrel difference much to write home about. I really can’t compare the weights as each is listed differently; With scope, empty, with full mag, bipod or suppressor… believe they are close with ERB at about 11 and a quarter pounds empty, no scope and M110 around 16 but I think that is including suppressor, bipod…
ERB “it will shoot X MOA” versus M110 known as “Old Lightning”.
Funny that people have so much to complain about in the M110 gun. IMHO, it's the most solid 7.62mm AR system out there. Also: See Colonel Lutz comments in the link in one of the poster's comments. I don't trust LaRue's firearms for any serious use, due to the fact that they don't comply to the TDP, and refuse to reveal what ''Texas Spec'' is. I also don't care for the attitude of the owner of the company.
Second: Forward assist is useless. If you're trying to stealth chamber a round in, then you haven't fired a shot yet, or your gun has had time to cool off. Push the bolt in manually. It won't be any harder than if you had just pushed a button. Also: No bolt assist = lighter, even if only by an ounce or two.
Third: If you think the M14 is a good rifle by today's standards, you're mentally damaged. It's an overcomplicated 7.62mm battle rifle, not a sniper rifle. IMHO, that gun doesn't really serve any role well that another gun can't do better, and possibly cheaper. Get over your love affair.
Fourth: Leupold Scopes were a bad idea, because they're more geared to the hunting environment. If you want a military scope, get a Premier or Schmidt & Bender. Not Leupold. Also, the Army TDP was written poorly, and I'm pretty sure there were scopes on the market at the time, that had zero stops.
Fifth: 7.62mm bolt action rifles are a thing of the past. Get over it. Get some skill. Learn to shoot semi-auto. If you go bolt action, go .300 WM, or .338 Lapua, or even .50. The only reason they're still popular is because (in the civilian world – where this matters more) they're cheaper than shit, and you can find parts for them anywhere. And 7.62mm AR system guns have abundant parts as well. So that leaves one advantage: Price.
Ditto on the M14, pile of crap. If they HAD to have it, wish the Troy stock was used, the Sage is garbage. I’d trust a Larue OBR, both KAC and Larue stand by thier products and will answer any issues and complaints with a quickness.
The Leupold scopes don’t track consistantly, and had issues in the XM2010 trials from what I can gather. The nice thing about the Horus reticle is that all you have to do is zero, lock it, tape down the windage and shoot hold offs. Mitigates some of the issues with inconsistant tracking. Gotta at least give it up to USMC for making a prudent choice on optics for the M40. Ditto on the need for a zero stop if you are dialing on an M110, makes for much quicker and easier to track adjusments.
1) Agree M110 solid system.
2) Careless about fwd assist. Especially in 7.62.
3) Not saying end all be all here. Even in its own time I kind of liked the FN-FAL better (except for its longer overall length). The M14 in its latest configuration is not exactly a flint lock. Not sure what is overly complicated? An M14 with around 62 parts, compared to an AR style rifle with what, at least double that number? Not the brightest bulb in the bunch but I figured out how to hit the X’s with it and its controls are pretty straight forward. You can find a better riffle for every purpose. Got to hit something out at 1400 yards? Not with this or your M110, just need more bullet. Want to clear a room I’m not taking an M82. Not a love affair, just not hatred. Everybody wants to take the new girl to the dance, but the old ones looking pretty good. She dump a few pounds, got one of those new dress, add some space for modern accessories, all in all not too shabby. When you consider cost a much cheaper date.
4) Write the right TDP. Put out to bid what you require in a scope and mounts. Shouldn’t be that hard.
5) Agreed 7.62 bolts are done in the military. Though I think the basic (Basic) skills required are pretty much the same. Only advantage I see is in cost of ammo. 7.62 vs. the big three; 300 WM, 338 Lapua or 50 BMG. Really wouldn’t compare cost of rifles, way too big a difference. An AR style in 7.62 going to cost more than 2 G’s. My FN SPR was around $2,500. But like the AR you can go way up. G.A. Precision and Surgeon have .308 rifles well over $4,000. If you’re going to go for a cheap bolt in 7.62 you’re more than likely not buying a top of the line AR style in that caliber.
Should have gone with the Armalite SASS. Of course that just can't happen due to the history between Procurement and Armalite. It just chaps my a$$ that we still don't get the best tools for the job due to POLITICS! But then we all know that when it comes to doing waht si best for the troops or POLITICS, POLITICS is always more important.
SBFP2012!
The .308 AR Platform peformed miracles with a Copper solid "bore rider" 6.8 mm bullet. It worked so well at extended ranges that it was hidden and never spoken of again.
FormerSFMedic kind of makes my point, I’m not saying the Mk14 EBR the greatest thing out there. It isn’t.
“Acquiring the OBR however wouldn’t be practical. The M110 is still a great system, and the Army should figure out a way to enhance its reliability. The Army already has a solicitation out for this very request.”
The EBR IS the way the Navy boys at Crane figure out a way to enhance its reliability.
“As for the M14. That rifle is all but obsolete (is obsolete IMO). You said it can do the same thing. IT CAN’T. With the change in TTP’s, the M14 just couldn’t keep up. Sorry brother.”
Now I’m not sure if he included Mk14 EBR in this because I can’t see a large advantage to the M110. Sorry because it is an AR design is no big whoop. Now what new TTP’s an EBR can’t handle I’m not sure.
Dollars and cents makes it a simple choice. Already have the M14 actions, and pay the guys that rebuild them.