Posted on 10/07/2010 9:55:41 AM PDT by Neil E. Wright
What the F$%^! Over $7,000! Why not just go BUY new ones!!!
So the only things they're keeping is the bipod and trigger assembly? For only $7800 a rifle?
Mark
Weighs almost as much as the Barrett which is what they were trying to get away from.
I’ve been wondering lately why no guns are make with the barrel inline with the center of the shoulder pad.
make —> made
.300 WinMag is a good round for long distance work.
This looks great. The price I saw on the web is $4,174.
What aren't they changing -- the trigger guard?
The Model 700 XCR Tactical Long Range with 300 Win Mag is listed with a MSRP starting at $1407
In other words, a new rifle. About the only parts not mentioned are trigger, trigger guard and bipod. Since they are replacing the "buttstock" does this mean they are keeping the foreend?
I think some Pentagon purchasing agent just got sold a bill of goods!
if it’s good enough for Talibunny, it’d make a great elk round too.
Seriously, if we are really wanting to reach out, why not just go with the .338 Lapua Mag? The Brits are fielding it in the L115A3. This looks like another Army waste of taxpayer money when there are better long range precision rifles available of the shelf.
Ooops. That “but” should be “buy”.
Seriously, if we are really wanting to reach out, why not just go with the .338 Lapua Mag? The Brits are fielding it in the L115A3. This looks like another Army waste of taxpayer money when there are better long range precision rifles available off the shelf.
Where to start on this one? $7800 is a pretty steep price for an upgrade, especially when they configured the original purchase of the Remington 700 with this kind of upgrade specifically in mind. The .308 cartridge works with the Remington 700 medium-length action. The Army bought them with the long action specifically so they could convert to the .300 WM round by just changing the barrel and opening up the bolt face a bit. Their M24s used for target shooting were converted to .300 WM that way by their own gunsmiths.
I'd like to see how the $7800 per "upgrade" is broken out by component. I bought my Accuracy International .338 Lapua Magnum with high-end scope customized for it for that price. And that was in a quantity of one, and included the 15% excise tax. The government has far more buying power than I do, and all they get is a crummy upgrade for that much money?
Another odd aspect of this purchase is that only the very best shooters can use either the 7.62mm NATO or the .300 WM effectively out to their maximum ranges. The only way to reach out a lot further is the .338 Lapua, which is a long-popular medium-game cartridge. All the R&D for load development was done for free by civilian shooters. The only problem is that the rifles weigh about as much as a GPMG and tripod.
I can see the Army buying new-in-the-box M24s, and bringing in the older .308 versions for conversion. But no matter how well done, or how economical the conversions are, they're only buying about 300m more range. $7800 for another 300m?
Assuming all of this is reported correctly, this is either an overpriced boondoggle, or there's some black item included in the price. Maybe it's the new scope with laser rangefinder, met system, and complete ballistic systems built in. The Air Forces can hide billions of dollars for black aircraft and spacecraft, and the Army can't divert nickles and dimes for something as simple as sniper rifles.
* Ping *
Need to replace the M-16 A4 series and the M-4.
This is nice but most troops don’t carry these.
But these guys have to meet all the Gubmint required hoops.
We as taxpayers bitch if they cut corners on this stuff and then we bitch when excessive testing cost to much.
The $900 dollar hammer wasnt just a hammer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.