Posted on Feb 23, 2018
The Marine Corps May Finally Get A New Sniper Rifle — Just Not The One They Need
4.61K
39
57
3
3
0
Marines
Weapons
Sniper
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 5
2
2
0
I agree CW5 Jack Cardwell it's a nice weapon system but lacks the distance the army went to the M2010 ESR it's a 300. Win mag with a 1300 yd effective range
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
TSgt David L. - If you put hundreds of rounds per year through an M82 you had someone regularly replacing parts. It may not have been you, but it was someone. The M82 was deeply flawed with known points of failure. That's why the Army retired all of its M82A1M in the 90s. Now I wonder if the Air Force continued using the M82 designation for what the Army called the XM107 and then the M107. This is the only thing that makes sense to me because I was part of the test program for the XM107 when the M82's got canned for reliability issues. The only way to know for sure though is we really have to nerd out hard on Barrets and debate things like "Well, your picture clearly depicts a rifle with Gray #7 with six grooves on the selector switch versus a rifle with Gray #7 with five grooves on the selector switch"...actually it is a little easier than that. Did your rifles have a green drag bag and/or came came as part of a two case package (one for the rifle, one for the accessories)?
(1)
(0)
TSgt David L.
SFC (Join to see) - Right. Like I said, we sent folks to the Barrett armorers course. We did our own work unless it was something major happened. I don't know if they replaced the older weapons with XMs or M107s as they came out or not. It's possible and I was not aware of it. We were gone a lot. I do know we shot the shit out of them.
I wish I could've saved some trigger time until now. I miss the beast. Not enough to buy one of course. LOL
I wish I could've saved some trigger time until now. I miss the beast. Not enough to buy one of course. LOL
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
TSgt David L. - Pfft...$15 a round for ball, $60 for RAUFOSS...ya, no way i am paying that out of pocket.
(2)
(0)
TSgt David L.
SFC (Join to see) - Yeah, I wish I had some still. Crazy money to feed the beast. I keep thinking about buying/building one. I wish I was back on Uncles dime when it comes to toys and shooting. Those were the days! LMAO
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
This article is sort of misleading. The M110 has a lot of flaws, and the CSASS fixes a lot of those flaws. Both platforms were never really meant to be true "long" range rifles according to the modern standard. Back in the 90's, the M24 (basically the same as the M40 for you Marines) had a maximum effective range of 800 to 1,200 meters "based on the shooter, terrain, and weather conditions". The M110 is really a 600 meter gas gun, but can hit fairly well at 1,000 meters 70% of the time. The CSASS is a reliable 800 meter gun and can consistently hit at 1,200 meters in the right conditions. Is it less than the M2010, yep...but the CSASS was never meant to replace the M2010 or any other modern .300 WIN MAG. It is designed as a sniper support rifle for use in situations where you need a faster capability to engage targets that have extremely small exposure windows...a fancy way of saying urban operations...where bolt guns struggle struggle to keep up for that fast follow on shot.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The Army and Marines have never had a common Sniper platform. This is pretty surprising, but makes sense.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I think that will change. The Marine Corps has been heavily influenced by national match competition shooters for decades. It worked out really great for them from the 1950's to the late 1990's when long range shooting was still using phrases like ballistic "theory". However, their sniping program started to fall behind because of this deeply entrenched mindset that is not taking advantage of modern advancements. There are hopeful signs though. I know that as of 2015, the Marine Corps sniping community is really trying to sell their leadership on adopting Army platforms, technology advancements, and training techniques that have almost doubled the effective range that snipers had in the 1990's.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google