Is .300 Winchester Magnum the best choice for the U.S military's sniper rifles?

[C0untZer0]

I know the Army's M2010 and now the Marine's Mk 13 Mod 7 sniper rifles are chambered in .300 Winchester Magnum (7.62×67mm), and I know it was a favorite of Chris Kyle, but is it a better cartridge for long-range sniping than the .338 Lapua Magnum ?

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne.../marine-snipers-are-getting-new-mk-13-rifles/

 

[Varminterror]

Consider - Kyle claimed the 300 McMillan rifle as his favorite weapon he was issued. That’s not necessarily a testament to it’s superiority among an open solicitation, even in his opinion - only among the cartridges and weapon systems he was issued.

In my personal experience, the 300 is a contender for the application, but not what I would build for myself if I could only have ONE.

 

[Demi-human]

Unfortunately, the military must think of things in addition to payload on target. Fortunately, humans are not Elk.

 

[mcb]

Think about how much heavier both the rifle and the ammo is in 338LM than 300WM and how few situation exist that are too far 300WM but still within 338 LM. In a defensive role 338 is good. In an anti material role ok but never as good as a 50. If you have to hump that 338 around it seems less advantageous. If a 338 is light enough to carry easy the recoil becomes problematic. Depending on the situation/terrain you may want a 308 over either magnum cartridge.

Having options is good, pick the tool that fits the situation rather than trying to find one tool for all situation.

 

[FL-NC]

In a word, YES. The 338 is superior to the 300 WM. It is less effected by wind, and the terminal effects are outstanding in comparison. Also, the MK 13 leaves a lot to be desired when discussing service life. The "big army" sniping community has historically "rode the coat tails" of SOCOM, for the most part. Big army has only recently accepted the concept that sniping (as it applies to the world-wide mission of our Soldiers) isn't a job where "one rifle can do it all just fine". The M24 SWS was developed with bigger plans in the 80's, and made big army dump the M21 SWS (until they needed it again). Then, having seem our MK11/SR25 SWS, big army decided to dump the M24 and get the M110 (a wal mart version of the SR25). The whole time we (SOCOM) were asking for (and developing) systems in 300 WM. When they finally came to fruition, R&D outside of the DOD (and subsequently put into the field by other countries) showed 338 LM to be the better choice. The Barrett (M107) was (and is) an abomination from the good idea fairy, that was introduced in SOCOM and USMC during the 1st gulf war era with the sole advantage of 50 BMG terminal performance to destroy non-human targets (even though it works on humans too- but isn't necessary). Unfortunately, every sniping "expert" in the DOD (trained via Tom Berringer movies) thought the barrett was some type of perfect tool with a universal adaptor. And on and on it goes.

 

[Llama Bob]

If the goal is to maximize a combination of reach, wind bucking and terminal performance on unarmored humans at distance for a given level of recoil, there's exactly zero reason to be in .308 or .338 caliber. A 7mm will will easily outperform either by all three metrics at the same recoil level.

The reality is that we're still stuck with a bore diameter that was an obvious mistake in 1892 and has been a mistake every time it was recycled after that. There's no way we're going to stop making the same mistake now. It's a classic mistake and we've grown fond of it.

 

[jski]

So let me get this straight, just when the SEALs are dumping the .300 Win Mag, the Marines are adopting it? From what I gather, the SEALs are leaning toward the .300 Norma Mag.

 

[jmr40]

The special forces community is dumping 308 in favor of the 6.5 Creedmoor. Out to 2000 yards trajectory is close to the same as 300 WM and terminal effectiveness on humans is the same. With 1/3 the recoil. The 308 has served us well enough, but the 6.5 Creedmoor doubles the effective range.

The 338 LM only offers an advantage over 300 WM beyond 2000 yards. On paper the 338LM is better. But the military decided not enough better to justify the negatives.

http://soldiersystems.net/2018/03/23/ussocom-adopts-6-5-cm/

 

[eastbank]

a 220 gr .30 cal bullet at 2800-2900 will carry up pretty well.

 

[Glockula]

So far the military seems unwilling to get away from .308 projectiles for their medium to long range rifle rounds. I' not sold on the 300wm because of the antiquated belt which I think reduces accuracy potential but is a stronger case design which is good in environments our ground combat troops and Marines will fight in.

Over all not a bad choice, much better than the M40s in .308, but I do agree that a .338 or 6.5 would maximize the potential of the weapon system better than the 300wm. The 6.5 variants having less recoil and report for the ballistics and the .338 really giving some reach out and touch capability. With ammo that would certainly be a two man weapon system though.

There are no free lunches here and the 300 Wm isn't the shiniest and coolest thing out there but it is a good uprade for my brothers out there,

 

[entropy]

I thought they did the .300 and dumped it in the 90's, for the .50's? They are thinking of going back?
The longest I've ever shot done was with a .300 Mag, I like it; In a proper stock (McMillan), it is easy to shoot.
I'd think 6.5 Creedmoor would be the obvious anti-personnel choice, and .50 BMG still the obvious anti-light vehicle/hardened target rifle.

 

[Captcurt]

They each have advantages in a certain niches. When used as intended it boils down to the man squeezing the trigger. A 50 cal in the hands of the average Joe is a maybe. A 6.5 in the hands of a Master is a done deal.

 

[FL-NC]

I worked in sniper R&D my last 3 years in the military (left on 2010). I still hang out with, hunt with, and shoot with the guys who are doing my old job. The rifles, optics, ammunition, calibers, software, etc etc. are a constantly evolving process, leading into an absurdly long adoption process when/if anything gets formally accepted. Most of the things I am referring to don't get past the test stage, and most people outside of the "community" never even hear about them.

 

[SharpDog]

I know the Army's M2010 and now the Marine's Mk 13 Mod 7 sniper rifles are chambered in .300 Winchester Magnum (7.62×67mm), and I know it was a favorite of Chris Kyle, but is it a better cartridge for long-range sniping than the .338 Lapua Magnum ?

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne.../marine-snipers-are-getting-new-mk-13-rifles/

The military has a new .300 WM load with a high BC that performs better than their .338 LM in their tests. I'm trying to find the article now, it was about 6 mos. or so ago. Not saying that the .338 LM could not be loaded better but I believe these tests are what they are basing the decision on.

 

[Riomouse911]

As a non-military vet & a non-sniper, I have zero factual experience to draw on to put forth an opinion on what’s better, rifle-cartridge a or rifle-cartridge b.,

As a 27+ year LEO who trains my people on the range, sometimes bureaucracies have to compromise and field a system that serves the widest role, can be used by the most folks, and can be acquired and serviced easily. No single firearm is ever going to be the best at all roles and for all people.

Each of the rounds and rifles discussed in the thread have a purpose and each one has a particular wheelhouse where they outshine the others. Based on what I have read, the.300 Win has worked well within its limitations, is more effective now than ever before, and can be carried/shot damn well by those humping them through our various war zones. Is it the best? I’d say it’s about as good a compromise as you can get.

Is it worth nearly $12,500 a unit? (4.3 million for under 350 units) THAT should be the question!!

Stay safe

 

[sunaj40]

I know the Army's M2010 and now the Marine's Mk 13 Mod 7 sniper rifles are chambered in .300 Winchester Magnum (7.62×67mm), and I know it was a favorite of Chris Kyle, but is it a better cartridge for long-range sniping than the .338 Lapua Magnum ?

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne.../marine-snipers-are-getting-new-mk-13-rifles/

Really just a matter of what you intend to do as far as the shooting environment-if you are shooting at ranges up to 1000-1500 yds with appropriate accurized rifle/scope etc. the rifle/cartridge is capable of excellent accuracy, lots of downrange velocity and energy for the 30 cal; , recoil is stout but can be reduced with recoil pad/stock/muzzle brake etc., bullet selection-widest possible bullet designs and weights 130-220 gr made for the 30, will work well with many different powders, cases are plentiful and affordable; suitable for deer to bear (although 30 cal are considered light for big bears), it is a magnum rd and is too much gun for anything but large game, one of my personal favorites, when you really want to terminate your target with prejudice
The 338 Lapua Magnum is a powerful cartridge developed for long range military sniping, using bullets c. 250 gr @ 2900 fps out to 2000 yds, a superior cartridge for its intended purpose it is expensive to feed and maintain compared to most 30 cal setups but if $$ is not a problem this is one sweet cartridge, it also serves as a light "artillery" round for destroying enemy physical targets (cars, small planes, equipment)

 

[sunaj40]

The special forces community is dumping 308 in favor of the 6.5 Creedmoor. Out to 2000 yards trajectory is close to the same as 300 WM and terminal effectiveness on humans is the same. With 1/3 the recoil. The 308 has served us well enough, but the 6.5 Creedmoor doubles the effective range.

The 338 LM only offers an advantage over 300 WM beyond 2000 yards. On paper the 338LM is better. But the military decided not enough better to justify the negatives.

http://soldiersystems.net/2018/03/23/ussocom-adopts-6-5-cm/

With 50 gr more weight and substantially increased energy, not to mention the very best components being available I can't see how anyone would compare a 300 wm with the 338-it would be substanially more stable in many adverse condition from 600-2000 yds ; if I was sniping past 1000 yards in a military environment I would definitely be using the 338

 

[entropy]

Would you hump it up and down the hills and sit in a sangar with for days on end?

 

[Big7]

So far the military seems unwilling to get away from .308 projectiles for their medium to long range rifle rounds. I' not sold on the 300wm because of the antiquated belt which I think reduces accuracy potential but is a stronger case design which is good in environments our ground combat troops and Marines will fight in.

Over all not a bad choice, much better than the M40s in .308, but I do agree that a .338 or 6.5 would maximize the potential of the weapon system better than the 300wm. The 6.5 variants having less recoil and report for the ballistics and the .338 really giving some reach out and touch capability. With ammo that would certainly be a two man weapon system though.

There are no free lunches here and the 300 Wm isn't the shiniest and coolest thing out there but it is a good uprade for my brothers out there,

No need for a belt on a modern cartridge.
Function of a few things.

Two of the main ones are:

Throw-back to available H&H cases back in the day.

The "belted mania" that followed.

For me, the best of all worlds would be .408 Chey Tac aka, .408 Cheyenne Tactical.

That way, with the hand held calculator, provides substantial anti-material, anti-personnel
capability at distance.

The 6.5 is a fad. Won't take legs. Just don't have the horsepower
and I'd rather have a .338 LM or .300 WM any day.

 

[z7]

For me, the best of all worlds would be .408 Chey Tac aka, .408 Cheyenne Tactical.

That way, with the hand held calculator, provides substantial anti-material, anti-personnel
capability at distance.

if I was shooting from a fixed position at distances over 1000yds consistently, could park a vehicle and walk 100yds or so, make two trips with all the gear, yes I would want a .408, a 375 magnum variant or something like that. but the .408 cheytac rifle (the intervention) weighs 29lbs. the mk 13 mod 5 (not the one the USMC is getting) weighs 12lbs. I can't find a quick spec on the mod 7 but I expect it weighs less than 18lbs. 10lbs + is a huge difference. now on to ammunition, how many more rounds of 300win mag can you carry vs .408 ammo.

the military has to make compromises in many areas and the rounds chosen are always a compromise. the 300winmag is not the best choice for urban sniping with distances less than 1000yds. it is also not the best for ELR shooting in the mountains of afghanistan, BUT it does better in the mountains than the 308 win, and is lighter than the other options. it is off the shelf, proven design that will be an upgrade from the M40's.

the "best" would be a 3 rifle setup that can be adapted for various missions.

one rifle for ELR where weight doesn't matter

one rifle for long range patrol light the mk 13

one rifle for urban operations, like a semi auto 6.5 creedmore.


it is not the "best" but it is "better"

 

[cougar1717]

I do find entertainment in these "what should our government use?" threads. It's not like our input matters in their choice. This one kind of has roots in both the "nobody uses 300WM in long range competition anymore" and the "338LM is ballistically superior to 300WM," lines of thought. That leads to the, "they ought to use one of the calibers winning long range shooting competitions" or "if I had unlimited resources, I would want ..." conclusions.

The criteria for these choices goes beyond simply extending range to 1300 yds or which has the longest, skinniest projectile. Military selections always seem ultra-conservative in terms of combat tested calibers with years of service. No one is going to stick their neck out on the line and the people making the decisions really aren't on the cutting edge of long range competition. The government has a specific set of criteria and purchases from the lowest bidder whose product meets the criteria.

 

[mcb]

I do find entertainment in these "what should our government use?" threads. It's not like our input matters in their choice. This one kind of has roots in both the "nobody uses 300WM in long range competition anymore" and the "338LM is ballistically superior to 300WM," lines of thought. That leads to the, "they ought to use one of the calibers winning long range shooting competitions" or "if I had unlimited resources, I would want ..." conclusions.

The criteria for these choices goes beyond simply extending range to 1300 yds or which has the longest, skinniest projectile. Military selections always seem ultra-conservative in terms of combat tested calibers with years of service. No one is going to stick their neck out on the line and the people making the decisions really aren't on the cutting edge of long range competition. The government has a specific set of criteria and purchases from the lowest bidder whose product meets the criteria.

With sniper systems the lowest bidder that meets the requirement is not always the one selected. For much of what the government does with competitive contracts the lowest qualified bidder does often get the job but with sniper system that is not always true. The PSR and XM2010 were far from the cheapest submissions in their respective RFP's and yet they won.

 

[FL-NC]

if I was shooting from a fixed position at distances over 1000yds consistently, could park a vehicle and walk 100yds or so, make two trips with all the gear, yes I would want a .408, a 375 magnum variant or something like that. but the .408 cheytac rifle (the intervention) weighs 29lbs. the mk 13 mod 5 (not the one the USMC is getting) weighs 12lbs. I can't find a quick spec on the mod 7 but I expect it weighs less than 18lbs. 10lbs + is a huge difference. now on to ammunition, how many more rounds of 300win mag can you carry vs .408 ammo.

the military has to make compromises in many areas and the rounds chosen are always a compromise. the 300winmag is not the best choice for urban sniping with distances less than 1000yds. it is also not the best for ELR shooting in the mountains of afghanistan, BUT it does better in the mountains than the 308 win, and is lighter than the other options. it is off the shelf, proven design that will be an upgrade from the M40's.

the "best" would be a 3 rifle setup that can be adapted for various missions.

one rifle for ELR where weight doesn't matter

one rifle for long range patrol light the mk 13

one rifle for urban operations, like a semi auto 6.5 creedmore.


it is not the "best" but it is "better"

When I worked alongside SOF snipers from another NATO country in '06, they had streamlined their overgrown inventory down to 2 systems in afg.- a Blaser in 338 and the SR25. They had dumped MK12's, several other bolt action rifles in 308, M14 variants, and had "moth-balled" the Barrett, meaning they kept it in the inventory but didn't see a need for it over there. They found that the SR-25 and 338 could take care of any application on a "soft target".

 

[M118LR]

http://www.americanspecialops.com/special-ops-weapons/

Part of Big Greens Philosophy is to adopt a Sniper Rifle that looks like the one that every other Soldier is carrying. Advances in ammunition have allowed the 300 Win Mag to meet the 1500 Meter SOCOM min requirement. Modern Sniping is evolving at a far more rapid pace than Government Procurement and the slow grind towards multi-service acceptance and type casting. As long as Special Warfare is for specialists, small units with specialized purposes will be better served with specialized equipment. The selection of a single sniper rifle for all the services to utilize as "General Issue" will only ensure that the folks at the front will be saddled with inferior equipment. JMHO.

 

[Orcon]

With 50 gr more weight and substantially increased energy, not to mention the very best components being available I can't see how anyone would compare a 300 wm with the 338-it would be substanially more stable in many adverse condition from 600-2000 yds ; if I was sniping past 1000 yards in a military environment I would definitely be using the 338

Obviously you were never in the service. If you had been, you'd be humping whatever MTOE told you to hump.

And besides, no matter the quality of gear we're always pissing and moaning about how it's not the best. Such is the life of a soldier; drink water and drive on.