Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Please Santa, I've been very good this year




http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/12/ ... 291900726/

For how much they are charging for that thing i would have thought they could have at least redesigned the receiver better. Perhaps the actual weapon will, but for now it is a hack of a 700 receiver, chassis and scope rail. The high resolution pics on Wikipedia show what I mean. I'm not sure how well the design will hold up to a traditional sniper stalk (lots of stuff to snag with.

On a brighter note, the folding stock is nice for transporting, they have a great AAC silencer for it (little brother to the .338LM Titan on their website...suppose to weight like 10oz) and .300WM is a good compromise. I would have preferred to see them adopt the .338LM like most of Europe, but .300WM is very good too (their load more or less matches the 250gr .338LM, but comes up short for the 300gr loads). 220gr SMK and H1000 is the basic setup for that gun.

gunderwood wrote:For how much they are charging for that thing i would have thought they could have at least redesigned the receiver better. Perhaps the actual weapon will, but for now it is a hack of a 700 receiver, chassis and scope rail. The high resolution pics on Wikipedia show what I mean. I'm not sure how well the design will hold up to a traditional sniper stalk (lots of stuff to snag with.

On a brighter note, the folding stock is nice for transporting, they have a great AAC silencer for it (little brother to the .338LM Titan on their website...suppose to weight like 10oz) and .300WM is a good compromise. I would have preferred to see them adopt the .338LM like most of Europe, but .300WM is very good too (their load more or less matches the 250gr .338LM, but comes up short for the 300gr loads). 220gr SMK and H1000 is the basic setup for that gun.

The reason it looks like a Reminginton 700 receiver is because it is a Remington 700 receiver. The program was originally known as the M24E1 and was intended take existing M24s and perform the upgrades. Essentially the reason the rifle is chambered in .300 Winchester Magnum is that is the max length the receiver can handle and there are rounds in the federal supply system for it (Navy was first to use the round, the MK 248 Mod 1). As for how it will hold up during a traditional stalk, the rifle will be in the drag bag until the team hits the firing position. the rifle that would be out during the stalk would be the spotter's M110, a Knights Armament 7.62 X 51 that from a distance would look like an M16 family weapon with a scope. I personally never had much like for the adjustable stock on the M24 and thought using a removeable buttplate with spacers would have been a better system and you could do an adjustable cheek spacer that works along the same lines.

If you want to see the official US Army info sheet go to:
https://peosoldier.army.mil/Factsheets/ ... XM2010.pdf
For the M110:
https://peosoldier.army.mil/newpeo/Equi ... id=IW_SASS

grumpyMSG wrote:

gunderwood wrote:For how much they are charging for that thing i would have thought they could have at least redesigned the receiver better. Perhaps the actual weapon will, but for now it is a hack of a 700 receiver, chassis and scope rail. The high resolution pics on Wikipedia show what I mean. I'm not sure how well the design will hold up to a traditional sniper stalk (lots of stuff to snag with.

On a brighter note, the folding stock is nice for transporting, they have a great AAC silencer for it (little brother to the .338LM Titan on their website...suppose to weight like 10oz) and .300WM is a good compromise. I would have preferred to see them adopt the .338LM like most of Europe, but .300WM is very good too (their load more or less matches the 250gr .338LM, but comes up short for the 300gr loads). 220gr SMK and H1000 is the basic setup for that gun.

The reason it looks like a Reminginton 700 receiver is because it is a Remington 700 receiver. The program was originally known as the M24E1 and was intended take existing M24s and perform the upgrades. Essentially the reason the rifle is chambered in .300 Winchester Magnum is that is the max length the receiver can handle and there are rounds in the federal supply system for it (Navy was first to use the round, the MK 248 Mod 1). As for how it will hold up during a traditional stalk, the rifle will be in the drag bag until the team hits the firing position. the rifle that would be out during the stalk would be the spotter's M110, a Knights Armament 7.62 X 51 that from a distance would look like an M16 family weapon with a scope. I personally never had much like for the adjustable stock on the M24 and thought using a removeable buttplate with spacers would have been a better system and you could do an adjustable cheek spacer that works along the same lines.

If you want to see the official US Army info sheet go to:
https://peosoldier.army.mil/Factsheets/ ... XM2010.pdf
For the M110:
https://peosoldier.army.mil/newpeo/Equi ... id=IW_SASS

Yes, I know it is a 700 and yes I know they wanted to save money by using what they already have, but it seems kinda silly IMHO. They are practically replacing everything but the receiver. There are plenty of custom built guns receivers (i.e. receivers made for tactical work, not "fixing" factory tolerances) for that kind of money. Personally, I think Remington had the inside line on that contract despite the fact they put together an inferior system compared to some of the other American manufacturers IMHO. The only thing Remington did better was use their own receiver which as I said seems like a silly requirement considering what they are charging for that thing. Again, you could have bought a full rifle for that price.

gunderwood wrote:
Yes, I know it is a 700 and yes I know they wanted to save money by using what they already have, but it seems kinda silly IMHO. They are practically replacing everything but the receiver. There are plenty of custom built guns receivers (i.e. receivers made for tactical work, not "fixing" factory tolerances) for that kind of money. Personally, I think Remington had the inside line on that contract despite the fact they put together an inferior system compared to some of the other American manufacturers IMHO. The only thing Remington did better was use their own receiver which as I said seems like a silly requirement considering what they are charging for that thing. Again, you could have bought a full rifle for that price.

I can't really argue with your logic, I can just try to explain some of what they are doing. Chances are, you are very right that the only thing that might be reused is the receiver. Obviously the barrel and the stock are changed, now it is getting a detachable magazine, so even that metal is getting replaced. They might be reusing the triggers too, but given all that has gone on with the 700 triggers lately, even they are likely to be changed. As for the cost, it is a big package. I haven't purchase all the parts involved, but I will try to come up with a few of the bigger items/ costs:
Leupold Scope- I don't know all the specifics but a Mark IV, 6.5-20 starts at @ $1300
Remington 700 XCR- tactical long range rifle- lists at @ $1400, this rifle is a whole lot fancier in the stock department
AAC sound suppressor- not sure of the model, but I would guess at least $800
AN/PVS 29- night vision sight- I am not sure whether it is part of the package, but they say it is being fielded at the same time- they should run $4000 or more
You can see all of the other stuff that will come with the rifle when it is issued and it does include all the cases and bags(The original M24s were $5000 rifles and came with a similar package). Remington may have had the inside line, because it was the original manufacturer, but other companies were afforded the opportunity to bid on putting a package together.

grumpyMSG wrote:As for the cost, it is a big package. I haven't purchase all the parts involved, but I will try to come up with a few of the bigger items/ costs:
Leupold Scope- I don't know all the specifics but a Mark IV, 6.5-20 starts at @ $1300
Remington 700 XCR- tactical long range rifle- lists at @ $1400, this rifle is a whole lot fancier in the stock department
AAC sound suppressor- not sure of the model, but I would guess at least $800
AN/PVS 29- night vision sight- I am not sure whether it is part of the package, but they say it is being fielded at the same time- they should run $4000 or more
You can see all of the other stuff that will come with the rifle when it is issued and it does include all the cases and bags(The original M24s were $5000 rifles and came with a similar package).

XM 2010.jpg

Remington may have had the inside line, because it was the original manufacturer, but other companies were afforded the opportunity to bid on putting a package together.

Prices are hard to determine on special items like that because the government has made sure the civilian market has to pay top dollar. In exchange for the privilege of selling your product to the civilian market, the government gets special pricing while civilians get the shaft...its kind of a reverse subsidy.

The AAC suppressor is an unreleased model, but was shown on their blog about a year ago. Technically it is just a smaller/lighter version of their Titan-QD Ti suppressor which is designed for .338LM (http://www.advanced-armament.com/product.aspx?pid=485). On the civilian market the Titan-QD Ti is $3500 + $300 for the muzzle break (it is required for the QD model). Usually you can find the silencer for a bit less, but not much. The 300-SD is the model they are suppose to be using, but I expect it to cost around the same $3k mark for civilians. Who knows what the government is paying for them.

http://www.aacblog.com/?p=6259

The old version of the NV scope is the PVS-22 which runs about $10k on the civilian market. The newer version is the PVS-27 which also runs about $10k, but just came on the civilian market AFAIK. I thought the PVS-29 was smaller, but more limited than the 27. I don't know which they selected for that rifle.

http://www.nightvisionstore.com/US%20Ni ... ht%20r.htm
http://opticsbrands.com/content/morovis ... e-shipping