Here’s a video I put together showing the Army’s new M110 sniper rifle in action out at that test shoot at Aberdeen. I have several others I’ll post as I edit them, so stay tuned.
And please excuse the rough-and-ready quality of the clip. I’m just getting used to this whole video editing and I promise each one will be better…as will my videography.
{ 72 comments… read them below or add one }
The suppressor is pretty impressive. I was pretty awed by the amount it reduced the audible signature of the weapon.
Due to the nature of the internet and modern ‘digital audio/video recorders’ (let alone quality of computer speakers), I doubt we’ll full appreciate the suppressor or the ‘sound barrier being broken’.
I think what would be more impressive is if we saw the target down range to get a better sense of how much distance was covered by the gun.
The main improvement over, say, a well built SVD, appears to be suppression, which assuming everything else was the same between the shots, was impressive. Anybody able to say how it affects flight path on the M110?
when i used this rifle at sniper school, thee was no noticable effect on flight path or ballistics @ 800m. out to 1000m there is only a slight deviation from flight path.
Hey folks, be sure to read the story I wrote up on this in Military.com’s Warfighter’s Forum. There’s more detailed, first-person info on each of the weapons I fired. It would answer many of your questions.
http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,154791,00.html
Nice demonstration. I still favor the 50 cal sniper rifle. Is there still a white plume of gases coming from that rifle? One of these days, maybe we will have the technology to go to a cartridgeless shell and not have to worry about the clanging of the brass or the weight of the ammunition.
Still a plume of smoke and I’d prefer the bolt action rifle. I do appreciate the suppressor demo, as my computer is plugged into a real home theater system via spdif, and that demo was impressive.
M-82 light, anyone? :) Bout time the snipers have a good semi auto weapon!!
I viewed the video of the new 110 without realizing any disconcernable improvements. What was the grouping of 3 quick rounds? What was the range of the target… my estimate was about 150-200 yards. Noted significant smoke that would give away position after just one round.
I my experience, I have used a M1-Garand, Mauser, and a M-14. While all three produced high accuracy, the bolt action Mauser gave me the best results and security. My shots were from 300 to 1200 yards… all take downs.
From this video of the 110 I have to say the muzzle suppressor is acceptable and that is about it.
Yeah, lets run around a modern battlefields with a Mauser, thanks for your input.
Might not work too bad as a sniper/DMR weapon in conjunction with other more modern weapons…..
Seems like the AR-10 has finally come into it’s own…and it’s been around for how long?
There is smoke coming from the chamber but it disipates quickly, I would say that is not a concern for giving away your position.
The supressor is amazing though, I have heard it fire first hand.
Always glad to watch someone fire a weapon. Other than that not much to say except:
what was the distance?
What was the grouping?
Why all the smoke?
What is the cost over run?
Where’s the video ?
Nevermind…. I refreshed the page and it was there…
In many ways, a sniper is also an FO. One shot they know you are there. Three shots, at the most, they know where you are. Even though you have shifted your position, a semi automatic will leave brass for the patrol to find, showing them your exact location when you shifted. Having now been forced to completely pull back and lose contact with all but the pursuing patrol, your secondary role as an FO is now completely negated.
This was designed for use in urban scenarios where the snipers were found to be leaving their M24s behind and using tricked-out M16s and M4s……
I really do like the “Assault rifle gone sniper rifle” thing, it’s a very cool design and idea. All soldiers are trained with the AR, and then eventually a SAW, M50 or something of the like, but now integrating a sniper’s rifle as an assault rifle, more soldiers can become semi-marksmen which will help at the war on terror, though, the really noticeable fact that I see, is of course the shell ejection, I only use bolt action rifles while shooting in concealment, I know every shot I take, and where it’s shell is, and can escape with out being ever having a cartridge found. But, in areas like Iraq, and other largely populated areas, you can hardly go 10 feet without finding a spent shell of some sort, so I believe that the M110 rifle in areas like that is just plain terrific, large amounts of fire power, large capacity of fire power in a simple platform.
The M110 Sniper Rifle:The M110 weighs 17.3 pounds in combat, and about 70 pounds with all components of the system. The M110 can use a ten or twenty round magazine. The 40.5 inch long rifle can have a six inch tube attached to the barrel, which reduces the noise and flash made when the rifle fires, and largely eliminates nearby dust rising into the air, which often gives away the snipers position.
http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=647
Other then the special made SVD..it’s about 180m up on the Ruskies…but they are dumping a ton of them in Venzuela….
I belive it’s .064 MOA………..
What caliber is that thing and what is the approximate effective range? Also, didn’t snipers prefer to load single shot to protect the bullets?
Why .308? That was a sick replacement for the .30-06. (Check the long range ballistic tables). When I left the Corps, the long range “shooters” were using modified Remington 700′s chambered for
.300 Winchester Mag. That cartridge could be loaded with a 200gr boattail and pushed at 3000fps.
The Marine Corps Rifle Team was using Match Conditioned M-1′s and Frankfort Arsenal Match Ammo. There was a 1000 Yd. match with “iron sights”. It does not appear that much progress has been made, and a case can be made that weaponry has regressed in this area.
The further you are away from target, the less likely of being detected. Accurace at a long range is the ticket. At short range, Gimme fire power.
No worries on leaving brass behind, they make a brass catcher that attaches to the rifle, basicly a little canvas bag. Only thing is you have to empty it before moving, if it has more than 1 spent round in it. Can you say jingle bells?
I’ve seen the bags before, never really liked them, kind of comber some and jingle like crazy, plus it’s a black mesh…sticks out, and I wouldn’t dare paint it.
I can’t say as I’d trust, yet another AR knock off as a sniper rifle when you can’t trust the AR on a daily basis to work reliably. There are way better .308 semi-auto battle rifles out there, HOWEVER, they all suffer from NIH syndrome which is more important than the lives of soldiers who must day in and day out bet their lives on such unreliable weaponry. Our soldiers deserve, from us, the best equipment we can field, REGARDLESS of where it is procured from. Procurement should NOT take precidense over reliability and quality.
i'm a little over 10,000 rounds through my POF "AR knock off", without having to clean or lube it one time. so much for your reliability theories.
It’s more about the round than the rifle. I’m curious to see how it performs under cold bore conditions from 1600+ meters.
In regards to the 50 cal comment… I thought those weren’t intended for human targets? At least as far as combat and what I know we aren’t supposed to use that big of a round on flesh?
Does the Army do anything right,, AND THIS IS DEFINITELY NOT IT!!,, 300 WIN MAG/300SM,, IS THE ANSWER,, my suggestion years ago was to convert an m-14 to accomodate this round,, having been in on the original test,, and we did NOT RECOMMEND the M-24 system,, distance was 1,000meters plus range,,Leupold 20 x scope,, and a few add ons,,with the price well under $2,000.00,, the 308 is someones,, a non shooters idea of a long range rifle,, as they poop out at 850 m,,instead of the Aberdeen “wanna bees”,, they should put this weapon in the hands of the experts,, at the Army Marksmanship Unit,, but then the truth will out,, and the purchasing officer in the pentagon wouldnt get his kick back!!, ,, remember I WAS THERE DURING THE 24 FIASCO!!,,they put the weapon in our hands,, not to shoot,, but to look at,, ANOTHER NON-FUNCTIONING PROJECT FROM THE PENTAGON!!REMEMBER,, WHAT IS THE MISSION??: PROVIDE SURGICAL KILLING SHOTS AT EXTREME RANGES!! (1/2 Mile plus!!)
HELLO!!
WW Knox,, maverick40id@rtci.net
The Army annouced that they were goin bad to the M-14 weeks ago. What’s this about?
I see alot of people running their sucks on this page about how inferior they think the .308 is. There are plenty of dead ragheads that I sent to meet allah during my time in Beirut. They can’t comment on how bad the .308 is because that’s what I used to end their miserable existance!
M40A1 did me and my brothers just fine.
Semper Fi
Amazing, the Armalite AR-10 comes out in military and people complain about the chambering! After I went through sniper school I was trained on Warsaw and Chicom weapons. M-70′s, M700′s, guess what, commercial AR-10′s. While I preferred bolt guns so I could police my brass.( And would be interested if anybody else picked up a Whisper .30). Now if I was in a fixed FOA I believe the M-110 will out fire a M-14 with match ammo and the same scope. Even though the Mod262 5.56 round is excellant , I would rather the firepower of at least NATO 7.62 just as .45 over 9mm as a side arm.My experience my 2 cents.
How ’bout 338 EDGE or 338 Lapua with 300 grain Sierra: even better ballistics than the 30 cals past 1000 yds but without the weight of a 50. Just a thought.
Good for overwatch when theres a lot of hostiles. those snipers that were compromised in iraq may have had a better chance w/ a semi. I don’t think its made for killing one important man. i would like to have had it as a DM rifle. Hell, the M-14 is an accurate weapon with stopping power to. they took 40,000 out of storage for a reason. maybe they ought to start phasing out the .223 for the .270 to. Barret makes the 468. Worth a field test. Send some to the box and see wat happens. oh, the hell with nato…
MY DAD,STILL LIVING,AMEN. CARRIED A BAR IN THE PACIFIC,WW2, EVERY TIME HE PULLED THE TRIGGER HE HAD TO SHIT FIRE AND SPARE THE MATCHES,HE ENDED UP TAKING THREE 6.5RDS WHILE SUPPORTING HIS SQUAD. OUR BOYS TODAY NEED TO BE ABLE TO SMOKE AND FLOAT WITHOUT BEING SEEN,BE IT SINGLE SHOT OR FOLLOW-UP KILL.LETS ALL SEND OUR IDEAS TO DOD
MAYBE THEY WILL LISTEN TO US. WE HAVE THE BEST ARMS MAKERS IN THE WORLD AND I KNOW IF FUNDING WAS GIVEN, OUR BOYS WOULD HAVE THE BEST OF THE BEST ON THE BATTLEFIELD.
4PaPa1,DMZ
Blah,blah,blah……5.56mm=Rabbit round. 7.62x51mm IS a man stopped. The M-14 is “good to go” forever, but we might as well re-issue the M-1 Garand in 30-06 and drop Ayatolla-A$$aholas at 300m+ with iron sights and relive the Glory Days of WWII and Korea (Kent State?). New isn’t always better: case in point .45ACP v. 9mm NATO. ENUFF SAID .338 Lapudapu yahoos.
I carried the M-14 in Iraq, verrry good rifle. While in Kuait, my team and I were hitting targets at 750m consistantly. The 5.56mm round is not a good round, why do you think everyone else uses 7.62mm?
me myself, i would prefer a 6.5/.284 launching a 140 gr.at 3000 + thru a 22-24in. tube from a 20rd.mag. bolt action. less weight, less recoil, less noise = better opportunity for a head shot.
no brass to search for. should be a man killer at 850m.
Oh yeah, it’s flatter shooting too.
I used an M-14 match with match ammo in vietnam. It and a starlite were 22 pounds and useful only for frightening away cattle from inside the wire.
As I suspect several of you know, shooting someone at close range with a 5.56 is a good opportunity for h2h.
I could live with the ballistics of the 06 or a hotter mag but would absolutely want a 20 round clip.
It is good hearing from people who know the current game.
thanks
USMC/RVN
The 5.56 is too light for combat use. Why doesn’t the military go to the 6.8mm. Better penetration and knock down power for the same buck.
To boot you can reach out and touch someone. The riund is far more accurate and gives a much bigger punch.
The conversion to 6.8 isn’t all that great and existing M-16A2′s can be quickly converted. Ammo weighs approximately the same as 5.56.
I have a similar rifle at home. A factory Colt Match Target/Tactical Elite, 20″x1″ bull bbl, 3×9 scope, Hogue grips and bbl shroud. Great for 100-150 yd shots on paper or varmits, but I would take a Garand in .30-06 if I was going to kill a bad guy…….
I would love to see any of you naysaying experts take a hit in the head or vitals at 1000m with a 5.56mm or 7.62 and see if you can say it is ineffective. Recent developments in low drag bullets for the 5.56 and 7.62 greatly extending effective range(same goes for you 45 ACP only zealots who can’t quit raggin on the 9mm!)…………who shoots a full power magnum well? Who wants the muzzle flash and vicious report of a magnum? Yes they are more effective for slightly longer ranges, and some very select few individuals can handle them like an expert, but with how much training. Can’t remember having my Bushmaster ever fail when running around here in the FL swamps in a swamp buggy kickin mud and crap all over the place. Never seen a wild hog yet that didn’t drop when shot correctly, are we saying a pig has less vitality than a man(maybe they weren’t wearing their body armor when I hunted them)? Almost all of you guys need to get out of your armchairs and either walk the walk or just shut up and punish your monkey for paying forward all this crap you keep reading and buying into. Learn to actually shoot and where to shoot something to kill it before you crap on something, even a 22LR is very capable of killing at ridiculous ranges, and is still the most dangerous cartridge around being so many people look at it as a toy.
Having used an f88 styer with the 5.56 and seen the damage that it can do to brick walls (we only have a max effective range of 300 meters) I would have to say that it can stop you wether you’ve got armour or not the only diff is if it puts a hole in you or not. I must say how ever that as a Sniper Rifle a 7.62 would and has for many years served its role well, having only fired of about 40 rounds of 7.62 I’m no expert on it but it is good out to 900 yards when ever I’ve used it.
Just a thought form Australia.
It’s interesting that the 9mm and 5.56mm have to be defended. Everyone comparies them to the .45 and the 30 cal. That says it all – why not have something that doesn’t have to be defended, or have excuses made for it?
Our troops deserve better than “almost as good as” or “it works at close range” or “most of the time”.
I am currently in Afghanistan and I carry both an M-14 and a M4. Let me rephrase that, i carry the m-14 nad have the m-4 over my back. The 5.56 is too small of a round when the A$$holes shooting at me are in a grove or on a damn mountain. My biggest problem is that you get FOBBITS who praise the 5.56 and all they ever do is leave it in a weapon rack usually 4 to 5 days at a time. I love my M-14 and can easily hit my targets 800 meters when shooting and i have used some kentucky windage to get a guy off a mountain when my buddy who is a crack shot couldnt touch him with his M-4. I have seen it in action the 7.62 is the better option and holy smoke its a NATO round so dont use the NATO excuse to why we cant change.
I was issued an Elisco M16A rifle that couldn’t hit a target at 150m..so I exchanged it with a deffective “bolt action” . Winchester .308 (M14) that needs to be reloaded everytime I fire it…though it was difficult because I have to pull the charging handle just to extract and reload because of the gas port has been over used, I could still could take down moving targets with it at 500 to 7oo m on iron sights…
This is classified as sniper rifle. Foot soilders should carry 7.62 sniper .33 Laupa. Thats my opinion
Damn I cant think tonight. .338 Laupa. Sorry bout that
I feel the soldier in the field knows what he needs but politicians and high ranking officers who suck up to them, always look at the price. Too often the lives of our soldiers are worthless to these people. It is the price of the equipment that matters to them. The only way to get thru to these types is for all of us to write our favorite politician and let them know in a strong voice that our military peoples lives are priceless. “President@Whitehouse.Gov”. Give ‘im hell!
Dave
One issue that often gets overlooked in these discussions, is what is the mission, environment, target, time, terrain, etc? No single system is ideal for every likely situation or objective. Is the shooter required to lock out of a submersible, two miles offshore, and swim back to the beach? Or, execute a HAHO or HALO jump, onto the side of a mountain? How is the shooter expected to extract, particularly when under heavy pursuit by the enemy? Is the only safety, an international border only reachable by foot, 200 miles away?
An issue that has been alluded to in the foregoing discussion, is that many of these procurement decisions are made by Logisticians, Budgeteers (sic)*, and other assorted REMFs. In the US Civil War, logisticians refused to procure repeating rifles, fearing the logistics system could not meet the increased demand for ammunition. NATO standardization was implemented, to achieve economics of scale, and decrease logistics pressures caused by a plethora of exotic munitions and calibers, that could not be resupplied by Allied forces.
Special Weapons for Special Forces, smacks of Elitism to many officers serving in Conventional Forces. I refer you to the absence of Army SF during Desert Shield/Storm. During the early-60s, the official Army would not allow Army SF to wear their Girl Scout hats, until JFK told them to put them on. (So I’ve read) During the Clinton-era, Army non-SF troops were issued black berets marked Made in PR China. These parabolas apply to elite forces choices in weaponry, as well as casual or ceremonial apparel. My knowledge of sniper weapons pedigrees, is not sufficient for the task of citing a relevant example.
Instead of shouting, my choice is best, because I say so! I suggest that this dialog should compare the relative merits of rival weapon systems, in the context of a specific mission, objective or target. Is the shot a 2-km headshot through a vehicle windshield? Or perhaps, to disable the vehicle
“Nice demonstration. I still favor the 50 cal sniper rifle. Is there still a white plume of gases coming from that rifle? One of these days, maybe we will have the technology to go to a cartridgeless shell and not have to worry about the clanging of the brass or the weight of the ammunition.
Posted by: Gforce at November 2, 2007 05:16 AM”
Ammunition without a cartridge has been around for years. I would have to check my literature to give exact dates and info, however, a google search would probably bring up a lot of intersting articles on the subject.
A lot of you guys are retarded. “Well i can hit this target at this range with this round and blah blah” unless your a sniper shooting something at 800m isnt going to happen. the 5.56 round is fine..maybe if some of you can actually shoot youd realize that. The enemy we fight today doesnt come at us with armor or tanks. Their in rags…i would know because im there now..a 5.56 would go through rags just as easly as a 7.62 or any other round for that matter..
I trained with the M-14 in 1969. Imediatly upon graduation the army switched to M-16 and told us “it never needs cleaning”. BULL. training+PM= live soldiers, no matter what the caliber of the wheapon
That weapon is not 5.56 that is a SR-25 in 7.62 is the new snper rifle from stoner and robar mix ive fired it and its great its based upon the M10 the ORIGANL M16 system in the orginal cal.it was 7.62 it was switched to 5.56 in 1960 and a foward asst added along with changes ti the dolt head and Rounds them self.
I liked ‘rupturducks’ comments. As former MAC-Vietnam, we improvised with Remington 700 BDL, and I will always favor the bolt action. Fewer things to go wrong when the sh– goes down. If something can break or go wrong, it will. I still shoot alot, and to stay good you have to practise. I can’t practise 4-6 hrs. several times a week with a .338 or .50. My body can’t take it and it eventually shows in critical shots. I won’t bet my life on it as I would with the .308. Maybe I’m just gettin’ a little wussy in my old age.
Dr.J
I have been shooting rifles since I was nine years old. And I would have to say that I hate the M-4 and the M16 I just do not like the M-16 style guns. The best rifle I would consider for combat would be a M-14. It’s still a real rifle with a real cartridge. I’ve used 5.56 to shoot squirels and rabits. I’ve used 7.62 on deer. wich is a man closer in size to? Of corse a deer. Also in Iraq I’ve seen targets hit multiple times with a 5.56 round and still keep moving. I carry an M-14 and I’ve never had to shoot a target more than twice to bring him down.
The majority of kills with 7.62 have only taken one shot.Not Only that I can make reliable shots at 800yds no problem. Unlikes the 5.56 round. And I prefer an M14 not the m110 or m4
I like real rifles not these plastic and aluminum pieces of crap. But if I have to take one I would take the 7.62 M110.
Ive said this before… The M16′s based off the original armalite format in 5.56 are exceptional for close range urban combat. The low recoil + muzzle jump insures peak persision when the chips are down and you can carry much more ammo for longer engagements.
The 7.62x51mm NATO has a much higher ballistic coeficient and thusly superior penetration and stopping power over the 5.56x45mm NATO. But most guns worth mentioning that are chambered for that caliber a heavy and to unwieldly for urban combat.
I say the best is a blend of both worlds. 5.56r’s are good for urban but more distant and armoured call for the 7.62mm+ Both have their own advantages and disadvantages on todays battle fields.
Ive said this before… The M16′s based off the original armalite format in 5.56 are exceptional for close range urban combat. The low recoil + muzzle jump insures peak persision when the chips are down and you can carry much more ammo for longer engagements.
The 7.62x51mm NATO has a much higher ballistic coeficient and thusly superior penetration and stopping power over the 5.56x45mm NATO. But most guns worth mentioning that are chambered for that caliber a heavy and to unwieldly for urban combat.
I say the best is a blend of both worlds. 5.56r’s are good for urban but more distant and armoured call for the 7.62mm+ Both have their own advantages and disadvantages on todays battle fields.
trained on an out of the box 14 and loved itcould kill further then I could see.
given a toy 16 had the trigger fall out after 3 shots, never realized I could have had a choice or would have had a 14
but it was nice to be able to carry a lot of ammo
14 was the most accurate I ever fired followed by a british 303
bought a 308 very poor rifle
During my 1983 to ’02 career, i used the M-14 and it is the best battle rifle EVER made. Also was issued the SR-25 during the Gulf 1, and found it lighter and less recoil than the 14. The Sr-25 was actually the Mk11-the Navy version with suppressor. Choice? In a job where being quiet is everything, gimme that Mk-11. Other than that, give me back my M-14.
My Troop used the SR-25 (XM110) in Iraq in 04-05, very effective, alongside M14/21s, the round was far more effective than 5.56. The real issue is getting the weapons and parts to every unit. Mags, optics, and repair parts are the issue everytime we get a new piece of equipment.
Is it me or is that thing an AR-10? I bet the military spends $10,000 per weapon!
How about just using the M-14 with Fiberglass stock? What is a M-4 now? A CAR-16 with a heavy barrel?
We like to waste money in the military. I have an old M14 that will shoot rings around most high dollar hunting rifles and all military rifles with the exception of national match weapons with there close tolerances. We have M14s already they work well, the troops like them etc… Spend the money on a suppressor for the M14. It will do everything the plastic wonder gun will do and it looks like a rifle and not some comic book artists idea of what a rifle looks like.
I’m surprised there wasn’t more mention of the 6.5mm or 6.8mm. IF memory serves me right all you would have to do is snap on a new complete upper. The same lower and same mags can be used. Ergonomics are the same for the shooters and should cost less $$ that a new “AR-10″. H*ll it could do what the 40S&W did for pistols…… give us something else to argue about LOL.
But I honestly have to say if I had to go out again and had a choice between the two… .308 baby. Budda Budda Budda!
LMAO This is an ideal weapon for squad support through target supression and the elimination of key enemy combatants… much like the SVD has been doing for the old soviet forces since the sixties. Since soldiers are now being fighting in a far more open environment than the 5.56 was designed for, I think it makes damn good sense to get this class of weapon to the troops that need it.
I am a fan of the M-14 it is by far one of the best shooting rifles i have ever used. For targets at ranges of 600m or more it gets the job done. I also like the 300 win mag to reach out and touch the target.
Looks like a nice rifle, ive shot the SR25 before was as accurate as the M24 till about 500 meters then the M24 shot half the group, And i see alot of pepople talkn about the 338 and the 300 those are great rounds but fromn a training stand point its not good, at the AF Sniper school we shot between 60-80 rounds a day for three weeks and could any of you imagine shooting that in 300 win mag for three weeks, the M24 is proven out to 1000 meters on a steady basis.
This looks like a great replacement for the M-14 sniper version of Nam era. I remember seeing film of a sniper team with scoped M-14s taking out a group of 50 NVA in a couple of minutes. This looks like the weapon for that mission.
One shot one kill at a mile or more and this is not the right weapon.
The Army Marksmahship Unit is using the M110 with iron sights as a service rifle in NRA competition. I just finished competing against them at Quantico. They were shooting high X count cleans with the IRON SIGHTS with this rifle at 1000 yards, that's hitting a 20 inch circle every time in changing wind slow fire (single load).
immagine what the rifle is capable of with a good optic.
any questions on weather the system is capable of hitting a man sized target?