I know, that's why I was being an asshatOriginally Posted by Les Pepperoni
I know, that's why I was being an asshat
Semper Gumby, Always Flexible
As a gas-gunner, I agree with the above.
Director Of Sales
Knight's Armament Company
I think it really comes down to what you define as sufficiently accurate. For me, bolt or semi, anything hovering around .5 is good enough for me. My AI, SR25EMC and OBR all hovered around .5 moa for my better groups. I will say it was easier to do consistently with the AI. But interestingly my single best group was with the OBR in the low .3's for 5 at 100.
One nugget I've always loved is feedback from the FBI LE sniper school instructors. (These numbers are not verbatim, but you get the idea).
Prior to 9/11 and GWOT, semi-auto's as a primary sniper rifle was rare. Granted, gas guns were behind the curve at that time, but scoped M14/M1A's and AR15's were sometimes employed.
As the GWOT was in full swing, semi-auto's saw a sharp upswing (despite marginal advancements). 90% semi auto, and a class with only semi's was not uncommon. I assume this is largely "monkey see, monkey do."
Today, while the margin between the semi and bolt gun's accuracy is marginal, class makeup now consists of about 70-80% bolt action. My class was was no different we started out 75% bolt; however, guess how many semi/gas guns were on the line for final qual on the last day...ZERO. With the exception of one guy that was having function/reliability issues, the semi guys opted to use loaner bolt guns out of the FBI armory. Their thought was they would rather trust an unknown bolt gun to a known semi (everyone passed the qual, BTW). I just find that interesting.
Despite mechanical accuracy, I've never seen a semi be as forgiving as a bolt gun. If/when I screw up with my bolt gun, the shot is off .25-.50 MOA downrange. When I screw up with a semi, it seems to show up as a 1.0 MOA mistake downrange. Aside from that, I feel that bolt gun magazines and the manual action lend themselves for more freedom in load development. For example, there are some 260 loads that just won't play nice with your semi auto mags, but will likely work in your bolt gun (mag/action pending).
BGM...Bolt Guns Matter
pointblank4445, its an interesting observation. But I think it outlines what is trying to be achieved. If the passing course of fire held no advantage for a semi, why use one? Indeed I agree and I believe it is easier to be more consistently accurate with a bolt gun. I don't believe this to be a shortcoming of the semi auto rifle, its more a shortcoming of the user. Bolt rifles are more forgiving of user error. However, how many would have used their semi's if the passing course of fire favored the abilities a semi brings to the table? In my opinion, the rise in the use of a semi in operations has been the need to engage multiple targets very quickly. And I would suggest that this is where operational needs probably splinter quickly between mil, fed and local LE. Mil snipers seem to be heading in the direction of semi auto rifles for urban based ops and the magnum bolt gun for those less urban, longer range ops. How many scenarios make sense for local LE to have a 2k yard capable 338lm? However, if we see an outbreak of the attacks we see in Europe, I can see the Semi continuing to gain favor in LE. over a 308 bolt gun. .5 moa matters a lot at 1k, how much does it matter at 50 yards compared to the advantage of follow up shots or multiple engagements a semi brings to the table? IIRC 50 yards is the avg LE sniper engagement distance.
Last edited by shane45; 02-07-2016 at 12:59 PM.
I hesitate to post this for lane reasons but if you read the sniper books by Jack Coughlin, you are offered a reason for this and it has to do with the military context of sniper use. Coughlin relates that in the real world with moving targets and dynamic situations, nobody shoots like they do on the square range. Even the guys who were really good, often required multiple shots to bring down a target. When you combine this with an environment in which there are multiples of these dynamic targets, suddenly a semi-automatic becomes essentially mandatory.
Back in a CONUS world, we're not looking at the same problem. I'd also offer that a lot of LE guys need to deliver a more precise shot than the military guys. Think hit Haji somewhere in the torso versus, shoot hostage taker in the brain stem. Even Hathcock noted that the LE sniper was making a more demanding shot, accuracy wise, than what he delivered. In this context, a bolt gun probably makes more sense - unless things go all Mumbai or Munich.
- It's not the odds, it's the stakes.
- If you aren't dry practicing every week, you're not serious.....
- "Tache-Psyche Effect - a polite way of saying 'You suck.' " - GG
John, Shane, etc...
Please don't read that I'm trying to put out a blanket statement that one system is hands-down better than the other. It's all picking the right tool for the job. Some would argue that a semi is to the point that it can run do everything a bolt gun of the same chambering can do and then some...I beg to differ. Mil snipers and LE snipers are vastly different species; so are PSR guys, BR shooters, and long-range hunters.
Shane, it's funny you mention the Semi's "abilities". You would think with the "faster follow-up" that these semi shooters would have had an advantage in drills/tests where multiple shots were a factor. The truth is, nearly every guy on a semi was either slower or had a lower score do failure to meet accuracy standards. This was most evident during the advanced course qual which was 8 rounds on 1" dots on command, and 2 rounds on 6x 1.5" circles in 60 seconds or something like that. The semi's flat out struggled. Why?...if they have faster follow-up. If I had to wager a guess, I would say their recoil management was not up to par; and most likely, they were fully aware of their limitations, and knew they had to take their time and do everything right to get that bullet where it needed to be.
I already know what you're going to say: "shooter error" or "lack of training". I won't disagree with that. Most of these guys are pretty middle of the road ability wise...and many will stay as such given training time/availability. So my question is in a game that comes down to fractions of an inch (which is the nature of LE sniping), why give them a tool they can't master? Why not use a tool that would insulate against some of the unforgiving nature of the job (remember, we don't pick targets, time or place...we're reactive)?
Last edited by pointblank4445; 02-07-2016 at 02:06 PM.
PB, I can only speculate at why they were slower on a semi. But I cant really think of a scenario where one would need to engage multiple 1" targets at speed so it sounds like the exercise actually favored a bolt gun. I'm going to join John here and state that I am drifting out of my lane a bit but I think if I am taking many shots quickly, Im either engaging a vehicle, or a moving target that's failing to go down. At that point I would think 1" precision is really not an objective. Getting COM hits is. I know for a fact I can clear 5 clay targets at 100 with my semi WAY faster than I can do it with my bolt gun. But how does this translate to a real world scenario? I don't know that answer. What I do know is if I had 2 suicide bombers yelling Alla Akbar running through a parking lot heading for the mall entrance, I would want a semi. If I had a hostage situation, I want the rifle with the most consistent CBS. But I digress and I do agree that the right tool needs to be selected. But to use your point about not picking the target, time or place, could a semi cover more possible scenarios on a callout?
For LE, you can't expect a centermass hit. Our training is for instant neutralization via a shot to the cranial vault for worst-case-scenario. We don't engage vehicles; we engage the driver or suspect IN the vehicle. Speaking from experience, I've had multiple occasions where I would have to make a shot on a suspect who is only exposing part of his face through a cracked door; thus, my aiming point was his eye...77+ yards out in one case. This is just a tip of the iceberg but you can see why I say it's a game of fractions of an inch.
That is actually an excellent question. 75% of the time, a scoped AR15 will do the job just fine. Unless I know otherwise, I often deploy with an SPR and leave the bolt gun in the truck for emergencies. However, that other 25%, I'm glad I had a bolt gun and a hefty scope.
If I had my wish on the ideal tools, I would roll with some sort of suppressed 14.5-16" AR with 1-6x or 1-8x optic and a short, handy 308 like the GAP Gladius or my custom rig. Those would cover the entire scope (pardon my pun) of our duties and allow for a bit more backwards compatibility. My fear with something like a meaty 308 bolt gun, high power optic, and piggy back red dot is that it would be an ultra-heavy jack of all trades, master of none rifle. At best, even the most ideal 308 gas guns are cost prohibitive.
Last edited by pointblank4445; 02-07-2016 at 03:29 PM.
I agree with many or all of the points brought up above. My own experience is that my issued larue shot every bit as well as the HS guns. Not under any class or real stress, but running the quals on the range, showed no advantage to either gun. I think that is a function of the qual, rather than the gun.
No question that mil needs are different from le needs are different from PRS needs. Pick the tool for the job.
Reply With Quote