Without discussing the 2A, if you own a sniper rifle like me, tell us why.

Without getting into a debate over the 2A, if you own a "sniper rifle", like myself, please tell us why?

Here is mine:

A Ruger M77 Mark II All-Weather (.270)

mine includes a 1 - 4.5X adjustable scope (not shown in picture)

Here are some of the reasons I own this sniper rifle:
1. It doubles as a great hunting rifle :)
2. It offers a great balance among power, trajectory, range, and "kick" which I don't feel are offered in handguns, shotguns, or "assualt weapons"
3. I enjoy the challenge of attempting to shoot the 10-ring at ranges of 100-400 yards.
4. It looks cool
5. It sounds even cooler!

And most of all
6. Because I want one

Those are some of the reasons I own a "sniper rifle." There are even more reasons why I own this model.

If you own a "sniper rifle" too, please tell us why.

Good One!...unless you weren't joking:)

For duck hunting

Funny you should ask. :)


The best piece in my C&R collection is a post-WWII PU Mosin Nagant 91/30 Sniper rifle. It looks a lot like the picture above. I've never fired it, because it's in such good condition. :) After I bought it I had to go buy a run-of-the-mill generic WWII production 91/30 for $60 so that I'd have one to shoot.

Here's a good article on the 91-30 Sniper. There's also a nice section on how to spot a fake 91/30 Sniper.

I bought the 91/30 Sniper just for the sake of my C&R collection.

Most recently, I bought a Swiss K31. It has an unusual straight-pull bolt design. They are only $90 from the local wholesaler. I highly recommend them. They are very accurate.

Thanks for the links.

If you feel like it, tell us why you own them.

For these rifles, it's essentially just for the love of precision machinery and history. I am a history buff, and old guns are an affordable concrete link to history. Historical, but perfectly functional rifles are available as low as $40. In the $100-200 range there are an incredible variety of rifles from all over the world going back 100 years -- Russian, German, Czech, Yugoslavian, Spanish, Chinese, Romanian, British, US, etc. (Any firearms made before 1898 are antiques, are not subject to most federal restrictions on firearms, and are worth more simply due to that fact.) Even my fairly rare 91/30 Sniper is probably only worth $700-800. Not bad for a very rare collectible in any hobby. (The publicity from the movie "Enemy at the Gates" has not hurt the rifles value, either. ;))

In addition to being an interesting historical relic, the Swiss K31 is a marvel of precision engineering. Instead of a typical bolt that is turned manually by the operator, the K31 bolt is pulled and pushed straight in and out. The body of the bolt turns itself 90 degrees clockwise to lock solidly in the last inch or so of travel. It makes for faster operation, but is very complex to design and manufacture. You would expect to Swiss to be the ones to master it. :)

I picked up one from SOG last month for under $100. I paid the $10 hand select fee and got an amazing tiger stripe stock and a barrel that is 90% blued. It's a beauty.

It is great to shoot and very accurate with the iron sights. The machining on the receiver and bolt group are superb workmanship.

But I did wonder how that kind of fine clearance machining would have held up on Omaha beach after being dropped in the sand or in the mud of the South Pacific in WWII. Good thing the Swiss were neutral.

I'd love to find a scope for it that didn't require any machining or changing the original military configuration but so far no luck.

After having a Ruger M77MKII in .300 Winchester Magnum and getting the crap beat out of me on the weekends, I decided to get a heavier gun with just a little less cartridge. Ergo my Remington 700 PDM in .308 Winchester.

This pic isn't my rifle, I have a different scope, but you can see what I am shooting.

I guess you could snipe with it. I use it for deer hunting.

that hunting rifles could be used as sniper rifles. The gun I showed I use only for hunting deer and shooting at the range...but I don't see why it couldn't be classified as a sniper rifle.

It (a Remington 700 .338, I think, with an 8x scope... I haven't taken possession of it yet) was his favorite rifle, but I'm thinking of selling it since I don't really have any use for it, but I would have a use for some cash. I think he chose me to give it to because I was the only grandkid who ever took him up on his offer to go deer hunting with him, but I don't have any plans to go hunting again anytime in the near future. Bagging one deer was enough for me. Been there, done that.

About how much would that be worth, ballpark, so I don't get ripped off when I sell it?

http://www.pmulcahy.com/sporting_rifles/us_sporting_rifles.htm

If so my rifle is worth about $2500, not counting the scope. That's more than double what I thought it would be.

is that half the time what you end up with is a list of airsoft, counterstrike, and other game sites. That appears to be a site for a game of some kind.

I don't know what Remington 700s are going for these days but I guess it would depend on the stock, the barrel, and the overall condition. What flavor of .338 it is might also make a difference. The scope would certainly make a big difference as well. If it's a discontinued model it could be worth more too.


D__S just bought a 700, you should PM him.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x58549

Even brand new, without the scope it's worth less than half that (and these are manufacturers suggested retail prices).

http://www.remington.com/firearms/msrp

The 700 is easily one of the top 3 hunting rifles ever produced (I'm guessing that the Ruger 10/22 and Winchester M-70 have to be up there
in numbers). There's millions of them out there.

There's 2 basic styles: the ADL and the BDL (the BDL is a little fancier and has a few extras). And then there's variations and changes in those styles.

Unless your Grandfathers rifle is some sort of limited production, scarce model, really low serial number (or benchmark # like 100,000 or 10,000,000), it's probably not worth a great deal of money.

The overall condition will really determine the price. Condition of the chamber, throat and bore is the most important.

Check these sites for comparison pricing.

http://www.gunbroker.com

http://www.gunsamerica.com/2221/2221-random-1.htm

Depending on your state's laws, you should be able to sell it in a private transaction without going through a licensed dealer (I think CA, requires it, but that might only be for handguns... I'm not sure).

Some gun shops will sell it for you on a consignment for a percentage of the sale.

If you decide to sell it online to a person out of state, it has to be shipped to a dealer with an FFL.

I think it's this one

http://www.remington.com/firearms/centerfire/700cdl.htm

and those msrp numbers are a lot closer to what I expected them to be than the earlier link I posted.

I'm pretty sure I remember him saying it was a .338, though, but they don't list that one on their site. I guess I'll have to look into that. Maybe it was a limited edition, similar to the 35 Whelen that's currently listed there.
http://www.remington.com/firearms/centerfire/700cdl_35.htm

Worth 20 bucks, tops. Get rid of it soon as you can.


BUT.... since I've got such a kind heart, I'll give you $50 cash.


:)

I own to a sniper rifle is a sears "ted williams" model 34 semi-auto .22 rifle LOL, though I almost brought an Arcadia Arms 8mm mauser with me when I moved. It was an explosion waiting to happen though, so I didn't

It IS extremely accurate though, and with subsonic rounds/silencer, I imagine it could be used as a sniper rifle, if for nothing else than short range.

Currently, its sighted for 100 yards, and our daughters and I make cheap fun of shooting the numbers/letters out of playing cards, though the playing cards last alot longer than a box of amunition at that range.

I own it because...

1. It was handed from my grandfather to my father, then to myself.

2. Its got to be a collectors item by now.

3. Its extremely cheap and simple to shoot for me and our daughters. We enjoy it.

Question: Would a rifle firing a .17 HMR qualify as a sniper rifle?
Not that it really matters, but I am somewhat intrigued by that round, and have thought on and off about looking into an inexpensive model for longer distance target shooting, like a ruger 10/17 or similar.

I was thinking of buying something in .17 HMR myself, but I'm I bit reluctant unless I can be certain that the ammo will be around for a long time, or readly available (it's not like you can reload for it).

Now there's another .17 rimfire on the block.

http://www.clcweb.net/Shooting/17_Mach_2/17_mach_2.html

(makes me wonder if this will turn out to be a Beta .vs VHR contest).

If the newer cartridge wins out, this is going to be a must have!

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/News-04-16-2004C.html

Thanks for the link. I had completely missed Ruger's announcement of the new Mark III pistols. I have a stainless Mark II, so I'm not going to run out and buy one, but they look nice. I would like the more traditional magazine release. (I wouldn't buy a defensive pistol with a magazine disconnect, but I don't mind one on a target pistol.)

Since the .17HMR and .17HM2 are both Hornady cartridges, I don't know how the battle will play out. I'll probably stick with the .22LR for a while. :)

I bought it because I like to collect "look alike" weapons of current military loadouts. I don't have the money to plink down on an M24, so this is the next best thing. Bought in 1993. I don't hunt. I don't participate in competitions. I pretty much only collect and occasionally go to the range to "plink" at 200 yeards with it. Shoots at about 1/2 MOA.

How do you like it?

http://www.riflescopes.com/departments/231/rifle_scopes/super_sniper.htm

That's it. It's a 10x42 with the rear focus. I love it. VERY clear optics and perfect zero. I like the target turrets with the 1/4 MOA adjustments. Definitely worth the $300 it cost me. I don't have the $$ for a Leupold, but this one is almost as good for less than half the price.

that is waaaay too accurate for anyone to need in a caliber that has been used beyond 800 meters.

:hi:

Congrats on a fine weapon.

Wait a minute, .270, I was thinking 7.62 NATO. .270 is not a proper sniper round.

:eyes:

I suspect CA as well.

Before the laws (and the AG's sham of "consumer protection" regs), took effect here in 1998, there were plenty of MK-II's around. Now, no Ruger semi-autos produced after Sept 98 can be sold in MA (no mag disconnect or loaded chamber indicator).

I used to own a KMK678GC (slabside), but sold it a couple of years before the law went into effect. Now, a person or dealer can ask $300.00 - $400.00 for a well used standard MK-II and it would be sold in a day or two.


"Since the .17HMR and .17HM2 are both Hornady cartridges, I don't know how the battle will play out".

Good point. Their manufacturing line has limitations. I imagine they'd use their resources to manufacture the cartridge with the highest demand.

Good point. Their manufacturing line has limitations. I imagine they'd use their resources to manufacture the cartridge with the highest demand.

Upon further research, I suspect the .17HMR will remain as the choice for rifles, where it's length is not a problem. The Ruger 10/22 is available in .17HMR.

The .17HM2 uses the same bullet as the .17HMR, but with a short case. The .17HM2 has about the same overall length as a .22LR. That makes it suitable for handguns like the Ruger Mark III. That's probably the only reason they designed the .17HM2.

...I don't have any scoped rifles. My wife has a 3030 Winchester though.

So is this what VPC is calling a "sniper" rifle now, a deer rifle?

So you own these monsters, putting people at risk just so you can hear cool sounds? The second ammendment is not about being stupid, is about a MILITIA bearing arms.

thanks.


I can always use a good chuckle.

but someday I would like to own one.

They just generally seem to be useful weapons.

Good for hunting if I ever desire or need to.

Good for target shooting.

Good for some self defense situations (albeit inside a home a shotgun or pistol might be better).

Good for sniping if the need ever arises.

I guess there are several rifles around the house that could qualify as "sniper" rifles. They range from Rem 700 BDL's in .270, 30-06, amd .308. There are also three Weatherbys in .300 WBY mag., .375 H&H mag, and 30-06.

I also have a Mosin, an SK, a Mauser, and a Springfield that were designed for that purpose that I keep as collectibles.

Regarding the .17 HMR as a possible sniper: I have two, an NEF single shot and a Henry lever. The NEF is a tack driver and great for benchrest. The lever is handy when going after groundhogs in the fields out back. The only problem is that they're far too loud for the sniper to get away cleanly because the effective range in relatively short (I can print 2" at 200 yds) because a 17 grain bullet is going to get pushed all over the place by the slightest breeze.

I think the .17 HMR is here to stay. Every gun shop I've visited for the past year or so can't keep them on the shelves. I'm not so sure about the .17 Aguilla or .17HM2 because I haven't done any reasearch on numbers.

Remington .308 700 Sendero (now sold as the VS) with 26" fluted bbl. The scope is a Leupold Mark 4 6.5-20X50 Long Range Tactical with M1 Target knobs. The rifle consistently shoots under .3 MOA (using 168gr. match ammo) whether off the Harris BRS bipod, sandbags, or my pack. I shoot out to 600 yards regularly, but I can use the rifle out to 1000 yards - Just have to switch to a 175gr. load to stay supersonic out that far. Unfortunately, I don't get a chance to practice at that range as often as I'd like.

I use it for hunting, competition, range practice, and other things.

My Howa 30.06 was a wonderful surprise. Out of the box it was a little inconsistent with the standard 168gr. and 180gr. loads but after my gunsmith bedded the action and dropped in a Timney trigger, it shoots under .5 MOA. It carries a 3-9x40 Leupold scope. This has become my favorite hunting rifle because it's several pounds lighter than the Remington and the 22" bbl is easier to move around with in the brush. I liked this rifle so much I bought a one in .240 for my wife.

Though the .240 is on the light side, any of these rifles would be suitable for precision tactical work.

The point (I think) that you're skating around is that a so-called sniper rifle is really just a hunting rifle. I agree. When the anti-liberty brigade starts harping about evil "sniper rifles" they're really talking about any bolt-action long gun. It would be impossible to distinguish between a "sniper rifle" and any other good hunting weapon.

I have a few. I hunt primarily with a 300 win mag, 25-06, and a 308 win. Range time is always fun too and teaching my kids how to shoot well brings back memories from my youth. I have a few "just in case" rifles and shotguns that dont get fired too often. My wife and oldest son have learned how to use them competently but, they stay in the safe most of the time. Im well stocked on ammunition and I want it to stay that way.

We own the same sniper rifle! I use mine 1 week out of the year, starting on december 1st...my birthday and also opening firearms deer season.

Isn't it a beauty!!!

I really like mine. Such a flat trajectory, and just the right kick.

This November, dinner will be served, courtesy of THE TOWN!!!!

But I don't shoot it for "fun". It kicks a little too much for a plinker. I check it for zero and make necessary adjustments before deer season. I MIGHT shoot 10 rounds through it during this once-a-year session. The only other time it's shot is while hunting (at deer or the occasional coyote).
OP

I own my rifles and other arms for the only reason the 2nd amend gives to own them, it is my right to bear arms.

I don't need a reason.

"He, thinking I was about to shoot him in self-defense, tried to shoot me in self-defense.....So I shot him in self-defense."

Now you can shoot someone in self-defense even if they're a zip code away!

:evilgrin:

In case you're wondering, I'm just joking.

As a serious point, "Because I want one" is never reasonable justification, you have to explain why you want one. Otherwise it's just mindless, uncontrolled consumerism - there are many things that certain people want but which the majority of people believe they shouldn't be allowed to have (heroin, nuclear weapons, child porn). Wanting something is not to justify having it.

And no, I'm not suggesting that guns are as bad as the other things listed above....I would suggest that people who live in London shouldn't be allowed to own 6 litre SUVs when they're clearly going to clog roads, waste fuel and PISS ME OFF.....

of not bringing up the 2A, but I guess need to respond to your comment...

As a serious point, "Because I want one" is never reasonable justification, you have to explain why you want one.

When it is a right, as the 2A gives me the right to own this rifle, then just wanting one is good enough. Much like one can go read objectionable books, or hear objectionable speakers, or listen to whatever music one wishes to, because it is a right, a gun that is legal to own can be had just because I want it.

But thought I'd share the fantastic line from CSI:Miami (by which I mean the ONLY fantastic line):

"So, Kelly, what do we get when we have a six-foot man lying down with a three-foot rifle?"
"Hot flashes? Or is that just me?"

:evilgrin:

Is that like an assault rifle or saturday night special?

I own a .223 Ruger heavy barrel target rifle. (3 on a dime at 100 yards.)

I own a .223 broom stick Howa for a field chuck rifle. (Unused 6 years now??) Zero chucks or other critters. Don't like hunting as much as target shooting.

I own a Winchester .308 heavy barrel; target rifle w/Leupold scope. The .223 bullet at 50 grains is too light. I wanted 168 grains for more mass so the wind don't blow it around at 500 yards. Trigger is crap, still need to tweak and tune.

Target shooting for the 10X ring requires, patience, breath control and Zen.

Target shooting only requires a .22lr. The size of the observed bullseye at 50m could be made the same as it would be at 500m, so your marksmanship skills could be readily tested at shorter distances. Remember, the beltway snipers were killing people at 100m, so if they only had .22lr they would not have had an easy time getting away due to the shorter range.

Heavy barrel centerfire rifles are a menace because no deer hunter needs to be less than one MOA to get a humane kill. Such accuracy by hunters is never needed: No one needs to shoot tiny woodchucks or prairie dogs, because that's what humane traps are for. Think of what tragedies could happen if some gun owner decided to be Lee Harvey Oswald with his super accurate rifle. (yes, HIS, because women know better than to own death items)

.223 should be banned because it goes forever and can't be used for deer hunting because it is only good for killing people (that's why the military uses it). All centerfire rifle ammo buyers should be registered with the government, including every single round they buy, just like DC does with DC rifle owners.

In fact, centerfire rifles should be banned; shotguns work just as well for hunting, and most shots are taken less than 100m, anyway. All shotgun ammo and their owners should be registered.

:hangover:

When my wife goes shooting w/me; she uses my rifle and shoots better. I get stuck cleaning and reloading for her.

W/a 65 grain .223 Winchester PP bullet; ok for small deer. Plenty of energy, requires good placement on target. Not recommended (my opinion) but Winchester has produced data in their reloading manuals for it.

.22lr; part of target shooting requires the shooter to read the wind, sun, and mirrage. .22lr offers no challenge; too simple.

Muzzle loaders w/sabbots are approaching the accuracy of centerfires. Becomes a function of weighing the powder. Maybe we should limit the accuracy of powder scales. Some rifled shotguns w/copper sabbots are getting up there as well.

Summary: It's the criminals, not the average Jane/Joe citizen. I'm still in favor of registering criminals before guns.

I was not aware that they managed to suspend the laws of physics for the .223.

Are you suggesting that guns would be safer if they were less accurate?

the .223 is a hypervelocity round that travels too fast for legitimate use. That's why it should be banned, and all .223 owners should be institutionalized.

Guns would be WAY safer if they were less accurate. Imagine all the people who would have been saved if the person doing a driveby wasn't able to hit who HE was aiming at (yes HE)

:hangover:

"Remember, the beltway snipers were killing people at 100m, so if they only had .22lr they would not have had an easy time getting away due to the shorter range."

Are you suggesting a 22 at 100 yards wouldnt be lethal? If that is what you meant, you need to check your facts.

the low-powered .22lr is just the same as a BB gun. In fact, we should ban .22lr. because BB guns could do the same thing, without causing death to children.

:hangover:

I tried to find humor, logic, sarcasm, something in there, but I came up short. I have NO clue what the hell your intentions are, but your facts are seriously lacking.