Notes
Service Product Concepts Links Ordering Testimonials Q & A
Vertical fore grip: If you're like me, you want every advantage available. I didn't really know the
benefits of a vertical fore grip until I used the one on my 11. In the prone position is where I noticed it the
most. Instead of your rifle jumping out of position along with your bipod, you can pull down and back to
stabilize everything with the vertical fore grip, and your follow up shots come natural. If your scoped with
a cheek piece, pressing down with your cheek, and pulling down with your off hand transforms your
firearm into a solid, consistent, high power rifle repeater. The vertical fore grip actually compensates for
the lack of weight in your 91 or 93 compared to a heavier gun like the HK 11 or the 21. I have an Ohio
Rapid Fire 11, and with the fore grip on my SAR-8, I consider both equal when it comes to recovery and
follow up shot time. The 11 can handle more shots due to the heavy barrel, but the follow up shots are
too close to compare. In the off-hand position with a light rifle and a vertical fore grip the stability is as
noticeable, but not as effective as in the prone. Of course, this depends upon what technique of fire you
use (see concepts page).
Is it time for the U.S. military to adopt a belt-fed .338?
29Jan2006
Mid-Weight .338 Lapua
Special Purpose
Vehicle Mounted/Ground Troop
Belt-Fed Machine Gun Concept
The need to fill the effective “range gap” in application of military small arms has always been a concern for front line military forces. The heavy 50cal. M2 BMG and the light 7.62x51/63 machine gun variants have been working together on the battle field for decades, if not approaching a century, to push back the enemy with good and bad attributes. A new breed of medium power machine guns with more mobility than heavy machine guns, and an extended effective range with increased power over the current so-called “medium” machine guns to off-set the advancing mobility capabilities of light-armor designs would help fill-in the previously mentioned “range gap” tremendously.
The external and terminal ballistic characteristics of the .338 projectile (160gr.-300gr.) are nothing short of phenomenal regardless of what cartridge it’s being launched from. The only cartridge with the potential of becoming adopted by a military force chambered in a belt-fed MG is Finland’s .338 Lapua Magnum. Originally a US Navy project, this cartridge is already being chambered in numerous long range sniper rifles, and numerous military units are taking advantage of its performance, reaching out to 1,800 meters and beyond on point targets throughout the world today. It’s beginning to be a genuine alternative to the overly powerful and weighty .50 cal. sniper systems. Military ammunition for the .338 Lapua including: armor piercing, incendiary, tracer, and combinations are currently in production. All that is lacking now is a belt-fed GP machine gun to chamber the cartridge, and the insight from military leaders to notice its enormous potential and advantages over current traditional chamberings.
The Mid-Weight .338 MG has a suggested weight of approximately 25-35 pounds, and a vehicle crew could carry twice the ammo if not more over a .50 BMG, and have an astounding advantage over .30 cal. machine guns against light armored vehicles, and just to mention again, “RANGE”! With the recoil canceling mechanism needed to control the more powerful cartridge in a belt-fed gun, your average machine gunner will have no problem adjusting to the new system. A medium weight (hardware-wise) battalion of mobile assault troops armed with said weaponry would be a devastating, fast acting force able to deal with opposing forces at an uncommonly effective range and with a lesser need for ammo re-supply relative to the ability of the ammunition being utilized.
If there is a need to fill a supporting roll, the Mid-Weight MG .338 would fill the need nicely. All of the advantages for assault vehicles it offers would transfer over to ground troops. Ground troops are at a mobile disadvantage; especially in the Marine Corps. Grunts need all of the effective range they can get. The Medium Weight .338 is a true mid-weight. Physically looking at a .50 cal. round, and a 7.62x51mm round; what falls in-between the two? You’re either going to get more than enough power, limit your access because of weapon system weight , and still hope you have enough ammo to finish the job with a .50 cal., or hope this does it, and pray you can get close enough to do the job with the 7.62? You can see the need to fill a gap just by physically looking at the two cartridges that are mainly available.
The suggestion is not to replace what is available, but to add a more flexible weapon system that would bring a supplemental and balancing factor between the other two dominating weapon systems (i.e. Browning M2, and FN’s M240B/G and variants).
Recommended Specifications:
Tolerances should be relatively loose in working spaces to keep debris from causing excessive friction and jamming.
Gentry Lee Tipton
History of the .338 LAPUA Magnum
The .338 LAPUA Magnum, also known as the 8.6x70mm, was originally developed in 1983 as a long-range sniper cartridge for the U.S. Navy designed to push a 250 grain (16.2 gram) bullet at about 3,000 fps (914 mps). After a series of experiments, the Research Armament Company in the United States designed a round based on a slightly shortened and necked-down .416 Rigby case, building rifles for the Navy that used Hornady bullets and cases from Brass Extrusion Labs. The cartridge went from wildcat to production status when Lapua Ltd. in Finland refined the design at the Navy's request. The standard .416 case was not robust enough to support the average pressures generated by this cartridge, so Lapua kept the outside dimensions the same but beefed up the web area of the case. I should note that average pressures for this cartridge run a bitless than 60,915 psi or 420 MPa, and no single round will exceed 70,052 psi or 483 MPa. Muzzle velocity of production ammunition is a wee bit slower than the original concept, running about 2,950 fps (900 mps) out of the average rifle. This round will still be supersonic at 1.300 yards (1,200 meters), however, while 7.62x51 mm M80ball commonly goes subsonic around 770 yards (704 m).
Accuracy and velocity at long range are greatly facilitated by the design of the Lapua projectiles, which have had a reputation for extraordinary long-range performance since the 1930s, when Lapua developed a special bullet with rebated boat tail designed to give Maxim belt-fed machine guns unprecedented accuracy at ranges of 1,500 meters and beyond, while minimizing barrel erosion commonly associated with boat tail bullets of conventional design. The resulting precision D46 and D47 bullets delivered a lot of gold medals in national, world, and Olympic championships. The new .338 LAPUA Magnum ball round features a novel bullet design based upon that heritage. The B408 Lock Base bullet features much more robust construction and a conspicuously shorter rebated boat tail, which is also distinguished by a slightly pointed base. The B408 Lock Base provides superior accuracy at long range while delivering a flat trajectory. Lapua offers a broad range of tactical and sporting rounds for the .338 LAPUA Magnum, and it would be useful to take a brief look at each of these different rounds.
Retrieved From:
HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE .338 LAPUA MAGNUM
Alan C. Paulson
8 June 2006
Granted, my experience with the .338 Lapua Magnum is nil. Though, I do have an alternative to compare. I have a Ruger .338 Winchester Magnum restocked with a black laminate Microfit stock I installed myself, so it’s not perfect (unfortunately). I put a Schmidt & Bender fixed 10x Police Marksman scope on it, and I haven’t felt bad about that decision once. I load a Sierra 250gr. Match BTHP loaded long (Case overall length: 3.482) in front of 59gr of IMR4350 using new Remington brass and CCI large rifle magnum primers that gives a velocity of approximately 2,310fps at the muzzle. These loads will not load into your magazine. Maybe drop one in the chamber, and one in the magazine to get two rounds in the gun. I shot a one-hole-group at 100m with a similar load of 60gr of H4350. Both loads are very close in performance level, but I haven’t shot the IMR loading enough to have duplicated the H4350 one holer yet, though I did obtain a <.75in 100m group with the IMR loading. The day was getting long, and my shooting eye was beginning to fatigue when I shot the IMR loading. The bullet seated further out has really turned this relatively stock rifle into a precision instrument normally only found in rifles built from the ground up for this type of accuracy. Kudos to Ruger! The loads listed are reduced loadings of the full powered loadings in standard high performance .338 rounds. Recoil from standard .338 win.mag. loadings are hard to take for multiple shots. Expect a bit more recoil compared to a full powered 30/06 load with listed loadings, but not in any way uncomfortable. As mentioned earlier, my eye was worn out from looking through a scope way before my shoulder was ready to call it quits! I’m in the process of increasing the charge of IMR 4350 to 71gr. Max loading for Ruger only! I’m expecting 2,700 fps. If a long, long shot is to be made, this load should take care of it! I’ll evaluate this loading for accuracy soon, and post results right here, so stand by for a progress report.
Gentry Lee Tipton
11 June 2006
I wound up firing a lot of .45ACP, .45 Super, and .454 Casull before I started to shoot for groups in the .338. I know, bad idea. I was too hyped up to shoot good groups with the .338 IMR59gr.load. I did have a friend that shot a .50 inch, 3 shot group, and with two of the rounds so close in the same hole, it was hard to tell two rounds went through it, but sure enough it was opened up larger than a single shot. I did shoot a sub MOA, 3 shot group, with the 71gr. load. I'd say it was close to .70 inches. I only shot one group with that load. I guess I was forced to get into a better shooting position to deal with the recoil, and it showed on the target. With an IMR4350 71gr. load, and a 250gr. Sierra Matchking, I have a true 1000 meter, and beyond, rifle. With ballistic charts from Sierra, I know exactly what the bullet is doing at a given velocity. All I have to do is dial it up on my Schmidt & Bender, and first round hit probability is extemely high. The restocked Ruger with/Schmidt & Bender set up cost about 2/3rds less or better than a high performance .338 Lapua Magnum. I would hate to imagine trying to reload, and find affordable ammo, for the Lapua! The Lapua has a case capacity advantage that allows it to beat the Winchester Magnum up to an additional 200fps. If you have unlimited funds, then have at it. I have around $2,600 in the Win.Mag. not including reloading components.
Gentry Tipton
17 May 2007
I'm not one to slander a company or product on a whim, and I do not intend this site to do so on a regular basis. Only after hands-on review of a product would there be any grounds for questioning its quality or performance. After returning from Iraq in 2003, I wanted a project rifle to help me better understand the HK delayed roller blowback design, and have something unique at the same time. So, after finding out that HK had definitely made, though very few, HK 32k (7.62x39) rifles I wanted to get my hands on at least something that resembled it. It combines a larger bore firearm with a German make. You can't get any more "Sturmgewehr" than that without actually having an original MkB42 or MP44. I'm not going to mention names. If you know what is out there, I shouldn't have to. I did not expect the gun to work when I got it. No suprises there! The modifications I had to perform on the gun to get it to function were not that significant, i.e. swaping out parts, building a cartridge ramp etc...but was a real pain in the butt nonetheless. The real surprise was that after I did get the gun to actually function, the receiver started to give (bend) sinificantly during a 30 round string of fire with standard Wolff steel case ammo. The receiver bending was not my main complaint! It was incorporating a G3 and a 33 design together for really no good reason, and compromising the original design itself. I would like to see someone else get an automatic to function where, after the round is stripped from the magazine, still has a few inches to go (with nothing to control its direction) before it is to be guided into the chamber from contact of the bullet nose! What were the engineers thinking?!?!
Service Product Concepts Links Ordering Testimonials Q & A