Why sniper rifle are bolt action?
michel
Hello, I was wondering why are snipers rifle's bolt action and not
semi-auto. I have a 22 cal semi-auto rifle and (mind you I'm not the
greatest shooter) I can get decent grouping at 300 feets. Thank you,
Michel.
JewBoy
The extra camming force available on a manually operated bolt allows for
tighter chamber dimensions than on a semi-auto resulting in better
accuracy. In a bolt gun the chamber can be sized so the bullet
completely engages the rifleing without any freebore. In a semi auto, a
chamber that tight could keep the bolt from locking. Most gas operated
guns have a gas cylinder hanging off the barrel and a piston that
reciprocates inside it These moving parts have a detrimental effect on
the vibrations of the barrel when the rifle is fired. The lock work in a
bolt gun is better suited to the fine trigger desired in a sniper rifle.
Military triggers are designed to reduce accidental discharges and are
heavier and have a longer pull. Bolt guns can be chambered in caliber's
other than 7.62x51, such as .300 Winchester Magnum, which gives better
long range performance.
--
JewBoy
Cry Havoc! ...and let slip the dogs of war.
John Lydic
OPFOR 1 wrote:
>
> >Subject: Why sniper rifle are bolt action?
> >From: michel <dup...@total.net>
> I asked that question once and gotten 3 answers. First a bolt action allows
> for absolute control of the round and when engaged is almost a solid piece of
> steel. That allows for little if any movement thereby increasing accuracy.
> Secondly when you consider that you have only 1 shot a person tends to aim
> better and consider more enviornmental factors such as wind, humidity and
> range drop. Third the reciever on most bolt action rifles are
> stronger/thicker than most semi automatic rifle. This in turn allows less flex
> when the round is engaged.
1-3 are good answers but add #4: a sealed breech firearm (bolt or
hinge action)
allows a higher & more consistant gas pressure. Semi-autos use either
recoil
or gas to operate the mechanism and while they can be made fairly
accurate, the
gas pressure may be inconsistant. Most sub-MOA (Minute Of Angle)
firearms are
bolt action and have heavy barrels both for rigidity and to avoid
abberations (sic?)
from heat. The are also accurate at 800-1000 meters.
For example: My sealed breech (hinge action) T/C Contender yields
10-20% higher
muzzle velocities that either my semi-autos or revolvers for
comparable loads.
--
John Lydic
KA8LVZ / NNN0WWJ
NRA Life
NRA Certified Instructor
NRA Training Counselor
ly...@netexp.net Home
ly...@idt.ch.etn.com Work
"Tolerance is the virtue of those with no convictions of their own"
Chris Hanson
The thing snipers and long range competitors look for in their equipment is
consistancy. A bolt action rifle reciever is more rigid and, if high
quality or tuned correctly, postions the round in the chamber the exact way
each time. It is possible for a semi-auto rifle to shoot as well as a bolt
action rifle but with the semis increased action parts it is harder and more
expensive for the action to be tuned and stay tuned, look at the HK PSG-1.
Also accuracy is realitive to the shooter and his target. Sniper normaly
look for sub-moa groups out to 1000 meters. If you are interest in sniping
or long range shooting check out the book the Ultimate Sniper.
michel wrote in message <344421...@total.net>...
OPFOR 1
>Message-id: <344421...@total.net>
>
>Hello, I was wondering why are snipers rifle's bolt action and not
>semi-auto. I have a 22 cal semi-auto rifle and (mind you I'm not the
>greatest shooter) I can get decent grouping at 300 feets. Thank you,
>Michel.
I asked that question once and gotten 3 answers. First a bolt action allows
for absolute control of the round and when engaged is almost a solid piece of
steel. That allows for little if any movement thereby increasing accuracy.
Secondly when you consider that you have only 1 shot a person tends to aim
better and consider more enviornmental factors such as wind, humidity and
range drop. Third the reciever on most bolt action rifles are
stronger/thicker than most semi automatic rifle. This in turn allows less flex
when the round is engaged.
I would also point out that there are many fine semi automatic sniper rifles.
The ones that come up to mind first are the HK PGS-1, M21, Dragunov SDVS and
SR-25. Of course you need to look at the 2 differing philosophies of sniping.
One Philosophy is one shot one kill. The other is long ranged aimed fire in
support of field troops. Marines are generally great scout/snipers with tales
of selective target engagement. Soldiers are very good at providing selective
area suppression fire. Both have their good points and bad points.
Nick Hull
In article <344453...@netexp.net>, ly...@netexp.net wrote:
....
> For example: My sealed breech (hinge action) T/C Contender yields
> 10-20% higher
> muzzle velocities that either my semi-autos or revolvers for
> comparable loads.
>
In the same barrel length? I can believe the revolver loses some gas, but
the semi-autos should have negligible losses.
--
Free men own guns - slaves don't <http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/>
nh...@mindspring.com
Mike Sumner
michel wrote:
>
> Hello, I was wondering why are snipers rifle's bolt action and not
> semi-auto. I have a 22 cal semi-auto rifle and (mind you I'm not the
> greatest shooter) I can get decent grouping at 300 feets. Thank you,
> Michel.
One word, accuracy. Unless your going for a $10,000 HK PSG-1 it is
almost impossable to make a semi auto more acurate than a quality bolt
gun. And to a sniper, 100 yards is really darn close! Marine snipers
zero their M40A1's at 600 yards I think, and the Army at 300 yards. You
mention "decent groupings" at 100 yards. For a quality bolt gun in asy
.308 WIN groups should be 3/4" of an inch MAX or less if the shooter
does his part.
=========================================================================
Mike Sumner NRA# LRB0433C, IDPA# A00516, CRPA# T213738
psyc...@smartlink.net **Email for PGP
key** http://www.smartlink.net/~psycomik
Unoffical GSSF page at:http://www.smartlink.net/~psycomik/gssf/gssf.htm
=========================================================================
OPFOR 1
>. You
>mention "decent groupings" at 100 yards. For a quality bolt gun in asy
>.308 WIN groups should be 3/4" of an inch MAX or less if the shooter
>does his part.
That is the modern interpretation of precision military shooting. Remember
that that Moisin Nagant in the hands of the Soviets at Stalingrad were good
for around 1.3 MOA to 2.5 MOA. Then we have the 1903A4 Sniper rifle that was
good for 1 to 1.3 MOA. The Lee Enfield and P14 Sniper rifles of WW2 good for
.75 MOA to 1.4 MOA etc... You basically want something doing from .25 MOA to
1.5 MOA and in a pinch 2 MOA. Of course that is assuming an 800 yd target
effective range. If you for some reason want to engage enemies at 300 yd
effective range then I guess you could go up to 2.25 MOA maybe 2.5 MOA If you
are going for less than 300 yds why bother with a sniper rifle?
As for cheap sniper rifles. I hear the Savage 110 is good, the Pre 64
Winchester 70 and the Remington 700 ( in order of better and higher price in
my area). As a side note I had a Lee Enfield stock No4 ,which I free floated
the barrel and polished some parts, that got me 100yd groups of .5 inch. Not
that I can say that they will all do that, but heck its cheap and definitely
reliable. ( For those that want to know I think it was 80 degrees, moderate
humidity, 1 -3 mph crosswind, standard .303 round and slow firing. Groups
openned up after going to rapid fire and returning to slow firing. Proably
due to excess heat.)
Marty Jones
JewBoy wrote:
>
> michel wrote:
> >
> > Hello, I was wondering why are snipers rifle's bolt action and not
> > semi-auto. I have a 22 cal semi-auto rifle and (mind you I'm not the
> > greatest shooter) I can get decent grouping at 300 feets. Thank you,
> > Michel.
>
> tighter chamber dimensions than on a semi-auto resulting in better
> accuracy. In a bolt gun the chamber can be sized so the bullet
> completely engages the rifleing without any freebore. In a semi auto, a
> chamber that tight could keep the bolt from locking. Most gas operated
I have to agree on this, and it may be one of the
most significant reasons for enhanced accuracy -
the ability to closely control ammunition
tolerances. I've handloaded thousands of rounds
since '83, and I routinely neck-size and custom-
seat for accuracy in both bolt rifles and my
T/C contender.
> guns have a gas cylinder hanging off the barrel and a piston that
> reciprocates inside it These moving parts have a detrimental effect on
> the vibrations of the barrel when the rifle is fired. The lock work in a
> bolt gun is better suited to the fine trigger desired in a sniper rifle.
Good point, a hair trigger wouldn't make
much sense in a self-loader!
> Military triggers are designed to reduce accidental discharges and are
> heavier and have a longer pull. Bolt guns can be chambered in caliber's
> other than 7.62x51, such as .300 Winchester Magnum, which gives better
> long range performance.
You can get semi's chambered in some pretty good
long-distance rounds!
> --
> JewBoy
>
> Cry Havoc! ...and let slip the dogs of war.
Best regards,
Marty Jones (Gentileboy?)
mjones at ti.com
mike.e...@pclink.com
Rifles are individual. My 3006 BAR is more acurate than my 700 BDL.
in 3006. Both are fine MOA guns but I always shoot better with the
BAR. By the way, the BAR is available in 300 WM.
Mn Mike
JewBoy <Jew...@nazi.com> wrote:
>michel wrote:
>>
>> Hello, I was wondering why are snipers rifle's bolt action and not
>> semi-auto. I have a 22 cal semi-auto rifle and (mind you I'm not the
>> greatest shooter) I can get decent grouping at 300 feets. Thank you,
>> Michel.
>The extra camming force available on a manually operated bolt allows for
>tighter chamber dimensions than on a semi-auto resulting in better
>accuracy. In a bolt gun the chamber can be sized so the bullet
>completely engages the rifleing without any freebore. In a semi auto, a
>chamber that tight could keep the bolt from locking. Most gas operated
>guns have a gas cylinder hanging off the barrel and a piston that
>reciprocates inside it These moving parts have a detrimental effect on
>the vibrations of the barrel when the rifle is fired. The lock work in a
>bolt gun is better suited to the fine trigger desired in a sniper rifle.
>Military triggers are designed to reduce accidental discharges and are
>heavier and have a longer pull. Bolt guns can be chambered in caliber's
>other than 7.62x51, such as .300 Winchester Magnum, which gives better
>long range performance.
ED WELCH
-> > Hello, I was wondering why are snipers rifle's bolt action and not
-> > semi-auto. I have a 22 cal semi-auto rifle and (mind you I'm not
-> the
-> The extra camming force available on a manually operated bolt allows
-> for tighter chamber dimensions than on a semi-auto resulting in
-> better
I'm curious, how does a lever-action compare with the bolt-action as for
as accuracy goes?
Ed
Louis Boyd
ED WELCH wrote:
> I'm curious, how does a lever-action compare with the bolt-action as far
> as accuracy goes?
As a general rule, bolt actions are more accurate than lever actions.
Some of the reasons include:
1. Having a tube magazine strapped to the barrel with metal bands.
The loose bullets and varying number will modify the way the barrel
flexes with each shot.
2. Then stock is usually two piece. If the forestock is attached to
the barrel, the pressure applied to the forestock by the hand will
be a variable.
3. The way the bolt locks isn't as rigid as most bolt actions.
4. The way the shoulder stock attaches to the receiver isn't as rigid
and repeatable as a bedded bolt action receiver.
5. Few lever actions are chambered for cartridges which are known
for having good velocity consistancy. I've never seen a
lever action in 6PPC. There are some in .308 and similar
cartridges.
All that said, their are a few lever action designs which eliminate
many of the above problems, and some of them shoot better than some
bolt actions. It's not the lever itself which causes the problems.
As for a sniper rifle, a lever action isn't very easy to shoot from
the prone position. Without a floating forestock you can't lay the
barrel on bags without blowing it's accuracy completely. And because
of the lever you either have to raise the rifle or lay it on it's side
to eject and chamber. That's not consistant with rapid accurate fire.
Lever actions work ok offhand, and maybe as good as anything from a
horse.
Where a lever action shines is as a lightweight fast pointing carbine
with lower cost and possibly better reliability than a semi-auto.
There are reasons though why you never see one in combat. The last
major battle I can think of where lever actions played a winning roll
was when Custer lost at the Little Bighorn.
Lou Boyd
FCSA - NRA
Rich Pierson
Louis Boyd wrote:
> Where a lever action shines is as a lightweight fast pointing carbine
> with lower cost and possibly better reliability than a semi-auto.
> There are reasons though why you never see one in combat. The last
> major battle I can think of where lever actions played a winning roll
> was when Custer lost at the Little Bighorn.
>
> Lou Boyd
> FCSA - NRA
And if I remember correctly, he did not have them and lost.
Or were they using the ones that loaded through the
stock [forget the name/model] that were repeaters.
At least that is what I have seen in all the depictions
of custer at LBH.
--
*************************************************
Richard J. Pierson
Lucent Technologies -LCCC
Liberty Corners NJ
Voice 908.580.8901
Fax 908.580.6289
*************************************************
Louis Boyd
Rich Pierson wrote:
>
> Louis Boyd wrote:
> > Where a lever action shines is as a lightweight fast pointing carbine
> > with lower cost and possibly better reliability than a semi-auto.
> > There are reasons though why you never see one in combat. The last
> > major battle I can think of where lever actions played a winning roll
> > was when Custer lost at the Little Bighorn.
> >
> > Lou Boyd
> > FCSA - NRA
>
> And if I remember correctly, he did not have them and lost.
> Or were they using the ones that loaded through the
> stock [forget the name/model] that were repeaters.
> At least that is what I have seen in all the depictions
> of custer at LBH.
That's what I meant. The indians had a fair number
of Henry repeaters. Custer's men had mostly military issue
single shots -- Springfield trapdoor's, I believe.
Custer himself liked to carry a .50-70 Remington rolling
block for buffalo, also a single shot. I don't know if he
had it at the battle though. The repeaters were on the
winning side.
Gioll
> I was wondering why are snipers rifle's bolt action and not
>-> > semi-auto.
There are severalsemi-auto sniper rifles, the Russian Dragoniev, H&K have a few
models on the G-/91 frame, several companies produce rifles based on the AR
seris frame with ranges of 1000m+. In fact, during the vietnam war, Carlos
Hathcock used a M2 cal. .50 with a scope to make kills.
John
CHUCK MARSH
Louis Boyd (bo...@apt2.sao.arizona.edu) wrote:
: >
: > Louis Boyd wrote:
: > > Where a lever action shines is as a lightweight fast pointing carbine
: > > with lower cost and possibly better reliability than a semi-auto.
: > > There are reasons though why you never see one in combat. The last
: > > major battle I can think of where lever actions played a winning roll
: > > was when Custer lost at the Little Bighorn.
: > >
The difficulty over the lever action in combat it is awkward to operate in
the prone position, and the lower you lie, the tougher it gets. This is
one big reason the bolt action eclipsed the lever, late in the last
century.
Czarist Russia, I think, ordered a number of Winchester repeaters in
long-barreled musket configuration, and so far as I know, these fine
rifles never turned up as surplus. Maybe in a Siberian warehouse,
somewhere...
: [...] The indians had a fair number
: of Henry repeaters. Custer's men had mostly military issue
: single shots -- Springfield trapdoor's, I believe.
: Custer himself liked to carry a .50-70 Remington rolling
: block for buffalo, also a single shot. I don't know if he
: had it at the battle though. The repeaters were on the
: winning side.
:
The NA's had advantages of fire, movement, numbers and ground. History,
kindly, does not refer to the episode as "Custer's Last Screwup."
Chuck Marsh
Arne Carlsten
CHUCK MARSH <Not...@cris.com> wrote:
: Czarist Russia, I think, ordered a number of Winchester repeaters in
: long-barreled musket configuration, and so far as I know, these fine
: rifles never turned up as surplus. Maybe in a Siberian warehouse,
: somewhere...
The Russians bought 300,000 Winchester M1895s in 7.62mmx54R during WW I.
Couldn't find anything on whatever happened to these rifles; the Russians
and Winchester couldn't even agree on how many were actually delivered.
I suspect they were issued out to second or third line troops and/or
police; there are probably still M1895s sitting in police station or
militia racks in small towns in Siberia... An enterprising sort might
make some money tracking these down for the collectors' market.
--
Arne Gustav Carlsten
Flagstaff, Arizona
Chomh da/na le muc...
don
CHUCK MARSH (Not...@cris.com) wrote:
: Czarist Russia, I think, ordered a number of Winchester repeaters in
: long-barreled musket configuration, and so far as I know, these fine
: rifles never turned up as surplus. Maybe in a Siberian warehouse,
: somewhere...
The Russians were still using them in WW 2, and the Germans captured
enough of them to give them a designation! They were Winchester model
1895s in 7.62 Russian rimmed.
Don