Chandler XM-3

M

Mac308

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
131   0   0
I couldn't see where this has been mentioned already, but it looks like a Canadian company called Delta Marine Security is bringing Chandler XM-3 rifle systems into Canada.

Prices isn't cheap, but when you consider everything is included in the package except ammo, it isn't that bad. A lot cheaper than a completely kitted out A.I. or some other custom guns out there.

Thought I would pass it along for what it's worth to anyone who might be interested.

Mac
 
For the kind of money being asked, I could build a rifle that would knock its socks off (In fact I could probably build 3!) ... it is an $8000 Remington 700 with a Hart barrel. also, the Canadian built PGWDTI Coyote of Timberwolf rifles are better built better and have better barrels for much less money.
 
Yea I have the death from afar book series signed and all.

He continuously hawks the rifle (as he should being his book) but yea when it comes down to it, it is just another modified rem 700. I don't doubt a lot of good work goes into making one and it is top notch, but most of the price is based on his branding rather than the parts and labour value of the finished product.

Take my custom for example,

Stiller Tac 30 with fitted base and recoil lug, Krieger 28" 5R Heavy Varmint chambered with a virgin custom reamer, McMillan adjustable A5, Rifle Basix trigger, Farrel Rings, all precision fitted together. Completely bedded and floated.

Pretty much everything I can do to build the best rifle I could with no real limits on budget and I was still in less than 5000$
 
Cerik is bang on.

Or... buy a Remington 700 (just like the XM ) buy a mac stock (lust like th XM) a fancy trigger (just like the XM) and a Hart barrel (there are better choices) have it accurized and put together and viola, you have the identical gun for about $2300

This is the firearms version of those fancy fishing flies you buy that look like the belly button lint form a Vegas showgirl. Looks flashy, but is no better than a good old nightcrawler for catching fish.
 
My friend bought one and it would not shoot for sh*t. He sent it to a gunsmith and chamber was out of speck. So he sent it back to them and they said he modified the chamber,etc. (He had not done a thing to then rifle-just had it inspected.) they called him a liar.(all this after waiting a year for it)
They are full of crap. I would not believe their hype and over priced rifles.
 
Wow. Didn't realize there were so many Chandler-haters here. I was just passing on the information for anyone who might be interested.

I have had my Chandler Sniper since the mid-90's and never had an issue with it. In the past 30+ years of shooting I have never fired, or actually seen, another .308 sniper rifle shoot a 3 1/2" group at 1,000 yards. (Confirmed and documented in the June 2000 issue of Tactical Shooter magazine).

Like I said, just passing the information on for anyone who might be interested.

Mac
 
Mac308 said:
Wow. Didn't realize there were so many Chandler-haters here. I was just passing on the information for anyone who might be interested.

I have had my Chandler Sniper since the mid-90's and never had an issue with it. In the past 30+ years of shooting I have never fired, or actually seen, another .308 sniper rifle shoot a 3 1/2" group at 1,000 yards. (Confirmed and documented in the June 2000 issue of Tactical Shooter magazine).

Like I said, just passing the information on for anyone who might be interested.

Mac
Click to expand...

I don't think it has to do with hating Chandler as it does the fact that a rifle of the same quality and accuracy etc can be had for much cheaper. As far a small groups at 1000 yds its the nut behind the bolt that matters. Ammo selection, wind, position and every other condition and variable other than the rifle comes into play. I am sure there other rifles that could do it as well. Were you actually there to witness this group at 1000 yards or read it in the magazine. I am also sure the article in the magazine was hyping the Chandler rifle as well.
 
I was the "nut behind the bolt".

The magazine was at Blackwater in November 1999 (before anyone even knew the name Blackwater) to do an article on Blackwater and the courses offered. There was no hype around the rifle at all.

I shot the group in mid-afternoon, winds blowing 8-2 at 5-7 mph, firing factory Federal 168gr Gold Medal Match HPBT through a 26" barrel.

Understand what you're saying. Any empty-head can screw a barrel into a receiver, drop it into a stock, and call it a Sniper Rifle. It might even shoot well at 100, 200, or even 300 yards. However, I have only come across a handful of rifles durable enough for hard field use and able to shoot sub-MOA all day, every day, under the harshest conditions. Not all cars are racecars and not all rifles are sniper rifles. Sometimes you have to pay extra to get extra.

Mac
 
Nice looking rifle. I'm more interested in the Leupold Mk8 CQBSS Scope shown below it though.

ht tp://deltamarinesecurity.com/products.php

I'll just have to wait until a Canadian retailer is willing to jump through the State Department hoops for an export permit.

I'm wait listed for another bit of unobtanium (at RCMP for a FRT #) which would go well with the Leupold:

Swiss Arms Precision Rifle 7.62x51
IMG_2297.jpg
 
I have shot 3 Chandler rifles, one being an XM-3 and all were rock solid rifles. There was an article in SOF, I forget the year and month, that was written by Peter Kokalis and he tested and shot the Chandler Super Grade, his final comments were that Chandler builds the most accurate sniper rifles in the world. Now keep in mind this was a while back when there were not that many people building rifles the way we know then now, but they do build wicked rifles. When it comes to the XM-3, this rifle was built by Chandler at the request of DARPA with their specs. I have several IBA products and have spoken to both Norm and Norm Jr. many times and both have said that there are things they would have done different, but these specs are the ones the US Military requested.
 
Last edited:
Mac308 said:
I was the "nut behind the bolt".

The magazine was at Blackwater in November 1999 (before anyone even knew the name Blackwater) to do an article on Blackwater and the courses offered. There was no hype around the rifle at all.

I shot the group in mid-afternoon, winds blowing 8-2 at 5-7 mph, firing factory Federal 168gr Gold Medal Match HPBT through a 26" barrel.

Understand what you're saying. Any empty-head can screw a barrel into a receiver, drop it into a stock, and call it a Sniper Rifle. It might even shoot well at 100, 200, or even 300 yards. However, I have only come across a handful of rifles durable enough for hard field use and able to shoot sub-MOA all day, every day, under the harshest conditions. Not all cars are racecars and not all rifles are sniper rifles. Sometimes you have to pay extra to get extra.

Mac
Click to expand...

Thats great it was you shooting the rifle but what I am saying is that there are other rifles out there as capable for less. I also never said any empty head can put a rifle together. There are reputable builders in Canada and even more in the US that are far from empty-heads that build durable, hard field use, sub-moa all day under the harshest conditions. When it comes to
a durable, hard field use, sub moa all day under the harshest conditions rifle, I will take my AI over any other rifle I have used, including the one I am currently issued.
 
Mac308 said:
Wow. Didn't realize there were so many Chandler-haters here. I was just passing on the information for anyone who might be interested.
Click to expand...

I'm not a Chandler hater, I just recognize a waste of money when I see it. If you think the gun is worth the money, you fly right at it. After all, remember what you paid for anonymous free internet advice.

The games I play at all need a rig, ammunition and a shooter that can put 15 inside of a coffee can lid at 900M to win. It takes FAR more than a good gun to make that happen.

8 grand would allow me to build a minimum of two ultra high-end open class BR or F-Class rifles, that would beat a 308 "sniper" rifle hands down.

Remember, "sniper" rifles are build with field grade tolerances, not Benchrest tolerances. As I also said, PGW actually builds a better sniper rifle. Their action is stronger, stiffer and heavier. I also know what their barrels do too.
 
Mac308 said:
I was the "nut behind the bolt".

The magazine was at Blackwater in November 1999 (before anyone even knew the name Blackwater) to do an article on Blackwater and the courses offered. There was no hype around the rifle at all.

I shot the group in mid-afternoon, winds blowing 8-2 at 5-7 mph, firing factory Federal 168gr Gold Medal Match HPBT through a 26" barrel.

Understand what you're saying. Any empty-head can screw a barrel into a receiver, drop it into a stock, and call it a Sniper Rifle. It might even shoot well at 100, 200, or even 300 yards. However, I have only come across a handful of rifles durable enough for hard field use and able to shoot sub-MOA all day, every day, under the harshest conditions. Not all cars are racecars and not all rifles are sniper rifles. Sometimes you have to pay extra to get extra.

Mac
Click to expand...

If you do some research you will find that Mac308 shot this group and it is well dcoumented in several articles, that aside I like the concept of the DARPA rifle and asked Casey at Tactical Ornance to build a similiar rifle for me.

006.jpg


gadget
 
If functionality at the lowest possible price were all that mattered everyone would be shooting savages with custom tubes.

Why buy a nightforce when a sightron will get the job done? Why buy a drillings, baikal makes a double rifle that will take game? Why buy a rem 700 when a stevens 200 will do the same thing for less? :eek:

d:h:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom