Actually from personal experience I would take a bolt action over a Barrett any day of the week.
There's a reason the CF didn't buy them as their LRSWS.Even if they were not prohib up here I still wouldn't buy one.
You're right, there is a good reason why. The Barrett was designed and intended to be used primarily as an anti-material weapon. Not as a long range sniping platform. The fact that it is sometimes used in that role is a testiment to its inherent versatility and flexibily.
No one said it was the most accurate .50 cal. rifle. Especially, when one considers the chambering of the Barrett. It's designed to reliably use all military ammunition. A match grade chamber would be unthinkable under the circumstances, would it not?
Does the latest model M107A1 has less recoil due to a set of springs that change the mechanics ?
Eventhough it was designed to be anti material, that quickly became a secondary thing when people started reaching out and touching meat targets.A match grade chamber would be unthinkable under the circumstances, would it not?
Eventhough it was designed to be anti material, that quickly became a secondary thing when people started reaching out and touching meat targets.
It does work well in the anti material dept but since this is a precision rifle forum I figured we were talking sniper application.Minute of APC isn't very good in my books for an LR SWS.Our Tac 50 has a match chamber and I haven't heard anyone complain as of yet.
Just my opinion as I've been hands on both.
There'd be little argument that the Barrett would be less accurate than a dedicated sniping platform using match grade ammunition. I don't see how anyone would be inclined to believe otherwise unless they were basing their information on "Call of Duty" video games.
What about the advantage given by the quick repetition of fire - doesn't it make the rifle more usefull!
What about the advantage given by the quick repetition of fire - doesn't it make the rifle more usefull!
I saw a discovery channel show where the US coastguard used a barret semi-auto 50 for taking out smuggling boats engine from a hovering helo. They had an EOtech mounted on it and it seemed to the job pretty handily! never thought i'd see a legit reason for someone to mount a holo-sight on a barret! Not arguing with you at all longshot and i completly agree with you! but for what they were doing i think the rapid fire was an advantage when taking down boats with multiple outboards. Agian though the shots they were taking were sub 300m if i had to guess not exactly long range in your community![]()
It means you miss the target just that much faster.
As Jerry said, if it's necessary to dump a lot of rounds on a target, then it's a supressive weapon, not a precision one.