what cartridges are the U.S. Military using for sniping these days? as far as i know they use the 7.62x51mm , .300Win. Mag, .338 Lapua and the 50BMG. i think i read somewhere about them using the .300RUM as well. also what is your favorite cartridge they use for sniping? at the moment i'm fascinated with the .300Win Mag and i really like the .338 Lapua and am considering getting a .338 Lapua rifle someday and will definately get a .300Win Mag as soon as i can.

175 SMK going about 2700 fps..aint that the M118?

Secret Service counter snipers use the 300 RUM.
I'm not aware of any Military components currently using it.

i wonder if the military is actually using the .408 CheyTac or .416 Barrett cartridges? i think i saw some stuff about them on TV trying to design the ultimate sniper rifles for the military.

7.62 in the M24 and M110 rifles. 300 Win Mag in the XM2010, .50BMG in the M107. That is only the Army, not sure if the Navy and Marines are exploring other calibers.

Re the Lapua: The 338 RUM will do anything it will, is available in less expensive rifles, the ammo and components are FAR less expensive.
Low "cult appeal" but your wallet will thank you.

Lapua has much stronger, higher quality brass though. I have 12 firings on mine and they're still strong. When you consider the brass life difference the price is actually pretty similar.

The Lapua is a fine cartridge but is can't do anything the RUM cannot for far less cost.
12 firings and it is still "strong" ? based on what/ Would you share your lab anylysis of the change in the brass as compared to a 338 RUM ?
Funny but the RUM has a higher pressure limit than the Lapua..........

quote:

Originally posted by 45-70 shooter:
The Lapua is a fine cartridge but is can't do anything the RUM cannot"

Not new here, been here a couple of years or so.. Just kind of hang back and ponder interesting posts. I couldn't help myself here. Sometimes you hear things that just need a little boot. So with that, I will try to remain calm on this. Comparing the 300 RUM to the 338 LM is like putting a lion up against a household cat. The RUM using 230 Gr. VLD's does show some impressive down range terminals with it's greater bearing surface, but the field data dosen't even compare to the LM in any standard including internal. In addition, the design of the LM holds the same center balance as the 308 (concentric) which makes it inherently accurate from the start. I have pages and pages (really reams) of test data that would probably only serve to bore most but the end result is that the .338 LM is not only superior to the 300RUM, but in a "layman's" term, blows the RUM out of any contention. There's a reason why the RUM is NOT chambered in open-field operations in ANY theater and the answer is simple, "it got the boot" early in the game and in fact, the 300WM out performed the RUM across the tactical and sniper platforms as well. You may not have the field references I maintain but I do invite you to do a bit more research based on MTOA field data testing and perhaps you can see the broad difference and superior performance the LM holds over the RUM.

What the: One guy was comparing the 338RUM to the 338LM, but not sure there's any real comparison there either, as the RUM uses far more powder, and has to bave a lot more recoil than the LM, and doesn't have much more to offer.

I do believe that for the most part the 308-7.62x51, is the predominate sniper round, as most sniping done at 800 yds and under, and probably mostly Under..so plenty good enough.

Would really be interesting to read some of the data you have, as would then be able to base opinons on reality.

What the, if you think you can bore us with data, you haven't been here very long.

Lets see what you got!

AS how are you doing. I'm thr guy with the 7rum. I have compared the casings with each other. If I remember right they were pretty close, as far as projectiles why cann't you use the same one in both. This being said with the same quality barrel why does the LM blow the RUM out of the water. The last I checked a projectile proforms the same at any given speed and rotation. But you have to compare apples and apples 338 to 338.

MD, sure, I remember, good to chat again.

All the things you mentioned are correct, and that's why the statment that the Lapua "blows the RUM out of the water" are absurd.

According to QL the rum has an overflow water capacity of 110 grains, and the Lapua's capacity is 108 gr. This is about the same difference in capacity I have in my STW when I switch between Winchester and Remington brass.
For the .300 Win mag QL differentiates case capacity according to brand. With Federals over flow capacity at 92gr, and Norma's at at 95.5gr, the difference is greater then the differnce between the RUM and Lapua. Bottom line is the difference in case capactiy is academic. With equal length barrels, and the same projective QL predicts velocities within 20 FPS of each other. By tweeking OAL I can make either one appear to have the better velocity.

As far as the LM having a better center of balance then the RUM, well, that's just

It sounds like What THe, is confused about the difference between a rifle and a cartridge. The RUM has a smaller bolt face, and is has an OAL rated at 3.60", the size of a standard long action. This allows it to be chambered in a wider varity of actions then the Lapua with less work. With a stock, barrel length and contour of the designers choosing, a rifle chambered in the RUM could have what ever point of balance the operator wanted.

338 Lapua 300 gr bullet 94 gr compressed Retumbo 2654 fps

338 RUM 300 gr bullet 90.5 gr compressed Retumbo 2665 fps

That's what Hodgdon says, suppose they know ?

Recoil in a 20 pound rifle is not really an issue.

They are two peas in a pod. One has the "wannabe sniper" cachet, the other, designed by the company that brought us the 222 and 7mm RemMag, is at least ballistically equal and a lot less expensive.

Your money, your choice

The data you guys are comparing is "standard" commercial ballistics as found in RLM's and "off the shelf" sources and perhaps some of your own field data. The problem with the data you provide is that; it limited to internal and sub-terminal performance based on commercial components. The real testing is mid field and down range performance i.e. spin-up, RPM/stabilization, flight flow, drift etc., Then taking that data and subjecting it to the elements: altitude, wind, rain, fog etc, to solve a "consistency" objective. Muzzle velocity, ROD, COE and SD are all part of what is known as "engineered results" but more often than not have little effective influence on the end results of live fire test results. Have you ever asked yourself why the 7.62X51 or .308 Win. is a more accurate round than the 30-06? Again, without going into boring detail, some math tells us that when in a proscribed "node" based on design from an internal housing/case/chamber etc,. along with a neutral propellant burn (i.e. 70-80%) we can achieve greater accuracy and even terminal ballistics as a result. In other words, some things just fly better.....I think someone here has and is proud of their 300RUM, I'm not knocking the RUM! I have done little work with it but rely on my colleagues data as far as it being put to use as a round suitable for field operations. No round (well at-least almost no round) is worthless nor unusable. If you're willing to spend the time, expose yourself to additional components and test equipment including several barrels, actions etc., you will surely find a round that stands out. For me, I think I would take the RUM up to Alaska or Canada and play with some big game..