The M24 Sniper Weapon System

1
The M24 Sniper Weapon System
2
Intro

• The United States Armys M24 sniper weapon
  system (SWS) is one of the best overall sniping
  systems in use today. Based on Remington Arms
  Company's venerable 700 action, the system is a
  rugged, nearly indestructible means of
  dispatching hostile threats from long distance.
  Though some of the more recently designed sniper
  systems feature technical advancements not
  available on the M24, the Armys SWS is the
  standard by which all current-issue systems are
  compared.

3
Background

• From the 1950s through the 1980s, the Army had
  fielded primarily semi-automatic sniper rifles
  first the M1C and M1D and by the mid-1960s, the
  M21, a highly accurized M14 scoped with either
  the ART 1 or 2 day telescopes. The reason, or
  reasons, for using semi-automatic rifles is
  unknown. Certainly, sniping was unappreciated in
  the U.S. Army at this time and the logisticians
  would not have wanted to add additional equipment
  into the supply system M1s and M14s (the
  platform for the M21) were in use by regular
  soldiers. Possibly, as well, Army leadership was
  concerned with U.S. snipers encountering mass
  wave attacks such as those faced in Korea and
  therefore preferred scoped, rapid-fire.
• Whatever the reason, by the mid-1970s, Army
  snipers (primarily those among special operations
  forces (SOF)) were increasingly dissatisfied with
  the M21. The wood stocks were prone to warpage,
  the bedding would give way after one to two
  thousand rounds, the scopes could not be depended
  upon to retain zero, and the rifles accuracy
  suffered when debris entered the gas system.
  Consequently, maintenance costs for the M21, in
  both time and money, were very high. By 1976, the
  Army began consideration of new sniper rifles,
  even testing some rifles at Aberdeen Proving
  Ground. Unfortunately, the results were
  inconclusive and the military made no decisions.
  
• At about the same time, the military was also
  considering improvements in performance of the
  match cartridge used in sniping, the M118,
  through increased technical requirements. Hugo
  Teufel, "Military Match Cartridges and Their Use
  in Combat A Brief History, Part II" Tactical
  Shooter (November, 1998). These increased
  technical requirements were, at this time,
  unsuccessful.
• By the early 1980s, the military did develop a
  new match cartridge, the M852, and also
  redesignated the M118 Match Cartridge as a
  Special Ball Cartridge. These actions were
  temporary, pending the development of a new
  sniper rifle and ammunition. Though work had
  begun to acquire a new sniper rifle for the Army,
  it would be several years until fruition.
• At around this same time, a number of new units
  were joining the SOF community. Sniping was
  critical to these units missions and neither the
  available equipment nor the available training
  was up to the required tasks. SOF units were
  using "bootlegged 7mm and 300 Winchester Magnum
  weapons.
• That the Army needed to replace its sniper rifle
  was clear. What was unclear is what the new rifle
  would like. The outcome of this issue would be
  dependent upon the players involved in the
  process, but critical to the decision would be
  the views of one group of shooters the
  instructors at the J.F.K. Special Warfare Center
  (SWC), Special Operations Target Interdiction
  Course (SOTIC) at Ft. Bragg.
• In late 1984, SWC set forth requirements for the
  sniper course, SOTIC. The first course ran in
  early 1985 and was filled. One thing was apparent
  with the conclusion of this course the M21 was
  woefully inadequate.
• SOTIC instructors began work on a new rifle for
  SOF shooters. Though a number of the personnel
  would be heavily involved with the development of
  this rifle, two in particular are worth
  mentioning the late Larry Freeman, NCOIC and
  the late David Zavitz, instructor and gunsmith.
  Along with Gale McMillan, the SOTIC instructors
  would be the creative forces behind the Armys
  new sniper rifle.

4
Background Cont.

• The SOTIC instructors and SOF other shooters
  many of whom had significant combat sniping
  experience were inclined to return to a bolt
  action rifle. In the mid-1980s, they took a
  number of old, 1960s-era U.S. Air Force procured
  Remington 700s with Redfield Accutrac day
  telescopes. The stocks were pure walnut,
  unbedded, and the barrels had a high number of
  rounds through them. In their present condition,
  the rifles were unsuitable. Working with Gale
  McMillan, the SOTIC instructors had McMillan
  install barrels and stocks, and scoped the rifles
  with the new Leupold Stevens Ultra M3.
• When the SOTIC instructors put together the
  prototype rifles, they took them to Camp Butner,
  North Carolina for testing on the 1000-yard
  range. Importantly, General James Guest (who at
  that time was in charge of the SWC) was in
  attendance. General Guest shot an M21 first.
  Though he had a low score on the 1000-yard NRA
  bullseye target, he was unconvinced of the need
  for a new sniper rifle for SOF shooters. The
  instructors provided the General with one of the
  new prototype rifles. Upon shooting an "X" with
  the first shot, the General decreed "make it
  happen." The new rifle of which approximately
  15 would be built -- would be known as the
  "Free-Zatz-Millan." As a side note, General Guest
  would later testify to Congress on behalf of the
  new sniper rifle and would further inform
  Congress that the M21 was no longer necessary,
  leading to the M24s adoption, the M21s
  phase-out, the M25s unofficial adoption by a
  number of SF and SEAL units, and the adoption by
  some special operations units of the SR25. See
  Hugo Teufel, "The M21 and M25 Sniper Weapon
  Systems" Tactical Shooter ( 1998) Mike Wilson,
  "The SR 25," Tactical Shooter (December, 1998).
• The Generals approval made the possibility of a
  new Army sniper rifle a reality. But his approval
  would not remove all obstacles to its ultimate
  approval and adoption. The Army is not
  monolithic. In addition to the SOF snipers, there
  are snipers in regular Army units, trained
  primarily at Ft. Benning. The new rifle was no
  longer to be solely an SOF project. Army shooters
  from Benning would have involvement in the
  process.
• And then there are the Department of Defense
  components involved in the development and
  production of small arms. The two primary
  government components would be the U.S. Army
  Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command, Armament
  Research, Development and Evaluation Center
  (ARDEC) in Picatinny, New Jersey And The U.S.
  Army Tank-Automotive And Armaments Command
  Armament And Chemical Acquisition And Logistics
  Activity (ACALA) in Rock Island, Illinois. ARDEC
  would handle design issues and specifications,
  ACALA would responsible for writing the manual,
  establishing the assembly and disassembly
  procedures, and determining the contents of the
  deployment kit
• The SOF shooters had in mind an off-the-shelf
  rifle that they could deploy quickly. This
  approach would be in sharp contrast to the
  engineers and program types at ARDEC and ACALA.
  Their approach, as described to me by a retired
  SF NCO who participated in the selection process,
  would take several years to develop the new
  sniper system ("five years for the bullet, three
  years for the barrel to match the bullet, and
  another five years to develop the end product").
  When hearing this response, one SOTIC instructor
  became very upset. Throwing a Pelican case with
  one of SOF prototype rifles in it across the
  room, he commented, somewhat sarcastically, that
  civilians could buy rifles meeting the SOF
  shooters requirements on a daily basis and
  off-the-shelf. As a result of this and other
  meetings, the shooters were able to achieve their
  goal of an off-the-shelf rifle. These "issues"
  with ARDEC and ACALA would not be the only ones
  the SOF shooters would face.
• The most issue to confront all concerned would be
  cartridge selection. The SOF shooters thought
  that the 7.62 x 51-mm NATO cartridge should be
  the primary chambering for the new sniper rifle.
  Though overall an ideal round, the 7.62 mm NATO
  round it has maximum effective range of 800
  meters under the best of conditions, far less at
  night, given the difficulty of reading wind in
  the dark. Accordingly, the SOF shooters wanted
  the ability to change over a limited number of
  rifles to a medium range (900 to 1100 meters)
  caliber, such s the .300 Win. Mag., until a new
  sniper cartridge was adopted.
• The SOF shooters were not the only "end-users"
  involved. Regular Army snipers, represented by
  Ft. Benning, wanted the ability to change over
  all of the new rifles to a larger or more
  powerful chambering. I should note that this
  fight continues over 10 years later.
• Further complicating the issue was the Armys
  consideration of various calibers for medium and
  long-range shooting. For example, the military
  was considering the .338/.416 for longer ranges,
  the .50 for hard targets from 800 to 1500 meters
  and the 14.5-mm for targets past 1500 meters.
  Again, this issue is still alive today.
• The various parties to the selection process were
  able to work out their differences and by
  mid-1987, the Army was ready to seek bids. The
  military issued its product description and held
  a contractors conference, at which over 50
  contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers
  attended. Competing contractors would have 45
  days to submit their proposals including
  functioning weapon systems to Picatinny, New
  Jersey, ARDECs location.

5
Background Cont.

• The foundation for Remingtons entry would be the
  700 action. Designed originally for hunting, the
  Remington action in accurized form was the basis
  of 40X target rifle first entering the market
  in 1961 and the Marine Corps M40 first built
  in 1996. (The M40 was, of course, the inspiration
  for Remingtons introduction of the Varmint
  Special, a heavy-barreled version of the 700.)
• It would take more than just a good receiver to
  win the contract critical to Remington's bid
  would be a high-quality barrel. The company went
  first to Boots Overmeyer, but he did not have the
  capacity necessary, should Remington win the
  contract. Remington next contacted Mike Rock.
  Working very closely with Rock, Remington was
  able to produce the needed barrels with the
  distinctive Overmeyer 5R rifling in time to enter
  the competition. Accompanying the barrel would be
  an adjustable length of pull stock from HS
  Precision.
• Remington also needed to equip its entry with a
  day telescope. At the time, only Unertl and
  Leupold manufactured rugged tactical scopes,
  suitable for military application. Remington
  approached John Unertl first, but he told the
  company that he was too busy building scopes for
  the Marines. (Many have said that Unertl turned
  down submitting his scopes for the M24 because
  the Army had snubbed him some years back.)
  Remington turned to Leupold Stevens. Leupold
  had recently brought its Ultra (now, Mark IV)
  line of scopes, mounts, and rings to the market.
  Remington was impressed with the quality and
  ruggedness of Leupold's gear and chose the
  Oregon-based company as the optics subcontractor
  for its submission.
• Various manufacturers submitted their bid samples
  and the competition ultimately narrowed to two
  companies Remington and Steyr. There were three
  criteria that the military was considering
  ruggedness accuracy and cost. Cost was the
  least important of the three criteria it was
  also Remingtons weak point.
• There were sixteen shooters involved in the
  testing of the two entries eight from the Army
  Marksmanship Unit four SOTIC instructors and
  four Rangers. Though the Steyr entry was very
  accurate, by the seventh round it was throwing
  rounds, sufficient to cause misses at targets
  past 600 meters. Remingtons submission did not
  have this problem and was also built far more
  ruggedly than Steyrs.
• Remington won the contract to produce the Armys
  next generation sniper rifle. Remington firmed up
  arrangements for production, including bringing
  barrel manufacture "in-house."
• Much has been said about Remington's dropping
  Mike Rock as a subcontractor for barrel
  production, much of it untrue. When officials of
  Remington first approached Rock they explained to
  him that it was the company's intent to develop,
  and later produce, the barrel for the M24, should
  the company win the contract. After winning the
  contract, Remington did bring barrel production
  "in-house." The company resubmitted the weapon
  systems with the Remington-produced barrels to
  the military for first article testing and the
  military accepted them. Importantly, the
  Remington-produced barrels were approximately 25
  more accurate than the Rock-produced barrels.

6
Criticisms, Responses

• Almost immediately after the military adopted the
  M24, criticism of the new sniper system erupted.
  The HS Precision stock was not durable enough to
  withstand field use. The Leupold M3A suffered
  from elevation and windage knobs with
  insufficiently positive clicks. The long action
  was inappropriate for a .308 caliber rifle. But
  the greatest criticism leveled against the M24
  was that at 4,500, the system was too expensive.
  Time and logic have addressed these and other
  criticisms leveled against the system.
• Starting first with the stock, a SOTIC instructor
  has informed me that in the 10 years SF has used
  M24 for instruction, he has only seen two stocks
  break, on weapons that students dropped from over
  500 feet above ground while jumping into an
  exercise. In another well-known example of the
  stocks and rifles toughness, is the story
  of an encased M24 run over by a two-and-a-half
  ton truck. The truck driver was unaware of the
  weapons location and backed over it. When the
  parties involved realized what had happened, they
  found the weapons bolt sticking through the wall
  of the gun case. Taken to the range, the M24 was
  fired and found to be fully functional. (I hear
  from my friend at SOTIC that this weapon is still
  in use at SOTIC.)
• It is true that the combination of the long
  action and the 7.62 x 51-mm cartridge can be a
  problem for a shooter the rifle is prone to jam.
  This can be overcome through proper training in
  the loading and use of the 700 long action.
• The cost criticism is perhaps the most galling.
  The high initial cost of the M24 is due to the
  federal governments procurement policies.
  Whenever a new weapon system is developed, he
  manufacturer incurs certain development costs.
  Normally, these costs are spread out over the
  entire production run of the system. However, the
  government may not normally incur monetary
  obligations beyond the current fiscal year. Such
  was the case with the M24. The federal government
  required Remington to factor into its price for
  the first year of production, the total cost of
  development for the system, approximately
  500,000. After the first year of the contract,
  the price of M24s dropped to approximately 3,500
  each

7
The M24 SWS

• Though some old-timers may miss the "perfectly
  good" M21, the M24 is a very capable system. The
  M24 is not merely a rifle it is a system. When
  complete, the system includes the following
  equipment an M24 rifle with a 10 x 42 mm Leupold
  Stevens Mk. IV M3A day telescope and Mk. IV
  rings and base Redfield Palma rear sight and
  "International" globe with interchangeable
  inserts deployment, or "D", kit, complete with
  cleaning kit, tools, and replacement parts M1907
  sling and drag bag operators manual and
  protective travel cases for the scope and
  complete system.
• The barrel of the M24 is unique. Remington
  hammerforges the barrel with 416R stainless
  steel, the bull barrel is 24" long, and its width
  tapers down from 1.2" at the breech to
  approximately .9". The 5-R rifling was designed
  by Boots Overmeyer, is angled at 110 degrees, has
  5 grooves, and a right hand twist of 1" in 11.2".
  There are a number of advantages for the military
  marksman with this barrel. The angled rifling
  leads to less bullet deformation as the rifling
  swages it. Some believe that this results in a
  more even pressure curve as the bullet
  accelerates through the barrel. As well, once the
  barrel is broken in, the rifling lends itself to
  reduced metallic fouling a longer, more accurate
  lifespan because of reduced wear effect on
  rifling cross-section, and higher bullet
  velocities. The downsides to 5-R rifling are the
  greater than normal metallic fouling of the bore
  during the break-in period, and greater
  difficulty in barrel production, resulting in a
  more expensive barrel.
• HS Precision makes the adjustable length-of-pull
  stock, which is made of Kevlar-reinforced
  fiberglass and has a full-length 7075-T6
  aluminum-bedding block. The action is screwed
  into the bedding block with two screws, both of
  which are set to 65inch/pounds. The grip is fully
  contoured and ambidextrous grip and highly rigid
  fore-end.
• There are conflicting stories behind the
  adjustable stock and 24" barrel. Some (including
  one SF NCO who was on the development team for
  the M24) have attributed these two features to
  the militarys desire to transport the sniper
  system in the 1950s era paratroopers rifle
  case. Others attribute these features to less
  cynical reasons. When I asked John Rogers, he
  stated that the choice of barrel length was
  Remingtons, and was not dictated by the
  military. Further, the specifications for the M24
  relating to the requirement for adjustable length
  of pull, MIL-R-71126 (AR) 4.6.6. refer to testing
  procedures for the stock when the user is wearing
  NBC and cold and warm weather gear.
• Leupold Stevens manufacture the day telescope,
  mount, and rings. The scope, the M3A, has a body
  that is machined from a solid piece of 6061-T-6
  aircraft aluminum. All lenses in the M3A are
  treated with a proprietary anti-reflective
  coating to increase the lenses light
  transmission. The reticle is a mildot-pattern and
  is etched into the glass lens. (This is the
  primary difference between the commercially
  available M3 and the Armys version the
  commercial versions reticle is a more
  traditional wire design.

8
The M24 SWS Cont.

• Perhaps the best feature of the scope is its
  combination elevation turret/bullet drop
  compensator (BDC). Depending upon the caliber of
  the rifle on which the scope is mounted, the
  shooter selects the appropriate cam, sights in
  the rifle, and then can dial in the range on the
  BDC (though, of course, the shooter must still
  take into account altitude, humidity,
  temperature, etc., as they affect bullet drop).
  Specific cams available for the scope are
• ".308 Match," 168 gr. BTHP at 2,600 ft./sec. (BDC
  increments in yards)
  
• "7.62 mm Military," 173 gr. BTFMJ at 2,600
  ft./sec. (BDC increments in meters)
  
• ".300 Winchester Magnum," 220 gr. FMJ at 2,650
  ft./sec. (BDC increments in meters)
  
• ". 30-06 Springfield," 180gr. FMJ at 2,700
  ft./sec. (BDC increments in yards)
  
• ". 223 Rem. (5.56mm)," 55gr. FMJ at 3,200
  ft./sec. (BDC increments in yards)
  
• It is my understanding that Leupold is working on
  a cam for the new Federal Gold Medal Match and
  M118 LR cartridges using the 175-gr. BTHP Sierra
  MatchKing bullet. Importantly, all cams are built
  around the constants of sea level and 59 degrees
  Fahrenheit. Use of a cam in conditions other than
  those will result in deviations from the intended
  point of impact.
• Each "click" on the M3A whichever cam is used
  is equal to one MOA. Windage adjustments are in ½
  MOA adjustments. The advantage to the 1 MOA
  adjustment on a combat scope is that reduces to
  one, the number of revolutions a shooter can make
  with the elevation turret. This was very
  important to the military as shooters in
  stressful situations (such as combat) often are
  off by a complete revolution when the time comes
  to take the shot.

9
Improvements, Accessories

• In September of 1992, the military rendered the
  Military Specification for the M24 (MIL-R-71126
  (AR)) inactive, except for use in replacement of
  already issued sniper systems. Nevertheless,
  there have been a number of improvements to the
  system. To address the dangers of scope glint and
  lasers on the battlefield, the military has added
  to the system an antireflection device (ARD) and
  external mount assembly (EMA) laser filter. The
  ARD is the Tenebraex killFLASH and is threaded to
  fit both the M3 day telescope and EMA laser
  filter. The killFLASH is under 3" long with a
  1.75" thick honeycomb filter that provides the
  same glint shielding capability that a 27"
  conventional tube. When properly installed,
  however, the killFLASH will reduce the amount of
  light the scope can gather by 15.
• The number of non-eyesafe lasers on the
  battlefield necessitates the EMA laser filter
  today. Whether these lasers are used offensively
  or for distance calculation, if snipers are to
  continue to function effectively, they need
  protection from high-intensity beams of directed
  light. The EMA laser filter provides this
  protection, but at some cost to the user. First,
  the filter affects the colors the user sees,
  potentially obscuring targets. Second, the filter
  will shift the point of impact by as much as one
  minute of angle. Third, the filter is very
  reflective, and will give away a shooters
  position, without installation of the killFLASH
  ARD, of course.
• The military also upgraded the spotting telescope
  for the M24 system. The new scope, the M144, is a
  variable-power straight day telescope.
  Manufactured by Bausch Lomb and very similar to
  its Model 61-1548P, Elite 15-45x60 Zoom
  Telescope, the M144 provides magnification from
  15 to 45 power, comes with a quick detachable
  tripod, Tenebraex ARD and laser filter unit. My
  understanding that the major difference between
  the M144 and the Elite is quality of the seals
  used in the M144 to keep out moisture.
• The M24 also can be equipped with night vision.
  Until recently, the night optical device (NOD) of
  choice for shooters was the Simrad Optronics
  Model KN250. The Simrad attaches to the day
  telescope, allowing for no change of zero on the
  system.
• The second NOD found on the M24 is the AN/PVS-10
  combination day/night optic device. This scope,
  still in development, is intended to simplify
  optics for the M24, while improving upon the
  current Mk. IV M3A/Simrad combination for day and
  night operations. The scope weights nearly 5
  pounds, is fixed at 8.5 power with mildot
  reticle, and can be adjusted for output
  brightness and reticle illumination. A number of
  shooters using the PVS-10, with whom I have
  spoken, have been displeased with the scopes
  performance, but with the issuance of a national
  stock number, NSN 5855-01-410-8979, it is likely
  that the scope will be made part of the M24
  system.

10
Other Agencies, Governments Fielding the M24

• The Army is not the only entity to use the M24.
  The U.S. Parks Police and the New York Police
  Department have equipped their snipers with the
  system. The NYPD rifles are not stamped "U.S."
  nor do they have U.S. Government serial numbers.
• There are also a few foreign governments that
  have purchased the rifle under the Foreign
  Military Sales program. The Israeli government
  recently purchased 890 M24s. Previously, Lebanon,
  South Africa, and the United Arab Emirates had
  purchased small quantities of the system. Perhaps
  the most surprising sale was to Egypt, which
  purchased the most M24s of any non-U.S.
  Government entity 1000. Sadly, the Egyptian
  military did not wish to use match cartridges
  with the system. Moreover, that country's
  military is not known for maintaining its weapon
  systems -- whether an air defense network or an
  SWS -- and it is unknown how the equipment has
  fared.
• Finally, Remington made a few "civilian" M24s for
  commercial sales. In 1995-96, Remington built a
  limited number of the M24 rifles (not the
  complete system) and offered them to its Law
  Enforcement wholesalers. The rifles sold for
  2500 to 3000 dollars. Occasionally one sees
  these rifles for sale and they are sure to be
  collector's items.

11
The Future?

• The Army has been fielding the M24 system for a
  little over ten years now. The first M24s
  produced for the Army in 1988 were sent to SOTIC.
  Just this year, the Army changed them out. With
  ten years of use, several new barrels and
  approximately 75,000 rounds through them, the
  rifles have performed well beyond the
  expectations of those involved with the systems
  development, in particular given that the rifles
  are used for training and undergo significant
  stresses. (By the way, only after ten years and
  75,000 rounds did the extractors begin to fail on
  these rifles.) The M24 will not be the last SWS
  the U.S. Army purchases, however.
• Remington and the U.S. Government are looking to
  the future of sniping. In recent trials at Ft.
  Benning for the upcoming Medium Range Sniper
  System, Remington fielded a number of interesting
  potential submissions. In addition to the
  standard M24 in 7.62 x 51 mm and .300 Win. Mag.,
  Remington tested the "SR8", a 700 action-based
  rifle in .338 Lapua (using a Sako extractor), and
  another rifle based on the 700 action chambered
  for .30-338. Shooters firing these rifles were
  hitting B-27 targets from 1900 yards. The rifles
  were scoped with fixed ten and sixteen-power
  Leupold Mk. IV day telescopes.
• As well, Remington is looking into an "upgrade"
  or "product improvement" of sorts of the M24, the
  "M24 TC." The M24 TC is a concept rifle with a
  twenty-six inch composite fiber barrel and
  stainless steel barrel liner mated to a titanium
  alloy receiver. The rifle is chamber for the
  Remington 7mm Remington Ultra Long-Range Sniper
  (ULRS) round, with an effective range of 1500
  meters.

12
Specifications for the M24

• Calibers7.62 x 51 mm, .300 Winchester Magnum
• OperationBolt Action
• Overall Length43
• Barrel, Length, TwistRemington hammer-forged,
  416 R with 5R grooves, 24" (7.62 mm), 111.2 RH
  
• Weight12.1 lbs., unloaded without scope, 15 lbs.
  Loaded with scope
  
• StockHS Precision
• SightsLeupold Mk. IV M3A scope, Redfield Palma,
  International iron sights
  
• Effective Range (with day scope)800 meters
• Effective Range (with night scope)300 meters
• Magazine5- round, internal

13
Contacts

• Leupold Stevens, Inc.
• PO Box 688,
• Beaverton, OR 97075-0688
• Ph. [phone]
• Remington Arms Co., Inc.
• P.O. Box 700
• Madison, NC 27025-0700
• Attn John Rogers
• Ph.
•  
• Tenebræx Corporation
• 326 A Street
• Boston, MA 02210
• ph. [phone]
• Fax [phone]