Kicking around the .375 E to replace 50 cal. in the ELR-SR role.

Terry Cross · May 13, 2024

Link to decent article on a possible 50 cal replacement already being discussed here.

Barrett .50 Caliber Sniper Rifle Replacement For SOCOM May Fire A Smaller Round

A gun in a smaller caliber could replace the iconic .50 caliber Barrett, as well as Mk 15 rifles, in U.S. special operations inventory.

www.twz.com

Sandow the Heretic · May 13, 2024

Terry Cross said:
Link to decent article on a possible 50 cal replacement already being discussed here.

Barrett .50 Caliber Sniper Rifle Replacement For SOCOM May Fire A Smaller Round

A gun in a smaller caliber could replace the iconic .50 caliber Barrett, as well as Mk 15 rifles, in U.S. special operations inventory.

www.twz.com

I think at some point someone is going to question having a giant heavy action while getting the same performance as something smaller and lighter. I understand that there is an argument that the 50 BMG primers are more consistent at very cold temps but I've never seen data to actually back that up. Not that logic and reason have a damn thing to do with government purchasing...

BMG with a modern projectile has proven to be pretty capable even out to 2 miles. For real world applications, it would seem that the ability to swap between a monolithic and Mk-211 would be pretty useful. Honestly, a dumb version of the XM-25 round would seem to have a hell of a lot more merit in the field. At long ranges a round that can fuck up someones day with a close shot rather than a direct hit is a world of difference.

-Alex

Dogtown · May 14, 2024

The main advantage of .50BMG for a long time has been payload ability. Having something similar to Mk211 in a smaller bullet would be a priority before any rifle could even be considered, I would think.

Sandow the Heretic · May 14, 2024

Dogtown said:
The main advantage of .50BMG for a long time has been payload ability. Having something similar to Mk211 in a smaller bullet would be a priority before any rifle could even be considered, I would think.

Lehigh had a multipurpose round in 338 for a while so it isn't like you can't CNC a bullet and stuff it with whatever filling you want. Even an 833 grain 50 cal bullet like spotter tracer is marginal as a payload though. There is a reason actual HE rounds in 50 are essentially collectors items rather than a production round. Even in 14.5mm there really aren't HE rounds. With 20mm you get all the way up to 11 grams of HE which means the KE of the projectile is still probably higher in most cased than the explosive energy. That changes as you get further/higher/slower of course. Those aren't really made with antipersonnel in mind so with optimization maybe you could get a 20mm with a burst diameter large enough to be meaningful. I don't see anything in the realm or antipersonnel grenade that ever saw combat use smaller than 30mm though. The 25x59 is the smallest diameter long range shoulder fired grenade I can find and it never saw service. I wonder if something that small with a contact fuze is big enough to matter. Maybe the air burst capability was the only thing that gave it a practical use...

-Alex

DocUSMCRetired · May 22, 2024

It is true. They had the rifle out at the last couple shows. The MRADELR. The 375 EnABELR is already down range and in active service. https://barrett.net/products/firearms/mradelr/ The .375E version will be available for purchase in about 2 months.

762libertarian · May 22, 2024

Aren't the 338 and the 375 so close to each other capability wise that it would be wiser to go with one of them? It seems as if the list of cartridges kept in inventory is growing faster than ever.

DocUSMCRetired · May 22, 2024

762libertarian said:
Aren't the 338 and the 375 so close to each other capability wise that it would be wiser to go with one of them? It seems as if the list of cartridges kept in inventory is growing faster than ever.

Depends on the purpose/mission. I would say no in this application. Especially since we have more room to add goodies in the 375 for other needs.

Asgard1 · May 25, 2024

Barrett lost out on the contract

BCX · May 26, 2024

Who won the contract?

Asgard1 · May 27, 2024

BCX said:
Who won the contract?

It's not finished yet .

Asgard1 · May 28, 2024

Ohio Ord. And Sig is still in the running

cuirc · May 28, 2024

Since the 338 LM performance is close to halfway toward the 50 cal; and still "comfortable" to shoot, They should leave well enough alone. The 375 would be maybe halfway between the 338 LM and the 50 cal , so I don't see the point. Certainly a 50 Cal can do things that a 375 no matter how hot won't. Don't screw with something that works just to keep the ordinance folks busy!

DocUSMCRetired · May 28, 2024

cuirc said:
Since the 338 LM performance is close to halfway toward the 50 cal; and still "comfortable" to shoot, They should leave well enough alone. The 375 would be maybe halfway between the 338 LM and the 50 cal , so I don't see the point. Certainly a 50 Cal can do things that a 375 no matter how hot won't. Don't screw with something that works just to keep the ordinance folks busy!

Not entirely.

375EnABELER:
1000 meters = 6.5 Mils
2000 meters = 20 Mils
2500 meters = 31 Mils

.50 Cal M33 Ball:
1000 meters = 9.3 mils
2000 meters = 35 mils
2500 meters = 56 mils.

Given the same wind speed of 25mph under ideal atmospheric conditions the wind holds at 25mph are at 2500 meters:

375 EnABELR = 10 Mils
.50 M33 = 17 Mils

The project requirements are 2500 meter engagements. Which do you think would be easier on the shooter? Also at 2500 meters:

375 EnABLER = 1000 ftlbs Energy @ 1040fps
.50 33 Ball = 1100 ftlbs Energy @ 870fps

So the difference isn't very big. You can also see the velocity is starting to fall off a lot for the .50 cal. By Comparison at 1000 yards a 140gr 264 will have around 700ftlbs of energy. So the 375 still has a lot left in it. The rifles built were 28 inch to 32 inch vs the .50 Cal systems at 38 inches. So lighter, easier to move around etc etc.

And the .375 does it at a cheaper cost per round.

7mmShooter · May 28, 2024

The 375 has its merits for sure, but the 50 with a 750gr Amax or similar is a lot closer than M33 Ball.

Asgard1 · May 28, 2024

7mmShooter said:
The 375 has its merits for sure, but the 50 with a 750gr Amax or similar is a lot closer than M33 Ball.

You cant blame applied Ballistics for using hornady advertising tactics. After all the enabelr was designed shorter to fit into a standard cheytac mag to use optomized bullets. Unlike the bmg in standard mags. but if you optamize a bmg with 850 plus grain monolithic high bc bullets the enabeler will not even be close. But remember we are talking about military application in nato spect actions and mags .

Sandow the Heretic · May 29, 2024

DocUSMCRetired said:
Not entirely.

375EnABELER:
1000 Yards = 6.5 Mils
2000 Yards = 20 Mils
2500 Yards = 31 Mils

.50 Cal M33 Ball:
1000 Yards = 9.3 mils
2000 Yards = 35 mils
2500 Yards = 56 mils.

M33 is a straw man.

800 Grain Gen 2 Lazer:
1000 Yards = 6.5 Mils
2000 Yards = 18.7 Mils
2500 Yards = 28.1 Mils

That calculation is here at essentially sea level with pretty modest velocities achievable in a 32" barrel. 50 is a caliber that there is an existing supply chain and active weapons systems for.

There is certainly room for a lighter platform that is capable at long ranges. I think the larger bolt face on the enabler and correspondingly heavy action work against that goal. I remember hearing Bryan or Mitch say that the cold weather ignition with the 50 cal primer was one of the reasons for it but the current brass is LMR pocketed so I guess it didn't matter enough. What actual advantage does the enabler have over a CT?

-Alex

DocUSMCRetired · May 29, 2024

Sandow the Heretic said:
M33 is a straw man.

800 Grain Gen 2 Lazer:
1000 Yards = 6.5 Mils
2000 Yards = 18.7 Mils
2500 Yards = 28.1 Mils

That calculation is here at essentially sea level with pretty modest velocities achievable in a 32" barrel. 50 is a caliber that there is an existing supply chain and active weapons systems for.

There is certainly room for a lighter platform that is capable at long ranges. I think the larger bolt face on the enabler and correspondingly heavy action work against that goal. I remember hearing Bryan or Mitch say that the cold weather ignition with the 50 cal primer was one of the reasons for it but the current brass is LMR pocketed so I guess it didn't matter enough. What actual advantage does the enabler have over a CT?

-Alex

It is not a strawman, since I am using approved military rounds. If the 800 grain gen 2 Lazer gets approved then we can bring it in. But it is also important to note the contract criteria was to use smaller lighter rifles. A lot of our testing was asked to be done on 28 and 32 inch barrels. If you did this with the .50 the muzzle velocity would too low to be competitive.

Also to get those kinds of numbers with the .50cal you would need to be pushing 3050fps out of a 32 inch barrel. That isn't happening safely.

Sandow the Heretic · May 29, 2024

DocUSMCRetired said:
It is not a strawman, since I am using approved military rounds. If the 800 grain gen 2 Lazer gets approved then we can bring it in. But it is also important to note the contract criteria was to use smaller lighter rifles. A lot of our testing was asked to be done on 28 and 32 inch barrels. If you did this with the .50 the muzzle velocity would too low to be competitive.

Also to get those kinds of numbers with the .50cal you would need to be pushing 3050fps out of a 32 inch barrel. That isn't happening safely.

Hornady Amax is also an approved projectile.

My calculation was done at 2850 which is entirely doable in a 32 inch barrel.

-Alex

stefan73 · May 29, 2024

DocUSMCRetired said:
It is not a strawman, since I am using approved military rounds. If the 800 grain gen 2 Lazer gets approved then we can bring it in. But it is also important to note the contract criteria was to use smaller lighter rifles. A lot of our testing was asked to be done on 28 and 32 inch barrels. If you did this with the .50 the muzzle velocity would too low to be competitive.

Also to get those kinds of numbers with the .50cal you would need to be pushing 3050fps out of a 32 inch barrel. That isn't happening safely.

When was the .375 Enabler and approved military round?

DocUSMCRetired · May 29, 2024

Sandow the Heretic said:
Hornady Amax is also an approved projectile.

My calculation was done at 2850 which is entirely doable in a 32 inch barrel.

-Alex

I ran the numbers. To get 6.5 mils out of the 800 grain requires 3050fps. At 2850 your holding 37 mils. To match up to the .375s you would need to push 3050fps. Hornady AMAX would need 2900fps.

Out of the rifle requirements for barrel and other parameters you are looking closer at around 2300 - 2400 FPS. Which would give you the following for the .50 BMG under the new requirements:

1000 meters = 12 mils
2000 meters = 37 mils
2500 meters = 57 mils.

You are not going to get even close to 2800 fps if you follow the project guidelines for weight, barrel length, and other aspects.

.375 EnABELR has already been selected as the replacement, after years of success at this point down range. It proved to be a better option. The only question now is who will build the new rifle, and what will the final design look like. We don't have a dog in this race either way so it is exciting to get to sit back and watch what they come up with.

7mmShooter · May 29, 2024

750gr Amax at just 2850fps… standard Sea level conditions using the AB G7 for the 750gr Amax

1,000yds = 6.3mil
2,000yds = 19.7mil
2,500yds = 30.7mil

DocUSMCRetired · May 29, 2024

stefan73 said:
When was the .375 Enabler and approved military round?

Around 2017

DocUSMCRetired · May 29, 2024

7mmShooter said:
750gr Amax at just 2850fps… standard Sea level conditions using the AB G7 for the 750gr Amax

1,000yds = 6.3mil
2,000yds = 19.7mil
2,500yds = 30.7mil

Now show me how you will get that out of a 28 inch barrel.

Also the rifle must weigh less than 22lbs, no more than 18lbs barrel attached with an empty magazine. Bolt action, magazine fed. Peak recoil with suppressor attached must be less than 25 ft-lbs. Length of pull is 14.5 inches, Suppressor is 8.5 inches. Total length is 56 inches. That leaves you 33 inches for the action and barrel to make those numbers work.

Make it work with a 750gr amax at 3850 fps and stay inside the rifle criteria.

Sandow the Heretic · May 29, 2024

DocUSMCRetired said:
I ran the numbers. To get 6.5 mils out of the 800 grain requires 3050fps. At 2850 your holding 37 mils. To match up to the .375s you would need to push 3050fps. Hornady AMAX would need 2900fps.

Out of the rifle requirements for barrel and other parameters you are looking closer at around 2300 - 2400 FPS. Which would give you the following for the .50 BMG under the new requirements:

1000 meters = 12 mils
2000 meters = 37 mils
2500 meters = 57 mils.

You are not going to get even close to 2800 fps if you follow the project guidelines for weight, barrel length, and other aspects.

.375 EnABELR has already been selected as the replacement, after years of success at this point down range. It proved to be a better option. The only question now is who will build the new rifle, and what will the final design look like. We don't have a dog in this race either way so it is exciting to get to sit back and watch what they come up with.

stefan73 · May 29, 2024

DocUSMCRetired said:
Around 2017

No kidding, I didn't think the enabler had been around for that long. Cool

Sandow the Heretic · May 29, 2024

7mmShooter said:
750gr Amax at just 2850fps… standard Sea level conditions using the AB G7 for the 750gr Amax

1,000yds = 6.3mil
2,000yds = 19.7mil
2,500yds = 30.7mil

You can't push amax that fast. It barely can be pushed to 2700. The problem is the bearing surface is massive on a swaged bullet. Damn near an inch long. Most of the time 2650 is where those end up shooting well. Solids have a much smaller drive band and can be pushed faster safely.

-Alex

DocUSMCRetired · May 29, 2024

Sandow the Heretic said:
You can't push amax that fast. It barely can be pushed to 2700. The problem is the bearing surface is massive on a swaged bullet. Damn near an inch long. Most of the time 2650 is where those end up shooting well. Solids have a much smaller drive band and can be pushed faster safely.

-Alex

Max weight of the empty rifle needs to be 18lbs or less as well. And maximum recoil needs to be under 25 ft lbs. That is going to drive your velocity way down.

7mmShooter · May 29, 2024

Sandow the Heretic said:
You can't push amax that fast. It barely can be pushed to 2700. The problem is the bearing surface is massive on a swaged bullet. Damn near an inch long. Most of the time 2650 is where those end up shooting well. Solids have a much smaller drive band and can be pushed faster safely.

-Alex

Even at 2650, 36.7 mils to 2500yds. Still way closer to the 375 than what Doc originally posted, that was my point. It’s not the slouch that Doc originally made it look like. Within the limits of the program the .50 doesn’t stand a chance on recoil force alone, anyone can see that.

Sandow the Heretic · May 29, 2024

DocUSMCRetired said:
Max weight of the empty rifle needs to be 18lbs or less as well. And maximum recoil needs to be under 25 ft lbs. That is going to drive your velocity way down.

That is an impossible number for recoil. How is that being measured?

7mmShooter said:
Even at 2650, 36.7 mils to 2500yds. Still way closer to the 375 than what Doc originally posted, that was my point.

For sure.

-Alex

Terry Cross · May 29, 2024

DocUSMCRetired said:
Also the rifle must weigh less than 22lbs, no more than 18lbs barrel attached with an empty magazine. Bolt action, magazine fed. Peak recoil with suppressor attached must be less than 25 ft-lbs. Length of pull is 14.5 inches, Suppressor is 8.5 inches. Total length is 56 inches. That leaves you 33 inches for the action and barrel to make those numbers work.

Sounds like they specifically wrote their constraints around the .375
With the size and recoil energy parameters, they are effectively blocking any future iterations or evolution of the 50.

Asgard1 · May 29, 2024

Terry Cross said:
Sounds like they specifically wrote their constraints around the .375
With the size and recoil energy parameters, they are effectively blocking any future iterations or evolution of the 50.

No... DOD always has a wish list. The 375 enabelr is currently the only one that comes close but i am sure it will be obsolite before long and out of the running as advancement happen ever year. Strange how a industry is hindered by a box mag
..

Sandow the Heretic · May 29, 2024

Asgard1 said:
No... DOD always has a wish list. The 375 enabelr is currently the only one that comes close but i am sure it will be obsolite before long and out of the running as advancement happen ever year. Strange how a industry is hindered by a box mag
..

Enabler seems like an evolutionary dead end. Market penetration in competition is pretty close to zero. 375 Enabler and 375 Ct have pretty comparable MV and the CT has better data depth and uses a smaller action which works well with the goal of reduced weight. I would think that the larger bolt face would also mean heavier brass/ammo. I'm open to rational explanations as to why it may be better, I just haven't seen one.

-Alex

Asgard1 · May 29, 2024

Sandow the Heretic said:
Enabler seems like an evolutionary dead end. Market penetration in competition is pretty close to zero. 375 Enabler and 375 Ct have pretty comparable MV and the CT has better data depth and uses a smaller action which works well with the goal of reduced weight. I would think that the larger bolt face would also mean heavier brass/ammo. I'm open to rational explanations as to why it may be better, I just haven't seen one.

-Alex

The enabelr does not use a larger action then the cheytac it uses a cheytac action and cheytac box the enabelr is formed or made from the 585 nyatti brass .200 mark is larger in diamiter aprox .660 once fireformed. But the rim is rebated to cheytac .637 simply put its a atempt to compete performance with the cheytac with more box room for higher bc longer bullets. But performance wise it fell short. Same weight rifle lesser performance as the cheytac.

Huskydriver · May 29, 2024

cuirc said:
Since the 338 LM performance is close to halfway toward the 50 cal; and still "comfortable" to shoot, They should leave well enough alone. The 375 would be maybe halfway between the 338 LM and the 50 cal , so I don't see the point. Certainly a 50 Cal can do things that a 375 no matter how hot won't. Don't screw with something that works just to keep the ordinance folks busy!

338lm is garbage.... It's 2024

J McGriddle · May 29, 2024

Asgard1 said:
Barrett lost out on the contract

Can you share your source for this?

Sandow the Heretic · May 29, 2024

Asgard1 said:
The enabelr does not use a larger action then the cheytac it uses a cheytac action and cheytac box the enabelr is formed or made from the 585 nyatti brass .200 mark is larger in diamiter aprox .660 once fireformed. But the rim is rebated to cheytac .637 simply put its a atempt to compete performance with the cheytac with more box room for higher bc longer bullets. But performance wise it fell short. Same weight rifle lesser performance as the cheytac.

Damn... I don't know why it is stuck in my head that this is a necked down and shortened BMG case. Rarer than rocking-horse shit in competition so I think I've only seen two. Guess I should have done the math. Necking down to 338 is doable on a BMG case but Skip said the barrel life was atrocious.

Shorter cartridge OAL is solvable with bullet and chamber design alone. Seems like that would have been the obvious solution if the only upside is lower OAL.

-Alex

cuirc · May 29, 2024

Huskydriver said:
338lm is garbage.... It's 2024

Everyone is entitled to there opinion. I like it. I might also like a new cartridge based on the 375 it certainly as am impressive drag coefficient. Since I wrote the tread some information was given me which makes me maintain an open mind on the proposed changes not that that matters!
Yours for good shooting.

Dogtown · May 29, 2024

Huskydriver said:
338lm is garbage.... It's 2024

I want to agree, but I’d just say in 2024 there are better options for most applications where it was once a top contender. Its kind of like .308WIN today vs twenty years ago: sure, it gets the job done but there are better options now.

Huskydriver · May 30, 2024

Dogtown said:
I want to agree, but I’d just say in 2024 there are better options for most applications where it was once a top contender. Its kind of like .308WIN today vs twenty years ago: sure, it gets the job done but there are better options now.

Exactly... I can't see any reason to run a 338lm with today's cartridges

Dogtown · May 30, 2024

.338LM Improved is a much better .338LM, but with .33XC you can get virgin brass. Shooting .50BMG all day in the Army felt like I was giving myself a concussion; shooting .338LM all day sometimes hurts my shoulder; but I can shoot .300NM all weekend AND it has a much better selection of bullets.

cuirc · May 30, 2024

Could you be more specific:
I get less than 1/2 MOA with it at 100 yds with a MDT brake it is almost comfortable to shoot. I does the job. Only issue I can see is the cost per round

Huskydriver · May 30, 2024

Dogtown said:
.338LM Improved is a much better .338LM, but with .33XC you can get virgin brass. Shooting .50BMG all day in the Army felt like I was giving myself a concussion; shooting .338LM all day sometimes hurts my shoulder; but I can shoot .300NM all weekend AND it has a much better selection of bullets.

I agree. 338lm is just not relevant anymore

stefan73 · May 30, 2024

Huskydriver said:
I agree. 338lm is just not relevant anymore

Not relevant how? For what purpose?

Huskydriver · May 30, 2024

stefan73 said:
Not relevant how? For what purpose?

33xc all day over 338lm

cuirc · May 30, 2024

Just because there has been progress on a cartridge is no reason to bad mouth the original cartridge that served a purpose quite well for several years. By that logic we would get 243 SM and stop using the 243 because an improvement has been made! no reason to bad mouth a good cartridge!

Dogtown · May 30, 2024

Huskydriver said:
33xc all day over 338lm

Unless you need a magazine fed rifle, which I’m fairly certain this contract requires. That’s the crux of 33xc

Huskydriver · May 30, 2024

Dogtown said:
Unless you need a magazine fed rifle, which I’m fairly certain this contract requires. That’s the crux of 33xc

That's where the 375 enabler comes in haha

Huskydriver · May 30, 2024

cuirc said:
Just because there has been progress on a cartridge is no reason to bad mouth the original cartridge that served a purpose quite well for several years. By that logic we would get 243 SM and stop using the 243 because an improvement has been made! no reason to bad mouth a good cartridge!

243 blows as well along with 308win since im committing blasphemy might as well go all in

stefan73 · May 30, 2024

Huskydriver said:
33xc all day over 338lm

and 416 Barret or 375 CT or 375 CT Improved over 33XC. I guess the 33XC just isn't relevant

stefan73 · May 30, 2024

Huskydriver said:
243 blows as well along with 308win since im committing blasphemy might as well go all in

That one was actually funny.

Having trouble using the site?

Kicking around the .375 E to replace 50 cal. in the ELR-SR role.

Dingleberry

Private

Ke = (mv^2)/2

Private

Applied Ballistics

Private

Applied Ballistics

Private

Powder Consumer

Private

Private

Sergeant of the Hide

Applied Ballistics

Private

Private

Private

Applied Ballistics

Private

Sergeant

Applied Ballistics

Private

Applied Ballistics

Applied Ballistics

Private

Sergeant

Private

Applied Ballistics

Private

Private

Dingleberry

Private

Private

Private

Not here for a long time but here for a good time

Gunny Sergeant

Private

Sergeant of the Hide

Ke = (mv^2)/2

Not here for a long time but here for a good time

Ke = (mv^2)/2

Sergeant of the Hide

Not here for a long time but here for a good time

Sergeant

Not here for a long time but here for a good time

Sergeant of the Hide

Ke = (mv^2)/2

Not here for a long time but here for a good time

Not here for a long time but here for a good time

Sergeant

Sergeant

Similar threads