Army M24 Build Thread

[Yustax]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Quick question. Supposing I had an M24 SWS chambered for 308. What would I need to rechamber it to 300 winmag? Just interchange bolt faces? Or you need a complete different barrel or other parts?

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

The barrel would have to re-chambered for .300 Win Mag, you would have to get a .300 Win Mag bolt and then the magazine follower would have to be switched out for a .300 Win Mag follower. That's about it.

 

[lockedandloaded]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

The twist rate is kinda sketchy for the 300WM, but should work okay with lighter weight bullets.

 

[Flatbush Harry]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

She looks like a girl I invited to go snipe hunting with me when I was about 20.

LOL

FH

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lockedandloaded</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The twist rate is kinda sketchy for the 300WM, but should work okay with lighter weight bullets. </div></div>

Yea if it were me, I'd re-barrel it for the .300 WM. I don't know what the twist rate 1 in 11.25 would do with the .300 WM even the 190 grain BTHP. The XM2010s are M24 receivers being re-vamped with a 22 inch .300 WM barrel with 5R 1 in 10 inch right hand twist.

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Actually if it were me, I wouldn't do the .300 WM at all. I had a Remington M700 PSS .300WM several years ago and it was WAY more punishing to shoot than a Barrett .50 cal (see my avatar pic)! I never got thru the barrel break-in before I sold it off, less than 40 rounds. Never mounted the scope to it. Hated it! Still have some ammo left over that I need to get rid of.

I've shot my 7.62mm M24s out to 1000m and I'm quite satisfied with their performance to that range (9 inch groups or less). I won't be shooting anything any further out than that.

 

[lockedandloaded]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

There are already 3 seperate threads posted about this recent development. But in case anyone missed those, allow me to give a heads up:

http://www.defensereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/M24-Sales-Flyer-01-05-12.pdf

 

[perkantino]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Will the 30-06 ADL internal box mag and follower load 308 ?
Also, bottom metal is not fitting, because the ADL internal box mag is too tall.
However it's an ADL mag. In know this, because I checked and it's 7 mm longer than my SPS tac internal box mag. Anyone know why? "5+1" mag vs "4+1" mag may be?

If anyone has that mag, can they measure the length of it at the back (Where the back of the cartridge sits). 31 mm or 38 mm. My SPS tac is 31 mm at the back. I have two ADL 30-06 mags, and they both measure 38 mm at the back. As a result, bottom metal won't fit by precisely 7mm, which is anoying, because rifle is ready to be assembled.

 

[red6actual]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

I measure my M24 mag at 32.5MM, I bet they(Remington) modify the ADL magazine to fit with the Dakota/Sunny Hill metal.

 

[perkantino]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

What I don't understand is why no one here caught this.
The ADL mag won't work. What mag will is the question.
That or I am the only guy in the world with 2 ADL mags measuring both 38 mm, while 32.5 or 31 mm is what's required for a fit.
Thank you sir. Your input's been most valuable.

 

[bcw1284]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

ADL internal boxes have to be cut down in order to run with a floorplate. You need a BDL mag box if you want a "drop in solution".

I have dakota metal on my .30-06, and i'm using a BDL box. I just measured its height (@ rear of mag box) with calipers and got 29.6mm.

You can order the BDL internal mag from midway or brownells for around $10. The .30-06 size will also work for win-mag cartridges as long as you have the correct follower.

And not to rehash an old subject, but i'd like to know where that info came from about the Badger metal and double stack mags. The standard rem 700 action can NOT feed from double stacks. It's not an issue of the floor metal, it's an issue of the action's physical dimensions. The bottom port needs to be enlarged in order to do this... this is why some aftermarket "700 style" actions (like the ones from R&D precision) have a larger bottom port, so they can use AW mags (double stacking).

The simple solution for those of you who want a double stacker is to get the Alpha mag that double stacks but single feeds. Or, find a smith who can modify your action.

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

I assure you that the ADL magazine is what is used for the M24. It's the only 700 box magazine that has a tab on the side for the screw that attaches it to the receiver. Below is my Remington M24 factory magazine. Like Red6actual said, the Custom Shop modifies these magazines to fit.

Notice the wear mark on the bottom edge. That portion is sliding into the Sunny Hill floor plate 4.5mm.

A couple of other close ups of a factory M24 magazine.

 

[bcw1284]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Like I said, it has to be cut down... which he could do with a dremel, etc. I assumed he wanted the easiest solution to get his rifle running, nobody cares if the magazine box is "spec". The BDL box is the "plug and chug" solution. But if you really want the little screw, then chop up an ADL.

I can assure you that the BDL will work if you don't want to cut one up. I have one sitting right here in my dakota floorplate. But since you already have it, the easiest thing might be to slice the ADL if you have the means.

Thanks to EOD6 for the dimensioned picture.

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

You actually posted your BDL solution while I was writing my post so you beat me to the punch. I haven't seen the BDL magazine in relation to the Dakota/Sunny Hill floor plate but I'll take your word for it that it works. Only the purist will know the difference.

 

[bcw1284]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

No worries, we are on the same page that the mag needs to be shorter no matter how that happens. I actually like the cut down ADL more because it can be a PITA to keep the bdl one from popping out of place during install of the floorplate. I never had these issues with the factory metal, but the dakota does not want to "grip" the mag box. It's just a hassle during install, once you get it in it's ok.

Seriously, thanks for the pic. I have one I need to shorten for another project and those dimensions are helpful. Sorry if the previous post came off as grouchy, it was unintentional.

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Nah, you didn't come off as grouchy at all. You're welcome for the measurements though. I would take them with a grain of salt and only use them as a guide. Red6actual posted his was 32.5mm and he has a factory M24 as well. BTW, it's PITA to put my factory M24 back together again too. That magazine and floormetal are so closely mated. I think Lockedandloaded mentioned this as a systemic problem with the M24.

I've come to understand that a great many parts that were modified or hand made by Remington are not necessarily exactly the same from weapon to weapon. The difference in the magazine length may in fact lie in inconsistencies with the H-S stocks as well. Bottom line is, do what ever works for your rifle. Either homemade, Remington made, GAP, whoever, it's a custom made weapon.

 

[perkantino]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Very interesting. Thank you gentlemen. This has been very informative, and very useful!

 

[red6actual]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

A question for the Army Snipers, are there any day optics in use that are marked "MARK 4 M3-10x" on the bottom?

I know there are the Ultra M3a marked scopes and the newer LR/T M3s with only a serial number that are in use but the MARK 4 marked are in question.

Thank you in advance for the information.

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

What Red6actual is asking is if anyone knows if the early Mark 4 M3 scopes were mounted on US Army rifles. We all know that the M3A was the first batch of scopes to come with the M24.

Later scopes that have been issued on the M24s have been the Mark 4 M3 LR/T scope that have nothing on the bottom of the turret than the serial number like Lockedandloaded showed us back on page 10. What he's asking is if anyone has ever seen this type of M3 on the US Army M24s

 

[lockedandloaded]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

The Dec. 1992 Precision Shooting had an article I wrote about the Leupold Ultra scopes. This was prior to the internetz, and could be considered the 'dark ages' regarding sniper optic technologies.

But common knowledge at the time was the primary difference between the U.S. Army reticle, and the U.S.M.C. version, was how the reticles were manufactured.

The Army used a laser-etched glass reticle in the M3Alpha Ultra 10X. The Marine Corps used a wire reticle in the Unertl 10X.

To the users eye, the major difference is with the shape of the mil-dot. Army dots are circular, USMC dots are eliptical (football) shaped. There were also differences in the thickness of the stadia.

However, at some date, Leupold switched their reticle manufacture over to the wire-formed design. They also changed the name of their scope lineup from Ultra to Mark 4.

Not knowing the exact year Leupold changed over, I cant guess when the M3-10X was dropped from M24 production. However, I have documentation from John D. Rogers of Remington, stating the M24 contract had been finished circa 1995.

 

[lockedandloaded]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

7. When was my scope manufactured?

Every Leupold scope produced since 1974 will have a letter included in the serial number acting as a date-code. Scopes using a letter as a prefix (the beginning of the serial number) were produced between 1974 and 1992. Scopes using a letter as a suffix (the end of the serial number) have been produced after 1992. On the chart below, you will notice the letters “I,” “O,” and “Q” have been omitted as they are easily mistaken for “1,” “0,” and “0” respectively.


<span style="font-weight: bold">Prefix:</span>
E = 1974
F = 1975
G = 1976
H = 1977
J = 1978
K = 1979
L = 1980
M = 1981
N = 1982
P = 1983
R = 1984
S = 1985
T = 1986
U = 1987
V = 1988
W = 1989
X = 1990
Y = 1991
Z = 1992

<span style="font-weight: bold">Suffix:</span>
A = 1993
B = 1994
C = 1995
D = 1996
E = 1997
F = 1998
G = 1999
H = 2000
J = 2001
K = 2002
L = 2003
M = 2004
N = 2005
P = 2006
R = 2007

 

[red6actual]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

I have personally seen M3-10X LR/T scopes on US Army Sniper rifles, recent production runs as well with the Weber sights, 2 piece Leupold bases, etc.

I also own a Mark 4 M3 and M3 LR/T that have glass reticles, and had a wire reticle M1 at one point.

The Ultra M3a may have been dropped from production since Leupold stop producing them and started the MARK 4 line, and then the M3-10X LR/T came along and has been issued and is in use.

I even have 2010 production M118 CCW elevation cams for the M3 LR/T.

The question remains, any confirmation that "Mark 4" marked scopes were issued?

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Nice information on the date codes but it should be noted that these codes do not apply on the M3As as all guesswork was eliminated by actually engraving the date as part of the serial number.

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

I'm not sure of the date that the Ultra M3A changed to the Mark 4 M3 10X either but I'm fairly sure that the Mark 4 M3 10X changed to the the Mark 4 M3 LR/T and that was 2000. In that change the dials reversed their rotation from clockwise to counter-clockwise. A change that I found counter intuitive but that's just me.

Not sure of the dates that changed the reticles from glass to wire but they have since changed back to glass, another date I'm not sure of. Both the M3A and the M3 10X above are glass reticles confirmed by Leupold. The M3A is circa 1991 and the Mark 4 M3 10X is circa 1998. A friend of mine has a factory M24 circa 2006 and it has a M3 LR/T circa 2006 and it too has a glass reticle.

I'd estimate that 6 out of 10 M24s in service today have the newer M3 LR/T scopes but I have nothing to base that on but pure personal observation. Red6Actual and now myself, are interested in knowing if any Army snipers ever had a weapon that used the Mark 4 M3 10X on their issued weapons.

 

[Yustax]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Well, a weapon that I know use the MARK 4 M3 is the MK12 SPR rifle. An accuriced M16. Even though it was designed by the navy. I have seen more than one unit using these.

 

[red6actual]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Yes, the MK 12 does use a MK4 M3 however it is 3.5-10X40, same scope is used on the MK 11 and the Army M14 EBR.

 

[red6actual]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

It also seems clear that the etched glass "Army" mildot reticle was never out of producton.
The fact is that glass reticle M3 10x42 scopes have been witnessed through out the entire production range of all types.

It was used in the Ultra series, MARK 4 M3 10x42 and now the MARK 4 M3 10X42 LR/T series.

The wire reticle that apeared in Leupold scopes 1995/96 time frame was a Premier Reticles "USMC" mildot reticle.

Once Leupold and Premier parted ways in 2004, Leupold was no longer able to offer the wire reticle with USMC football shaped dots.

It is highly unlikely that the Army issued a day optic with a USMC reticle on the M24.

The TMR came along and also had to be an etched glass reticle by necessity of the reticle design.

 

[Yustax]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Any news to use new scopes? I have seen several scopes beside the MK4 M3 on the M24 SWS.

 

[red6actual]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

I have seen the MK 4 M3 variable 3.5-10 on a students rifle at Benning, do not know about any others like the 6.5-20 used on the M2010.

You might find a MK4 M1 in use as well as those are in the inventory but I have no evidence of use on the M24.

 

[Yustax]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Well, I like the new Leupold MK8 3.5-25x56mm. Seems like a better candidate for the M24 SWS than the older MK4 M3.

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Well sure this new Mk8 would be good for the .300WM or .338 Lapua M24s but that's not really the point here. 10X has been more than adequate for the 7.62mm M24. The documented max effective range was 800 meters but show me a sniper who hasn't shot and shot well out to 1000 meters and sometimes beyond. There are very, very limited cases where the US Army ever fielded the .300WM M24. Besides, this thread is all about replicating the US Army's M24 as it was for the past 25 years. What a civilian wants to do with his M24 basic rifle is his business and he can mount any scope he sees fit on it. But if you want to replicate the US Army's M24 then the Mk8 is not appropriate. The M3 10X scope in it's 3 different configurations and to a limited degree the M3 3.5-10X Variable scopes are the only ones that have ever graced the US Army's M24s. And that era is over as they are being turned in now to be converted to the M2010 SWS and it's scope is a Leupold Mk4 6.5-20x50mm with the new M5 locking elevation turret. Who knows though, some day, the Mk8 may make it to the M2010 program, but you'll never see a Mk8 on a US Army M24 because it's retired now.

What we are trying to determine here is "Was the Mark 4 M3 10X scope ever bought or used as a replacement on the M24?". The M3As would have been serviceable for years and unless broken may not have needed replacing before the new Mark 4 M3 LR/T scopes hit the market. Someone out there is bound to know the answer to this?

 

[lockedandloaded]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EODsix</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

What we are trying to determine here is "Was the Mark 4 M3 10X scope ever bought or used as a replacement on the M24?". The M3As would have been serviceable for years and unless broken may not have needed replacing before the new Mark 4 M3 LR/T scopes hit the market. Someone out there is bound to know the answer to this? </div></div>


Trying to keep on topic, I want to mention something that was always an unanswered question regarding the return for repair contract between Remington and the US Army. What did Remington do for damaged M3 scopes? Since Leupold was a sub-contractor to Remington and not to the Army, what if an M24 was sent into Remington with a broken M3?

Under Leupolds Lifetime Warranty, a civilian can send their scope directly to Remington for warranty repairs. Rumor is that the Ultra scopes, due to having their glass elements glued into the scope tube, required a $50 surcharge for repair (rumor, but not verified by myself). Did Remington stockpile a bunch of M3A Ultras for replacement purposes? Did they send them back to Leupold for repair?

 

[para1505]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Are the barrels on M24's, are they cold forgged hammered like there other barrels?

 

[para1505]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

oopps, like Remingtons other barrels

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Yes they are hammer forged though they weren't at the very beginning. Remington did not have the hammer forging equipment. Mike Rock made the first barrels for the M24 and they were button cut but Remington quickly caught up and bought the equipment and ultimately forced Mike Rock out of the business for reasons I shouldn't discuss because it's not first hand knowledge. Remington stated that Mike simply couldn't keep up with demand. Remington subsequently changed out all the barrels on the existing M24s and all new ones came out with the in-house hammer forged barrels.

 

[lockedandloaded]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Examples of operator manuals for the M24

 

[pre64marksman]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Describing M24 stock, EODsix wrote:
"...Note you will not get the Army's butt plate/pad from HS-Precision, that is a Remington product. If you want one of these, you'll have to order it from HS-Precision just like Remington would."

Sorry if this is knukleheaded of me but When you mentioned buttplate/pad, does this mean both the rubber buttpad and the metal base hardware beneath it are both Remington specific? Or just the rubber pad is Remington specific,(Remington logo and profile)? I figure you mean just the pad is remington because I believe the metal base is propriatory HS precision as part of the adjustable stock design.

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Yes the actual rubber piece on the butt plate. Remington provides those to H-S Precision. They are a half inch or so thick unlike the thick pad that is normally attached to that stock from H-S Precision. They are Remington logo-ed. I have seen, actually owned, a H-S Precision logo-ed pad that was the same profile as the Remington pad but I've only seen it once.

 

[pre64marksman]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Are the stocks still 6 month wait? Or is there an outlet with shorter wait somewhere? As special order is the wait 6 months as they say or is it often shorter than quoted? I understand MCM can easily be a long wait for special order but MCM often makes a run of certain styles to have them in stock. It would be nice if HS did this every once a while.

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Afraid I can't answer that. Check with Stocky's Stocks and see what they say.

 

[pre64marksman]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

they pretty much say 6 months. Its what HS says to. I was just wondering if folks have quicker turnarounds on special orders than the official 6 months quote.

 

[pre64marksman]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Anyone know offhand if the bow of the Badger Ordnance oberndorf style bm has the same width as the Sunny Hill 514 tactical bm?

 

[eodcam]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Quick Question, Are M24 triggers hard to come by?

 

[Smokeytok]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Not sure if it was posted but if any active and prior service military and leo can get a rebuild M24 with optic direct from remington:

http://www.remingtonmilitary.com/Firearms/Sniper%20Rifles/M24-Rebuild.aspx

$3500 so it aint cheap.

 

[eodcam]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

I have a trigger, I was just curious if its hard to come by. I did some trading when i was planning on a build and got it, but as usual I'm changing directions.

 

[eodsix]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

Yes they are hard to come by. Virtually unobtainable by anyone that doesn't have a M24 Serial Number to provide Remington as proof that you own a M24. If it is a real Remington M24 trigger and you don't want it, I'm sure you could find someone on this thread that would gladly take it off your hands. I have a real M24 or I'd buy it myself.

 

[eodcam]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

EODsix are you still Active? I'm at the Head. I don't have the post count yet.

 

[Joe40x]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

There's one on Ebay if anyone is interested. (Not mine or anyone I know)

 

[Joe40x]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

A M24 trigger, that is.

 

[firemanjim]

Re: Army M24 Build Thread

I'm just curious, does anyone have an HS PST006 M24 style stock lying around?

Need a short action stock for a remmy 700 M24/M40 contour.


I really want to make an M24 clone that is long action and as close to spec as possible. But right now for my first starter rifle, I need to cheat a little with what I can afford till I can do it right.

I know this probably belongs in the WTB section, but I was just wondering amongst all these M24 shooters and builders if someone had something lying around.

I'm glad ya'll started this thread BTW. There is a WEALTH of info here for when I finally can get started on my own custom M24 build. Information I never would have found otherwise.