-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
FBI Sniper Rifles
- Thread starter Toftwo
- Start date
I'll pull the post 64 box out of the rifle and take some pics of it too.
These are out of very early post 1964 model 70’s, they may have been manufactured in late 1964. Anyway, the short cartridge box and follower are from a 243 varmint and the other is from a 3006.
The post has a more box like spacer and is spot welded in place.
The post has a more box like spacer and is spot welded in place.
They're MDT's, but I'm not sure which model off the top of my head. I ...think... it's available commercially. Pretty certain it's just a Rem 700 chassis because they have the safety cutout for a Rem trigger.
That was the plan ole LSS.
There’s probably a rattlesnake underneath that pack.
Bedded and ready to fire. If it shoots, it's off for black oxide.
Did they rebarrel the HS when they stuck it in the chassis? Oh any ideas who made the accessory mount?
Ten rounds. Not too bad for a near 40yr old Douglas tube.
Yes, they did. 16" 1:8T HS Precision barrels. Marksman or Med Palma contour.
The rings, rail, and forward bridge are Badger Ord. Chassis and Butt Stock are MDT.
That terrible muzzle device was from Great Lakes Tactical.
I've gotten several questions via PM regarding the FBI Remington 700. They pre-date me, but in talking with guys I know in Quantico, here's the scoop.
With regard to the Remington: There is a distinction between a SWAT rifle and an HRT rifle.
SWAT:
Rem 700 action
Douglas #6, 12twist, carbon steel
Leupold 3.5-10 Vari-X III with either Duplex or Mil-dot
Leupold or Redfield scope mount, bottom screw rings
HRT:
Rem 700 or 40X action (due to clip-slot for Unertl mount)
Hart #7 contour, 12twist, stainless
Unertl mount and "10X Sniper" scope
McMillan Hunter, A2 or A3 stock for either, depending on timeframe.
With regard to the Remington: There is a distinction between a SWAT rifle and an HRT rifle.
SWAT:
Rem 700 action
Douglas #6, 12twist, carbon steel
Leupold 3.5-10 Vari-X III with either Duplex or Mil-dot
Leupold or Redfield scope mount, bottom screw rings
HRT:
Rem 700 or 40X action (due to clip-slot for Unertl mount)
Hart #7 contour, 12twist, stainless
Unertl mount and "10X Sniper" scope
McMillan Hunter, A2 or A3 stock for either, depending on timeframe.
Last edited:
It’s a take-off barrel. Didn’t even have to cut it or the action. It screwed on and head spaced, so we let it ride.
Awesome, gives me some faith in using my take off. So that’s a 700 with a Douglas not a Hart?
Thanks, Mr. Huskey. It's a retirement gift for my first sniper team leader. I learned an awful lot from him and he's one of my best friends. Walked through many doors with him either right in front of or behind me. Go anywhere with that guy... You know the type.
From little things I've been able to get him to say over the last two years I've been scrounging parts, I think this will be exactly like his first FBI sniper rifle. I even got within about 2,000 serials of his, which he still has the logbook for. I'm very excited to hand it to him.
From little things I've been able to get him to say over the last two years I've been scrounging parts, I think this will be exactly like his first FBI sniper rifle. I even got within about 2,000 serials of his, which he still has the logbook for. I'm very excited to hand it to him.
Rgr, knowing that type. I am reading what one of them wrote, doing a gift for his partner.
You rock !!!!!
I miss the companionship of people like you and Ray. Not the job, not the job. Y'all....
Brothers.
A question, how effective are the shorter barrels? I know we talk on here a lot about how they still keep their accuracy, if just a little velocity loss. It seems to me that would be a small adjustment. And, providing all the precision is put into the rifle, it shoots just as accurate? The gain in manueverability in tight areas plus not needing a really long-range rifle make it worth doing it that way I think. What's your take on that?
Now, me in the field, I'll take the long barrel every day, all day, 8 days a week. Or, use my AR.
The short barrel guns are plenty effective for what LE snipers do. In the case of the 16" FBI gun, the few hundred of them I have seen/helped chronograph run about 2475-2500fps with Fed Gold Medal Match 168gr ammo. And, they seem to all shoot "about" 1MOA. They shoot ok, but not great. And, getting that 1MOA performance takes work. It's an unforgiving rifle to a shooter who's not applying the fundamentals. I've seen more than a few students come through and complain that something is wrong with his/her rifle... "I shoot an AI on the weekends and can stack rounds on top of each other, but this is all over the map!" Give them a new scope/rifle and the same thing happens. If you think think you can do the free-recoil, thumb-on-the-side, gamer crap, this rifle will quickly reveal your weaknesses.
Overall, while I can't deny the size/length of the rifle lends to its mission effectiveness, I don't like firing it. I don't like the chassis, the butt stock, the scope, the muzzle device, or the twist rate. I much preferred shooting the HS in its original form.
Long story short, the size is right...
Overall, while I can't deny the size/length of the rifle lends to its mission effectiveness, I don't like firing it. I don't like the chassis, the butt stock, the scope, the muzzle device, or the twist rate. I much preferred shooting the HS in its original form.
Long story short, the size is right...
That's pretty interesting. I picked up a FN PBR a year or so ago, and wow, does that thing wants to fly all over. Load it with light/moderate rounds and I can control it.
Something I've learned from F-Class is when I am not right behind the rifle and it pushes to the left or right, that's where my bullet goes. I'll be right on the X and if it pushes right, my bullet ends up out in the 9-ring. The thing is, this is exaggerated on an F-Class target and 600+ yds. Fundamentals are very important. I used to discount half-moa flyers. Not anymore. When it shows up "big" on the target and no one else is making those "big" mistakes in a no wind shot...it tells you something.
Rgr...
16" bbl...
Used to shooting an 18# 26" barrel..
Used to shooting a 17.5# 24" barrel..
And go to a 13# 16" barrel.....
Physics IS physics. Immutable. Cannot get around it.
Shoot the 18# bolt gun, then go to a 16# ar10 platform, and the bolt rock and roll... and physics and momentum starts biting.
Everybody (that I know and/or shot, or trained with) who ever ran a sniper rifle, shot better with the heavy rifles.
As did the NRA cross course and long range shooters. And the saying, tighter hold (hard hold), tighter group. Dem dam amu boyz beat that in my head.
Mr. Galli and I have fundamental differences in what he teaches people and what I teach LE people. My deal is, you were born with two hands, arms, legs, n feet, and the body that's your platform. And at some point, whatever rifle platform you pick up, you best be able to shoot it with you and your body alone, controlled by those arms and hands, and able to put the bullet where your eye looks at.
In any running gun two way range.
In 3 seconds.
But, I'm just an old guy, over the hill, just sayin.
16" bbl...
Used to shooting an 18# 26" barrel..
Used to shooting a 17.5# 24" barrel..
And go to a 13# 16" barrel.....
Physics IS physics. Immutable. Cannot get around it.
Shoot the 18# bolt gun, then go to a 16# ar10 platform, and the bolt rock and roll... and physics and momentum starts biting.
Everybody (that I know and/or shot, or trained with) who ever ran a sniper rifle, shot better with the heavy rifles.
As did the NRA cross course and long range shooters. And the saying, tighter hold (hard hold), tighter group. Dem dam amu boyz beat that in my head.
Mr. Galli and I have fundamental differences in what he teaches people and what I teach LE people. My deal is, you were born with two hands, arms, legs, n feet, and the body that's your platform. And at some point, whatever rifle platform you pick up, you best be able to shoot it with you and your body alone, controlled by those arms and hands, and able to put the bullet where your eye looks at.
In any running gun two way range.
In 3 seconds.
But, I'm just an old guy, over the hill, just sayin.
Best I remember was the 1907 military sling. I remember a few guys having them. I remember the hooks killing sand socks. I remember most of the guys un hooking the back of the sling and letting it run loose prone off the bipod and sand sock.
Been trying to find old training pics. No luck with that so far.
Got all the parts I could find to do the evolution picture, been rained out, or busy as hell.
I wonder if anybody here in the topic remembers when Federal dropped speed on the 168 Sierra from 2750 to 2650, and why....
Red n White box, 2750.
Blue n white box, 2750.
Gold/orangish/w green box, 2610 out of my AI... went into investigative mode and found out both Federal and Hornady 168 police offerings are both running 2650 nominal with a few Hornady lots at 2625 slow...
(I have a lost period in the last 9 years, was not paying attention and rarely shooting the 168 past 300 yards )(somebody's been playing with a 338 lapua too much...)
Annoyed bc 308/168/2610-25 gets squirrely past 800 yards that slow. Shoots great at 600...
Been trying to find old training pics. No luck with that so far.
Got all the parts I could find to do the evolution picture, been rained out, or busy as hell.
I wonder if anybody here in the topic remembers when Federal dropped speed on the 168 Sierra from 2750 to 2650, and why....
Red n White box, 2750.
Blue n white box, 2750.
Gold/orangish/w green box, 2610 out of my AI... went into investigative mode and found out both Federal and Hornady 168 police offerings are both running 2650 nominal with a few Hornady lots at 2625 slow...
(I have a lost period in the last 9 years, was not paying attention and rarely shooting the 168 past 300 yards )(somebody's been playing with a 338 lapua too much...)
Annoyed bc 308/168/2610-25 gets squirrely past 800 yards that slow. Shoots great at 600...
Others will know more, but my understanding is that Federal typically loads their 168 GMM ammo to ~ 2600 or 2650 fps - as it is an accuracy node out to 600 yards - verified by the US military during the NM M14 program way back in the 1960s. I could be wrong, but I think for the past 20 years or so, Federal 168 GMM ammo has been loaded with a medium burn-rate powder with a port pressure level that is safe for M14s/M1As. A lot of matches were won with Federal GMM in National Match M14s during the 1980s-1990s for all events out to 600 yards - before the NM M16's took over at Camp Perry.
As your question about 'why' they would load it at 2650 fps? Well, I suspect Federal is still catering to the M1A crowd, and slightly downloads their famous 168 GMM ammo so its safe and accurate in an M1A. (It's still my favorite factory ammo in my M1As, and I use it as my 'control' load when handloading for an M1A).
Here's some history if interested: (see pics 1 thru 4) Federal's 168 SMK match round is listed on the boxes at 2600 fps or 2650 fps (using 24" barrel), based on what is written on their more recent boxes. The old 'red box' ammo from 1988 doesn't list velocity, neither does the silver 1991/93 dated box. The 1998 dated 'white and blue' box lists 2600 fps. The more recent 'orange and black' boxes dated 2009 reflect 2650 for the 168 SMK (and 2600 fps for the 175 SMK).
Here's a link with a lot of info re the old M852 round that used the 168 SMK, but below is the key finding from military testing for the National Match M14 rifle:
All you ever wanted to know about M852,
but were afraid to ask . . . NOTE: In the study cited, evaluations of several commercial match grade bullets for their potential to improve the accuracy of the 7.62mm M118 Match Cartridge. It is inevitable that comparisons will be made between the performances of the various manufacturers as...
www.m14forum.com
The 1962 Change Request being referred to re the 2640 fps for the old M72 match ammo (30-06) - was applied to the then-new M118 Match ammo (7.62x51mm) at 2550 fps (both using the same 174 grain FMJBT bullet of that era). I mention this b/c the same 2550 fps was specified 20 years later (circa 1981) when the military adopted the M852 match ammo that used the same 168 SMK that Federal still uses today in their Gold Medal Match 308W ammo. I should note that the muzzle velocity of M852 out of bolt action rifle with a 24" barrel is in the 2600 to 2650 range, but out of an M14 its about 50 fps slower due to the shorter 22" barrel and gas port that bleeds off some of the pressure. (5th picture shows some 1987 era M852 Match with the 168 SMK bullet. Note the velocity of 2550 fps - but not stated is that refers being '78 feet from the muzzle,' per the US military's legacy early 20th century testing methodology).
Excerpt from an online article that has unfortunately disappeared, 7.62 NATO Long Range Match Cartridges, By Frederick Salberta:
I think this is why old-timers who competed with the M14/M1A 'back in the day' - recommend that whatever medium burn rate powder one uses for loading the 168 SMK, try to load the charge weight so its as close to 2550 to 2600 fps at the muzzle as possible - at least that is what I have heard time and time again. In a bolt action rifle, obviously there is no such thing as port pressure, so one can use a variety of burn rates and bullet weights, but that is not the case in the civilian M1A (based on the M14).
(Last 3 pics show Federal's American Eagle 168 OTM ammo that is designed/marketed specifically for the M1A, and is a slightly cheaper alternative to the 168 GMM, - but I will note that velocity is the same as GMM, 2650 fps at the muzzle with a 168 grain 'Open Tip Match' bullet).
(For 1000 yards, typically different bullets were used due to the instability of the 168 SMK beyond 800 yards. I will note that based on that article by Frederick Salberta, for the 1000 yards matches, in the 1980s/early 1990s the USMC did load a very hot 168 SMK load called the "G4" load - and it was strictly on virgin LC brass and it was a once-fired proposition with all that over-stressed brass collected for disposal after the match. The gas system on the M14 rifle was modified with a larger gas port for all the additional port pressure. The long-range M14 rifles set-up for the G4 rounds were dedicated, and no other ammo was used in them. The reported velocity was 2800 fps out of an M14, so it was still super sonic at 1000 yards, but it was hard on the guns and I assume barrel life was short too... The 175 SMK bullet came out in 1995 and fixed that range limitation inherit on the older 168 SMK design).
Apologizes for the verbosity, but I have read a lot about this topic, and I hope some of this info was helpful.
Attachments
Last edited:
Others will know more, but my understanding is that Federal typically loads their 168 GMM ammo to ~ 2600 or 2650 fps - as it is an accuracy node out to 600 yards - verified by the US military during the NM M14 program way back in the 1960s. I could be wrong, but the past 20 years or so, Federal 168 GMM ammo has been loaded with a medium-rate burn powder with a port pressure level that is safe for M14s/M1As. A lot of matches were won with Federal GMM in National Match M14s during the 1980s-1990s for all events out to 600 yards - before the NM M16's took over at Camp Perry.
As your question about 'why' they would load it at 2650 fps? Well, I suspect Federal is still catering to the M1A crowd, and slightly downloads their famous 168 GMM ammo so its safe and accurate in an M1A. (It's still my favorite factory ammo in my M1As, and I use it as my 'control' load when handloading for an M1A).
Here's some history if interested: Federal's 168 SMK match round is listed on the boxes at 2600 fps or 2650 fps (using 24" barrel), based on what is written on their more recent boxes. The old 'red box' ammo from 1988 doesn't list velocity, neither does the silver 1991/93 dated box. The 1998 dated 'white and blue' box lists 2600 fps. The more recent 'orange and black' boxes dated 2009 reflect 2650 for the 168 SMK (and 2600 fps for the 175 SMK).
Here's a link with a lot of info re the old M852 round that used the 168 SMK, but below is the key finding from military testing for the M14 rifle:
All you ever wanted to know about M852,
but were afraid to ask . . . NOTE: In the study cited, evaluations of several commercial match grade bullets for their potential to improve the accuracy of the 7.62mm M118 Match Cartridge. It is inevitable that comparisons will be made between the performances of the various manufacturers as...
The 1962 Change Request being referred to re the 2640 fps for the old M72 match ammo (30-06) - was applied to the then-new M118 Match ammo (7.62x51mm) at 2550 fps (both using the same 174 grain FMJBT bullet of that era). I mention this b/c the same 2550 fps was specified 20 years later (circa 1981) when the military adopted the M852 match ammo that used the same 168 SMK that Federal still uses today in their Gold Medal Match 308W ammo. I should note that the muzzle velocity of M852 out of bolt action rifle with a 24" barrel is in the 2600 to 2650 range, but out of an M14 its about 50 fps slower due to the shorter 22" barrel and gas port that bleeds off some of the pressure. (5th picture shows some 1987 era M852 Match with the 168 SMK bullet. Note the velocity of 2550 fps - but not stated is that refers being '78 feet from the muzzle,' per the US military's legacy early 20th century testing methodology).
Excerpt from an online article that has unfortunately disappeared, 7.62 NATO Long Range Match Cartridges, By Frederick Salberta:
I think this is why old-timers who competed with the M14/M1A 'back in the day' - recommend that whatever medium burn rate powder one uses for loading the 168 SMK, try to load the charge weight so its as close to 2550 to 2600 fps at the muzzle as possible - at least that is what I have heard time and time again. In a bolt action rifle, obviously there is no such thing as port pressure, so one can use a variety of burn rates and bullet weights, but that is not the case in the civilian M1A (based on the M14).
(Last 3 pics show Federal's American Eagle 168 OTM ammo that is designed/marketed specifically for the M1A, and is a slightly cheaper alternative to the 168 GMM, - but I will note that velocity is the same as GMM, 2650 fps at the muzzle with a 168 grain 'Open Tip Match' bullet).
(For 1000 yards, typically different bullets were used due to the instability of the 168 SMK beyond 800 yards. I will note that based on that article by Frederick Salberta, for the 1000 yards matches, in the 1980s/early 1990s the USMC did load a very hot 168 SMK load called the "G4" load - and it was strictly on virgin LC brass and it was a once-fired proposition with all that over-stressed brass collected for disposal after the match. The gas system on the M14 rifle was modified with a larger gas port for all the additional port pressure. The long-range M14 rifles set-up for the G4 rounds were dedicated, and no other ammo was used in them. The reported velocity was 2800 fps out of an M14, so it was still super sonic at 1000 yards, but it was hard on the guns and I assume barrel life was short too... The 175 SMK bullet came out in 1995 and fixed that range limitation inherit on the older 168 SMK design).
Apologizes for the verbosity, but I have read a lot about this topic, and I hope some of this info was helpful.
I am one of those old timers who shot the State Rifle team m14's and my built M1A's.
There was a special mod to the gas system and we shot 180 and 190 sierras with 42 grains of 4064. Yes. It was hard on those guns, very. Verrryyy...
I lived through those times.....
Federal and the 168, loaded three FGMM loads, 4895 USMC, 4064 Army, and ww748 for the FBI/.gov.
I had three different blue/white box lots that ran 2750 out of a 26" barrel. WW748...
I had 9k lot 1.
I had 11k lot 2.
I had 17k lot 3.....
I was remembering those lots. I shot them in LE Mil International Sniper comps. Had a good sponsor..... pretty free giving us ammo.
It's just been awhile since I tried to stick a 168 to 1000. Was pretty disappointed after being spoiled by those 37k rds that shot to 1000 no problem.
Thanks for the articles, they brought back memories, good ones.
Well here’s my start to a model 70 fbi build.
As an update, I just got the barreled action for the Remington 700 SWAT rifle I'm working on back from black oxide. It looks fantastic. Ordered some new action screws, need to fit an internal magazine box, and tweak the trigger and it'll be ready.
Will try to get a pic or two up soon.
Will try to get a pic or two up soon.
Which model rifle did Ron Horuchi use at Ruby Ridge?
Also what rifle was used to kill the son's dog?
Also what rifle was used to kill the son's dog?
Never heard of him, but at the time HRT would've been using Quantico built Remington's. A dog would probably have been greeted with a MP5SD.
So if I’m reading this correctly, either redfield or Leupold bases/rings would be correct for my pre64 m70 build? And as far as the mcmillan stock went, I ordered mine June 26th, and received it last week. Fastest I’ve ever had a mcmillan go through, lead time was quoted at 5-6 months.
I've seen Leupold and Redfield bases but only Redfield bottom-screw rings on these old guns.
As anticipated, a pic of initial mock-up after black oxide:
As anticipated, a pic of initial mock-up after black oxide:
Bottom screw redfields, yes, per Skunk and what I saw, handled, and shot.
Great news on the stock. !!!
Thank you sir, was able to grab a Leupold vxiii 3.5-10 target model today on eBay also. Just need my barrel and scope mount now
I called Douglas about a barrel several months back. The guy I spoke to sounded like he had been there quite awhile and when I asked him about the contour for a FBI sniper rifle, he immediately said, "that was our number 6." He also said they stock them, can install one on your rifle, and do the finish in a "couple weeks" for about $500. That was with the XX Air Gauged Premium barrel...
Why were you upset with my question concerning rifles used at Ruby Ridge? The question was about what guns were in use at the time, not about killing Randy Weaver's wife and her son's dog.
Because your question opens the door to the politics of the time and how people feel about it. @Skunk answered your question about the rifle. You asking why we're not happy about your questions shows you'd rather go down the politics road instead of the "what about rifles of the time road".
Added: If you want to take the road you continue to ask about, go start a thread in the Bear Pit.
