McMillan has posted the spec for their new CS5 "Concealable Subsonic/Supersonic Suppressed Sniper System" - see http://mcmillanusa.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-cs5.php
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
McMillan CS5™ Spec Posted
- Thread starter ELR researcher
- Start date
Re: McMillan CS5™ Spec Posted
Looks like another version of the Tubb 2k rifle trying to do what the DTA SRS does so much better. Seriously, you could just buy a DTA SRS Covert sniper rifle and you wouldn't have to take it apart to maintain a short (26") profile. Plus, you would have a 16 inch barrel verses a 12.5 inch "stubby" barrel. Lots of Tacticool in this "Tubb 2K stubby", but I think the SRS covert is still a far superior engineered system.
Looks like another version of the Tubb 2k rifle trying to do what the DTA SRS does so much better. Seriously, you could just buy a DTA SRS Covert sniper rifle and you wouldn't have to take it apart to maintain a short (26") profile. Plus, you would have a 16 inch barrel verses a 12.5 inch "stubby" barrel. Lots of Tacticool in this "Tubb 2K stubby", but I think the SRS covert is still a far superior engineered system.
Re: McMillan CS5™ Spec Posted
I wonder what "Typical 7.62mm range" means to them, I'd like to see a 600+ yard shot with a 12.5" barrel. I think they might be a little misleading on that, I'm sure they mean the 18.5" barrel model.
I wonder what "Typical 7.62mm range" means to them, I'd like to see a 600+ yard shot with a 12.5" barrel. I think they might be a little misleading on that, I'm sure they mean the 18.5" barrel model.
Re: McMillan CS5™ Spec Posted
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lencomatt</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wonder what "Typical 7.62mm range" means to them, I'd like to see a 600+ yard shot with a 12.5" barrel. I think they might be a little misleading on that, I'm sure they mean the 18.5" barrel model. </div></div>
i have shot this rifle and with standard 175 black hills 308 i was able to consistantly hit a 764 yard target( it was a 10 inch gong) with the 12 inch bbl version.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lencomatt</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wonder what "Typical 7.62mm range" means to them, I'd like to see a 600+ yard shot with a 12.5" barrel. I think they might be a little misleading on that, I'm sure they mean the 18.5" barrel model. </div></div>
i have shot this rifle and with standard 175 black hills 308 i was able to consistantly hit a 764 yard target( it was a 10 inch gong) with the 12 inch bbl version.
Re: McMillan CS5™ Spec Posted
I really want one, Price? I like how they use the sr-25 type mags.
Does anyone know of any other bottom metal that uses the sr-25 type mags?
Not sure if I like the rear hook on the stock. Looks kind of fat, might need to see one in person.
I really want one, Price? I like how they use the sr-25 type mags.
Does anyone know of any other bottom metal that uses the sr-25 type mags?
Not sure if I like the rear hook on the stock. Looks kind of fat, might need to see one in person.
Re: McMillan CS5™ Spec Posted
Ok guys, let me make some clarifications for you. Some interesting facts that specifically address your comments are as follows:
-The 600 yard range is misleading, the supersonic ammunition will accurately travel further than 600 yards with any match grade ammunition. In the 12.5" barrel, the bullets leaves the muzzle anywhere from 2200 Ft/sec to 2500 ft/sec depending on the load. This puts the round supersonic passed 800 yards in almost all cases. Our tests show that the round will stay accurate out to this distance as well. For visual proof, please stay tuned to our Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/McMillanGroupInternational.
-So Yes, there is Tacticool built into this rifle, but only as a byproduct of real engineering. The concept was suggested to us by guys that needed a covert, quiet rifle. One of its primary applications is its subsonic capabilities. We developed a specific round to do this job. The round has been laboratory tested and will penetrate 18" of ballistic gelatin at 300 yards while holding sub MOA accuracy. Actually, lab tested the rifle shoots. .7 MOA (Average of 10, 5 shot groups). The beauty is that there is no need to change barrels, or anything for that matter, to switch from subsonic to supersonic ammunition or vise versa. All you need to know is the relationship of your DOPE. One last note is that at our range in Phoenix, AZ, we consistently shoot a man sized steel target at 475 yards with the subsonic ammo. At this distance, the bullet is still flying 830 ft/sec (total loss from muzzle ~ 220 ft/sec).
-The CS5 is a total of 23" long when broken down. Its counterpart, the STAR (Standard Application Rifle) (which is completely NFA free) is 26 3/4" long when broken down. Its barrel is 18". What I feel is of significance to the comparison that you made to the DTA recon, is that the CS5 is shorter (while the STAR is relatively the same in length), but having a butt stock (rather than a bull pup) actually gives you the ability to adjust your cheek weld and eye alignment (this is always a very important aspect for soldiers when wearing gear) in which the DTA does not have this capability. Plus, with the McMillan, you are not putting your face directly over the release of energy.
-Lastly, I want to mention that this is the first (that we know of) "stock-less" rifle. Due to some patentable features, this rifle technically has no stock, or recoil lug for that matter. Which means that some of the cumbersome nature of a chassis are eliminated. Basically everything is an accessory to the action itself. And to sum it up, means that there isn't anything on this rifle that cannot be changed out for another to best suit an application. Plus, the rifle is inherently more accurate because there is no muzzle jump which is created to by the transfer of energy from the barreled action to the stock through the recoil lug.
There are about a half a dozen major features of this rifle that we feel separates it from the competition in which I will not describe them all in this post. I think if you follow its development, you will see that this rifle brakes the standard paradigm that we know as the modern sniper rifle. And having said that, I completely understand your doubt. This rifle truly makes then next major strides in sniper rifle evolution. You will see this evident as you watch its further development over then next few years. This is just the beginning.
If you have any further questions, I would be happy to explain.
Ok guys, let me make some clarifications for you. Some interesting facts that specifically address your comments are as follows:
-The 600 yard range is misleading, the supersonic ammunition will accurately travel further than 600 yards with any match grade ammunition. In the 12.5" barrel, the bullets leaves the muzzle anywhere from 2200 Ft/sec to 2500 ft/sec depending on the load. This puts the round supersonic passed 800 yards in almost all cases. Our tests show that the round will stay accurate out to this distance as well. For visual proof, please stay tuned to our Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/McMillanGroupInternational.
-So Yes, there is Tacticool built into this rifle, but only as a byproduct of real engineering. The concept was suggested to us by guys that needed a covert, quiet rifle. One of its primary applications is its subsonic capabilities. We developed a specific round to do this job. The round has been laboratory tested and will penetrate 18" of ballistic gelatin at 300 yards while holding sub MOA accuracy. Actually, lab tested the rifle shoots. .7 MOA (Average of 10, 5 shot groups). The beauty is that there is no need to change barrels, or anything for that matter, to switch from subsonic to supersonic ammunition or vise versa. All you need to know is the relationship of your DOPE. One last note is that at our range in Phoenix, AZ, we consistently shoot a man sized steel target at 475 yards with the subsonic ammo. At this distance, the bullet is still flying 830 ft/sec (total loss from muzzle ~ 220 ft/sec).
-The CS5 is a total of 23" long when broken down. Its counterpart, the STAR (Standard Application Rifle) (which is completely NFA free) is 26 3/4" long when broken down. Its barrel is 18". What I feel is of significance to the comparison that you made to the DTA recon, is that the CS5 is shorter (while the STAR is relatively the same in length), but having a butt stock (rather than a bull pup) actually gives you the ability to adjust your cheek weld and eye alignment (this is always a very important aspect for soldiers when wearing gear) in which the DTA does not have this capability. Plus, with the McMillan, you are not putting your face directly over the release of energy.
-Lastly, I want to mention that this is the first (that we know of) "stock-less" rifle. Due to some patentable features, this rifle technically has no stock, or recoil lug for that matter. Which means that some of the cumbersome nature of a chassis are eliminated. Basically everything is an accessory to the action itself. And to sum it up, means that there isn't anything on this rifle that cannot be changed out for another to best suit an application. Plus, the rifle is inherently more accurate because there is no muzzle jump which is created to by the transfer of energy from the barreled action to the stock through the recoil lug.
There are about a half a dozen major features of this rifle that we feel separates it from the competition in which I will not describe them all in this post. I think if you follow its development, you will see that this rifle brakes the standard paradigm that we know as the modern sniper rifle. And having said that, I completely understand your doubt. This rifle truly makes then next major strides in sniper rifle evolution. You will see this evident as you watch its further development over then next few years. This is just the beginning.
If you have any further questions, I would be happy to explain.
Re: McMillan CS5™ Spec Posted
+1 on price!
You "practicool" people can say whatever you want, I think it looks great. How can you claim the DTA does it better? Have you shot this rifle yet? At least let them get a few out there before you make claims that you most likely have no way of backing up. You could end up being right, but you have no way of knowing that at this moment in time. Unless you have more experience with this rifle than your post let on.
+1 on price!
You "practicool" people can say whatever you want, I think it looks great. How can you claim the DTA does it better? Have you shot this rifle yet? At least let them get a few out there before you make claims that you most likely have no way of backing up. You could end up being right, but you have no way of knowing that at this moment in time. Unless you have more experience with this rifle than your post let on.
Re: McMillan CS5™ Spec Posted
I like the direction you guys went really pushed for compact package
I like the direction you guys went really pushed for compact package
Re: McMillan CS5™ Spec Posted
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McMillanMade</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The round has been laboratory tested and will penetrate 18" of ballistic gelatin at 300 yards while holding sub MOA accuracy. </div></div>
What bullet is loaded in this ammo? Does it expand at subsonic velocities? Sorry if this is on your website, it's filtered at work.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McMillanMade</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The round has been laboratory tested and will penetrate 18" of ballistic gelatin at 300 yards while holding sub MOA accuracy. </div></div>
What bullet is loaded in this ammo? Does it expand at subsonic velocities? Sorry if this is on your website, it's filtered at work.
Re: McMillan CS5™ Spec Posted
The data is not on the website as of yet. However I will likely post it on our Facebook page before anywhere else. Then shortly after will make it to the website. This is what I can tell you now:
-200 grain bullet
-Standard deviation for bullet velocities, 11 ft/sec
-MV at muzzle 1050 ft/sec (this speed was picked so that as speed of sound changes with elevation, soldiers operating at high altitudes would not have to worry about breaking the sound barrier)
-MV @ 100 yds, 989 ft/sec, penetrates 20.25" of ballistic gelatin
-MV @ 300 yds, 899 ft/sec, penetrates 18.25" of ballistic gelatin
-MV @ 500 yds, 830 ft/sec, no penetration data taken
-Trying not to insult anyone, but the question is often asked why does the bullet lose so little velocity over distance. The answer to that has to do with the lack of shock wave at subsonic speeds. When a bullet breaks the sound barrier, a shock wave is formed. This shock wave is the primary source of lost energy. If you look at a comparison of a shadow graph, while the supersonic bullet has a shock wave coming of the front (along with a few other waves created from deviations in the bullet), the subsonic shadow graph shows you only a small bit of "turbulence" coming from the back of the bullet. Basically, the rate at which the a subsonic round dumps its energy is far less than the rate of a supersonic round.
The data is not on the website as of yet. However I will likely post it on our Facebook page before anywhere else. Then shortly after will make it to the website. This is what I can tell you now:
-200 grain bullet
-Standard deviation for bullet velocities, 11 ft/sec
-MV at muzzle 1050 ft/sec (this speed was picked so that as speed of sound changes with elevation, soldiers operating at high altitudes would not have to worry about breaking the sound barrier)
-MV @ 100 yds, 989 ft/sec, penetrates 20.25" of ballistic gelatin
-MV @ 300 yds, 899 ft/sec, penetrates 18.25" of ballistic gelatin
-MV @ 500 yds, 830 ft/sec, no penetration data taken
-Trying not to insult anyone, but the question is often asked why does the bullet lose so little velocity over distance. The answer to that has to do with the lack of shock wave at subsonic speeds. When a bullet breaks the sound barrier, a shock wave is formed. This shock wave is the primary source of lost energy. If you look at a comparison of a shadow graph, while the supersonic bullet has a shock wave coming of the front (along with a few other waves created from deviations in the bullet), the subsonic shadow graph shows you only a small bit of "turbulence" coming from the back of the bullet. Basically, the rate at which the a subsonic round dumps its energy is far less than the rate of a supersonic round.
