Remington wins the PSR,

[jarhead_h]

From the begining I looked at the MSR and knew that it was going to win. It was the most polished package, sexiest looks, American made - and from the perspective of a line grunt my reaction is "how about NO."

There are something like 20 screws to lose on this thing(armorer's ordering loc-tite in bulk from now on). Everything's adjustable, which means everything is going to come loose. It looked like in order to change the barrel, it would require pulling half dozen screws in the rail, which means if there's a forward night optic that has to come off first. I'm sure there will be a bunch of other wonderful little annoyances to be discovered by those that have to live with the thing.

I liked their barrel nut system, but it would work much better if you could get at the barrel nut without taking the forearm off. The indexing pin was a neat idea, and to be honest I'm surprised Savage didn't think of it first. In theory that should minimize POI shift, but I have no experience with the rifle so this is all guess work. Total package though looked to be the most complete, and Rem is already well entrenched in the DoD system so really not a surprise.

My favorite switch barrel system in the competition goes to the MRAD. Unscrew two bolts, pull barrel, insert barrel, insert bolts, done, no need to disassemble the front half of the rifle.

EDIT: Looking at the photo above, there looks like there's a break in the forearm that I don't remember from earlier photos of the MSR, so I'mg guessing the upper part of the forearm is now a part of the rail, and the lower piece slides off once the bolts are undone allowing access to the barrel nut.

 

[eracer]

The MSR barrel in remington's site is SS, but the specs cited at Gearscout say Chromoly steel .338 barrel with 1:9.5 twist, 5R rifling and Melonite coating.

Is this barrel cold hammer forged or ??? High grade chromoly, hammer forged, could improve barrel life. Or perhaps you need this kind of steel for the coating.

What improvement in barrel life can be expected with the new melonite coating?

Stainless Steel takes a Melonite coating quite nicely.

 

[_Windrider_]

This looks nothing at all like a R700. Seems like a whole new animal.

It's a good looking rifle. I will be purchasing the FNH Ballista as soon as i can. I would love to get one of these, but since federal law prevents Remington for selling them cheaper to civilians than the government pays, i don't think a 25k rifle is in my future.

The Ballista is 7k in .338 Lapua with no optic. 1500.00/each for the .300 WIN Mag and .308 add-ons. so for 10k you get 3 calibers and a bad ass rifle.

 

[Arbiter]

I recall shooting an earlier version of this rifle back in 2009 or 2010 at a demo shoot. I shot it so briefly that there wasn't any time to gain a good opinion on the performance itself of the platform, but as a rifle per se it completely failed to impress. Awkward ergonomics, poor balance, and it never felt natural to shoot. Perhaps that's something that one has to grow into, but at the time it managed to completely destroy any vague interest I might have had in owning one, at any price point. Were I to get behind one of the final production rifles, it might be a different story.

 

[Ouch!!]

Heck this has been the rifle on modern warfare 3 lol. I thought they already won it.

 

[nn8734]

I personally would have leaned toward the AI just based on personal experience them. Nothing wrong with Remington (I have two 700s) but AI rifles are just sublime.

 

[BigJimFish]

They are listed $25k (don't believe that is the kit) and I think some without any kits have been floating around for $18k here and there.

I have heard is said that when it is somebody else's money the price doesn't matter. Still, you have to come up with one and, given that $25k is obviously no where near a normal cost + profit margin, I wonder how the number gets settled on. Remington clearly has a reason to ask for a billion dollars each or more. Why not, the financial industry got that and more and didn't even deliver a useful product. How is it, when you obviously discount any consideration cost of production, that you get to $25k when one party theoretically wants an infinite amount of money and the other has little interest in the price.

Do they do a poll like politicians to ask how much per gun people consider to be what level of inefficient, corrupt, crazy and than pick say 49% corrupt because you want most folks fooled.

Does the guy steering the contract have some sort of price structure for the purchase of his honer that Remington weighs against their asking price. Say, if you want $35k a rifle than my board membership when I retire will pay 5 million a year but at $25k it only costs you 2 million.

Oh, I know, it's a long term fixed contract right. Were all being fooled, Remington is charging a perfectly fair amount of money for the rifles. They hired an economist to give them an over under on how much to expect a dollar to be worth in 10 years when the contract is finished and he said that if you want to average $7,000 (a high price but fair given the paperwork) a rifle in today's dollars over the life of the contract you will have to charge $25k per gun. Actually, that doesn't seem like a bad bet for the dollar value in 10 years given current trends. That inflation rate by the way is about 22% to make an average rifle sold for $7k in 2012 dollars and 14% to make the last rifle sell for the equivalent of $7k in 2012 dollars. These rates are high by today's standards but I don't think that they are out of the question given current, and projected future, monetary policy. I expect that these calculations are a big part of long term fixed government contracts today. The more I think about it the more this explanation actually makes scary sense. Perhaps I am over estimating the corruption of defense department procurement and this is just a case of hedging ones bets relative to desperate measures taken with regards to monetary manipulation. If I was locked into a 10 year fixed price contract specified in dollars I would charge them out the ass to. Greenbacks are rapidly returning to their inner value.

 

[Dogtown]

The price tag you're looking at is for a complete SWS, not just a single rifle. I think with the PSR you're looking at conversion kits, suppressor, optics, etc.

ETA: for example, there was a beef about the UK paying crazy prices for their latest AI rifle but people forgot to factor in the optics (including thermal, IIRC).

 

[Lowlight]

The $25k was for a single rifle no kit, and the $18k rifle for sale I saw was also no kit.

I do know the barrels are coming from Bartlein, Remington is using them and I believe the initial word is also no kit, just a 338 barrel. Seems the kit may have been and afterthought in the case of the contract.

But I don't believe the full deployment kit like AI is selling is part of what Remington is supplying. Don't forget the scope was a separate contract that was awarded beforehand. So the only thing included would be the suppressor.

 

[Dogtown]

That would be rather unprecedented, no?

 

[diderr]

I knew Remington was going to win since day one. Just how things work. Just like if the Military upgrades to the gas piston individual carbines Colt will win that contract.
Now what is the USMC switching to? Are they going to be using this, or looking for their own gun?

 

[nn8734]

I knew Remington was going to win since day one. Just how things work. Just like if the Military upgrades to the gas piston individual carbines Colt will win that contract.
Now what is the USMC switching to? Are they going to be using this, or looking for their own gun?

If Marine Force Recon (MARSOC) falls under Special Operations Command then the selected PSR Rifle would also be fielded to special operations Marines as well - others on here can confirm or deny but I believe that is the case.