I think the tac 50 by nature will have a longer range, because the 50 bmg bullet is much larger and heavier and has a higher ballistic coefficient and is less molested by wind. Obviously the 408 round is fast and pretty big, but the 50 cal round is simply made for carrying its inertia without disturbance.
Also, cheytac rounds are 7.50$ each and 50 cal rounds are 2.50$.
Macmillan tac 50 vs cheytac m200 in .408
Austin Wright
Other urls found in this thread:
forum.snipershide.com
twitter.com
Jason Morales
Is this bait?
Are you acting retarded on purpose?
You better not be
Aaron Bell
Why would you think this was
Bait?
I just wanted to see what you pilgrams thought
Landon Brown
408 cheytac (and the very similar 416 Barret) was literally developed to give better extreme long range accuracy than the 50BMG
The only reason they exist is because they perform better at long distances that the BMG
Daniel Foster
except you forgot the whole point of 50bmg.
It's an anti-materiel rifle meant for hard targets and ordnance disposal via the huge variety of ammunition to choose from. When you go cheytac you lose all this. If you're hitting personnel you're better off with 338 lap.
Blake Edwards
.50 bmg is not an anti material round
Sebastian Wood
I think youre selling the 50 bmg short.
Its simply better than a 408 cheytac.
I get that the cheytac is good, but the tac 50 is a great product for the 50 bmg round.
I doubt a 408 cheytac could come close to killing a suami at 2 and 1/4 miles away lime the tac 50 did
Parker Green
>I'm a retard
Thanks for your opinion.
The difference between a 420gr 40cal projectile and 750gr 50cal projectile is going to be insignificant for the most part.
>how does that make me retarded?
Good question. The rounds that a 50bmg uses for anti material purposes are very inaccurate by precision standards your talking 3-4 moa from most military loadings. The target loads required for precise long range shooting are mostly unusable for anti material.
Even if you roll your own and bring it down to 2moa, the ballistic coefficient of military projectiles is awful, and 408 or 416 or similar will easily out run it.
Thomas Lopez
Also, the 50 bmg round is a fantastic sniper round.
Mason Wilson
Hi faggot, assuming youre right about the tac 50 being 3-4 moa, that would mean that at the famous 3400m killshot, the spread on one bullet to the bext would be 34 x 3 inches, which is about 100 inches or 9 feet of spread. If the canadian sniper could only get rounds 9 feet apart from eachother at the closest, there is no way in fuck that he would have been able to get one on target.
Try .75 moa to 1.25 moa,
You shitraping faggot
Ethan Price
Holy shit your retared, that ammo is 750gr AMAX which is a fucking target round, not for material. Why dont you study up before talking about shit you have no clue about?
Anything your getting for $2.5 a round is going to be well fucking below 2 moa, it's well accepted that round like 647gr api and similar are 3-4 moa.
The glass that Canadian snipers use would would have enough elevation to even SEE the target at the bottom of the fucking reticle. If he was using anything less than a 750gr amax, which even with the elevated bases they do use, his target was at the bottom of the reticle (any lower and it the target is not visible), with his turrets maxed out.
>9ft apart from each other at the closest
Again you have no fucking understanding of what your talking about. 3moa (I'll forgive you being too stupid to convert to yards when using moa) would mean the FURTHEST apart rounds would be a 9ft spread.
No one fucking said the tac 50 is 3-4moa. It's the ammunition. It's a precision rifle and is far more capable the ammunition is the limiting factor and anything that is used for anti material purposes, is not suitable for long range precision shooting. Get that through your dense skull. Rounds capable of that kind of accuracy are much closer to $7-8/round, if your too stupid to hand load (I wouldnt recommend it for you as you would kill yourself thinking you knew what you were doing).
You have no understanding of the relation of ammo to the gun, no understanding of how precision is measured, and no idea what shots like that require.
Cooper Cooper
The glass that Canadian snipers use wouldnt have enough elevation to even SEE the target at the bottom of the fucking reticle, if he was using anything less than a 750gr amax, which even with the elevated bases they do use, his target was at the bottom of the reticle (any lower and it the target is not visible), with his turrets maxed out.*
Joseph Gomez
Didn't Cheytac pull some bullshit by intentionally making the M200's made for the Civilian market less accurate than the ones made for the military?
Luis Campbell
forum.snipershide.com
Looks like the long answer is if they did, it wasn't enough to matter. Short answer, no.
Jackson Cooper
Converting to yards only makes your 3-4 moa claim even more underestimated.
40 x 4 = 160 inches which is 13.3 feet upper bound.
Fine ammo matters.
So dont make ridiculous claims like the tac being a 3-4 moa rifle.
Its well below that.
Colton Brooks
Are you being retarded on purpose
Carter Cook
I can only hope so.
Blake Thomas
>retard
show me your 408 api
Logan Wilson
are fucking retarded?
the only real use for 50bmg in manportable platform is ordnance disposal.
Justin Baker
user we can see the number of posters didnt change. You do know that right? Just because your got shit on for being stupid doesnt mean you can try to troll after the fact.
Anthony Sullivan
>50bmg sniper fantasy
>cheytac sniper fantasy
>30lb rifles for a sniper role
retardation.
The heavy highpowered rifles are terrible for using as a sniper. They're good for shooting at hard things at short to medium ranges, and for obese civvys to shoot from their benches.
Oliver Wood
you dumb fuck obviously it's still me.
kill yourself.
Matthew Ramirez
>heavy high powered rifles are terrible for using as a sniper.
Depends on what you consider a sniper and high power. I have no fantasies of using 50bmg, cheytac rifles/rounds or 30lb rifles. I'm merely commenting based on the OP, considering the discussion is based around 50bmg and 408 as long range precision rounds. If you ever would have to hike with or carry your rifle and shoot long range, something like a 12-15lb (still pretty stout), 'small' caliber (probably 7mm) high BC bullet is waaaaaay more practical than a 30lb rifle+2lb bipod+2-3lb glass, 1lb monopod, 4oz per round, and a the associated equipment for long range shooting.
If you ever go to a PRS event you'll notice a large number of people are using 15-20lb guns.