The greatest semi-auto sniper rifle

AR15 BABY--all the way !

well they are .223s... might not be the greatest military weapons but for close range stuff they would do nicely

Thats like asking which is better, Ford (which IS) or Chevy.

Different situations will give you a different result.

Can anyone say that the AR15 is lacking in a certain area or does not have the potential to preform a certain task? I know the AR isn't perfect, but its pretty much the best all-around.

Oh, and by the way, sub Thermal is correct, Ford is WAY better!

depends on the situation i suppose
perhapes for urban sniping we could be in agreement.. Stoner, Bushmaster, Colt, DPMS maybe even all make rifles that would be great for that and super accurate
how about in the field? would you want to take 800m shots with a .223? ive never tried wtih my varmitner, ive gone 600m hitting a 12x12" target with it, 20x20" sized targets w/ my M4 and iron sights at that range and that is hard with the 69 gr BTHP
yep ford is better but thats off topic

I would have to say that the M21 is and or was the best semi automatic sniper rifle. Its only draw back (back then) was the scope. think about it an M1 Garande, which was the best and most reliable semi auto matic to date. Think about it it froze at Bastonge(Battle of the Bugle for those not up to date with your ww2 history) use a liile urine and it worked so how do you make it better puut a scope on it. When you put a scope on a Garande you get an M21.

O0o and Ford and Chevy are good, but id have a ford body with a Chevy Engine(they never die)

well the M21 is a MUCH more accurate rifle than the Garand and based off the M14 which keeps the reliability of the Garnand, a lighter weight and a higher magazine capacity (detachable too) and better accuracy, less recoil froma .308 instead of .30-06 yet still deadly
the M21 can take most scopes which would mkae a fine system, what about the M25? its an M21 to my knowldege anyway with a synthetic stock which igves it another advantage?

Zaitev: the only major difference being that the Garand was originally issued in .30-06 and the M14/21/25 was originally issued in 7.62 NATO. I've heard that later in their life, the Garands were retrofitted to 7.62 though.

However, I hear what you're saying about the M14/21/25 being a completely iterative design based heavily on the Garand.

I think the quality of the rifle would be based on what your trying to do and where but i heard that the the heavy barrel ar-15's preform well in just about everywhere.

ps-Id rather push a chevy then drive a ford : )

If money's no object I'd either take the MSG-90 or the Mk11 Mod 0....

whats the Stoner SR-25 Mk11 Mod 0 have that a normal Stoner SR-25 doesnt? woundt ask but its $7500
isnt it just a 20" barrel and accessory rails on the handgrip???
for $3000 more it sounds a lil over priced unless that includes the scope, mounts and bi-pod and the accessory rails on the handgrip?

When i was talking i screw up big time I meant M1C not M21 but the M21 is Second


Ford engines arnt that great know this from whats happened to em

Fix
Or
Repair
Daily

what you think fo the WA 2000.. . i know only a few dozen were made in .300 Win mag or .308 Win but that should be a sweet shooter and its compact too
i'd be worried about getting it dirty though... its gotta be expenisve
wondienrg how expensive is it and how does it compare to the PSG-1 as far as accuracy goes???

A WA2000 is not a good field semi-auto. Imagine the repair costs on that fucker. You'd need a Blueprint, and every single piece would have to be made as it was broken. In addition to the Wooden stock and grip, and the fact that it has no modifications for weather or dirt. Don't forget to factor in the fact that due to the barrel clamping, they also come out to be pretty bulky on the front end, making it a bigger pain out in the field.

Maybe if they were mass-produced, and featured synthetic stocks and grips, and other alterations for weather and dirt, perhaps then. But in it's current state, it's a better competition/urban weapon.

i meant as a target/urban rifle i know its not meant to be a field rifle, aspecially not the ammount of them made and the availability of parts etc as you said would be too high
i read Mel's review of it and noticed he updated it... i now understand exactly how much it costs ($12,500 origonally, now about $30,000-40,000)
thats a lot of money for a rifle...

When the Swedish Armed Forces were evaluating rifle systems during the early and mid-80's both the Walther WA2000 and the H&K PSG-1 were initially considered and tested, but the WA2000 failed drastically on technical merits, while the PSG-1 failed somewhat in technical merits and the high cost.

I've never had an opportunity to test fire a WA2000, unfortunately, but for long-range shots, the WA2000 could probably be somewhat nice, due to weight being distributed at the fore of the rifle too, making it more stable.

Nek:
interesting about the PSG-1 and WA 2000
and agreed that the WA2000 could be nice cause of the weight distribution... would be more stable
just id hate to see either a PSG-1 or even worse a WA2000 take even a scratch because they are so darn expensive