Barrett 107 M .50 cal Sniper rifle
 

this isn't the full segment form the show "Futureweapons".

This thing has recorded a confirmed kill from 2400 meters, through tin and was designed to take out light armored personnel carriers :shock:

It is capable of firing explosive rounds for those really stubbon vehicles :twisted:

and the best part is....it's semi automatic :twisted:

2700 fps....you don't have time to hear the shot :twisted:

that one big ass bullet

Freakazoid displays my feelings towards this perfectly.

another useful tool to aid in winning wars :)

what a sexy gun :shock:

:lol:

not much of a muzzle flash and pretty quite too. I have seen that take out armor vehicles before. :shock: you dif. want to be on the tigger side of that gun.

here is another video, private owners

http://www.nazarian.no/wep.asp?id=35...=97&lang=0&p=8

and just a few feet under water and it wont even reach you...

:lol: amazing what some H2O will do to a bullet isn't it? :lol:

But what to do when "the other side" get's these....?
- inevitably, gun's like these will be sold to enemies of the US

hopefully by that time we won't have anyone on the battlefield for them to shoot at :D

I once tested a .50 rifle when I was in the service. It's frightening to say the less

The US doesn't need to worry about its enemies getting hold of Barretts, as the Hungarian Gepard is also available, and that is more powerful and more accurate, not to mention that there is also a 14.5mm version that is twice as powerful as the Barrett.

Don't you know how the US anything likes to do things? 14.5 mm...eh petty stuff. Read up on the Barrett XM109 let me give you a hint on it's specs, 25mm payloads. A-10 30 mm Avenger canon and F-16 20 mm Vulcan canon for comparison :twisted:

http://www.barrettrifles.com/military/images/109b.jpg

Of course they don't... and of course they will.. and of course it is...

:roll:

We all know the US sucks at anything it does, makes or tries...

:roll:

we all know the enemies of the US are stronger, better and smarter...

:roll:

...but do we really need you to remind everyone everyday?

:roll:

Heavy Stuff I must say.

If I'm not mistaking one of these is being used in Michael Mann's latest movie Miami Vice. And it makes HUGE holes in cars, human body and last but not least it takes a big piece out of the backseat as well. I guess it just flies straight through (the whole damn car :shock: )

Such fire power used being used to take out huge animals, and now they just blow human beings with it straight to piece. I have seen a video of a US sniper operating in Iraq before, he beheads his insurgents with one single shot.

btw: Miami Vice is a great movie, I didn't expect it being that good though. The photography is awesome and the soundtrack is superb. Boys with toys :-)


Cheers

i think that video was in afganistan....

the ripple/shock from the 50 cal. round wizzing by at even a foot away will rip you apart.

the energy exterted by this gun/rounds is nuts

hmmm given that the barrett is in use with most special forces units in the (western?) world, i'd rather have that than a hungarian rifle i've never heard of tbh... btw that XM109 sounds like its 1 nasty rifle to be on the receiving end of...

also, what kind of animals do u wanna kill with a .50 rifle? whales?? cos i dont think it'd leave that much left of a bear either...

http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles/rifles_82A1.htm

you know its a badass gun when arnold in cali bans them from his state

if the terminator himself is scared of it, it must be awesome lol

http://www.50caliberterror.com/index2.html



there is a local gun shop with one on display.

i think the usual asking price for a new one is somwhere between 4-8 grand depending on the model/make.

i want one.

Well there is definately some "huge" game hunting going on with this but the key note is the ability to take a target out from a very long range away, 1+ miles when that pea shooter just won't make the cut.

Biggest use for .50 is sport shooting at extreme ranges. Barrett puts out their own magazine which really reveals a lot about the whole .50 scene. These are amazing "tools" and have helped save lives and scare the shit out of the ememy :lol:

Closest thing I came to owning a .50 was a Desert Eagle it was a cheap way into getting into big caliber toys.

I don't know much about weapons, the only one I carry is the one in my pants :lol: Okay seriously, enough talk about my pea shooter.

With bullets like this one, if a body shot, does it just go straight through the victim, leaving the possibility of survival? I'm assuming the snipers all go for the heatshot?

Thanks.

well the vid i've seen (was in afghanistan) and that was also talked about, shows bodies just being totally ripped apart, kinda like putting a firecracker in a banana... so no it's not absolutely necessary to go for a headshot with this rifle. Also at longer distances i dont know if it's accurate enough, despite having an amazing range it's not the most accurate sniper rifle in the world (beacuse it's semi-auto)

I think I remember seeing the video you're talking about, I might have even posted it originally. I don't remember the specs, but it was a sniper video. There was some debate over whether it was actual compat footage versus someone sniping an animal or something.

Now that I think about it, I think the beginning of this video said it was an explosive round...I guess that really would ruin your day.

lol its no use getting a nice hairdo when uve pissed off a sniper carrying thst thing indeed :P

LoL, I agree :-) No use of carrying a kevlar vest nor helmet as well.


The video I have seen was shot in Iraq, I'm 100% sure of that. It was made by some French journalists who were following some young insurgents. They were trying to take a US sniper out who was positioned in an hotel. They tried to take him out with a rocket launcher but instead of that he got his head blown to pieces. It was incredible what fire power this sniper had his hands on.
And I have even seen another video, it was some live footage made at the beginning of the Golf war. The sniper was shooting at some Iraqi's who were hiding in a small bunker in the middle of the desert. This sniper reported that he had been shooting straight through the walls and doors and that he hadn't seen any movement ever since :o

They even use bullets which got enhanced with uranium and they don't stop for anything.
I don't know whether they mention that in the video. Personally, I think there is a big chance that these .50 bullets are reinforced with uranium because they have to be able to penetrate through light armoured vehicles.

Cheers

You really are a world-class turd. Frodefe asked the question about what the US and her allies will do if/when the "badguys" get hold of these, and I simply answered that there are easier ways of getting a rifle that is as powerful, more accurate and is designed in an Eastern-Bloc country. Which do you think are more likely to fall into enemy hands: an American gun or a rifle of a country that shared its military arsenal/designs with Russia, which is a country well-known for stockpiles of its guns just walking out the door? This have nothing to do with the US, so don't try and turn it into that with your same old crap.

Harry: that is all well and good, but the Barrett XM109 in 25mm makes less power than the Gepard 14.5mm round. The new Barrett is basically using a grenade (the destructive power of the round comes from it being explosive, not because it's a bullet in the traditional sense).

For everyone's information, the video that purports to be a Barrett shooting Taliban snipers is fake. It's actually Rock Chucks being shot with a .17HMR.

Don't believe everything that you read on the Internet.

Ive got the full segment from the show if someone wants to host.

Snipers going after single targets aren't going to use it's semi auto capabilities.

The semi auto part somes in handy when taking out a personnel carrier or when scattering a small patrol into large red mists :twisted: Besides, .50 cal @ 2700fps just needs to rustle your ear hairs before the shockwave coming off it ruptures your ear drum :prr: hit in the leg, and you don't have one. You just bleed out because your femoral artery is decimated. If the entry wound doesn't kill you, the exit wound will.

And someone please get gigdy a host!!! :D

Cowboy: the range they go to in the segment is a private range and uranium and explosive tipped bullets are availible only through the military. But they do have clips of the aforementioned bullets hitting a target on a highspeed camera :D

The local gun shop near me has a Barret. They let me hold and it's one heavy mofo. I can't imagine the recoil of it. I've seen .50 cal rifles being fired, I'd imagine it compares to being kicked in the shoulder by a horse. The price on the Barret was just under $9k. I have no idea what the exact model number it is they had though. They also had a few machine guns, heh, who needs an Uzi? $900!

I've shot a Desert Eagle. Very over rated gun. It's weight absorbs a lot of the recoil and with a proper hold on the gun it's not too bad. Though, with repeated shooting your wrist will get sore. The worst thing is that they aren't accurate for shit, not in my experience anyway. I couldn't hit the side of a barn from the inside with one.

That's strange, as the Desert Eagle is amongst the most accurate of all "off the shelf" guns and is perfect for target shooting. You have to hold it tightly though, and if you "limp wrist" a shot it will go all over the place, and can jam the gun. It really is the kind of gun that you need to spend a lot of time with, tbh.

While you are a scholarly gentleman I guess? :violin:
You sure did - taking great pains to make sure you said it was better etc etc etc.

Uhm - it's patently obvious to those in the know - but you took great pains to point out any and all definicies in the "US" version vesrsus the "enemy" version....

Yet you went to great pains to emphasis the "enemy" one is better and more accurate and more accesable... tahn the US one -- seems you made it about the US long before I even opened the thread :)

Again taking great pains to discount the "US" version :)

So you are a gun owner and regular shot then?

I thought hand-guns were verbotten in the Communist Republik of Britain?

Well the thing about this one is the way the barrel is set in the reciever. It's set to absorb alot of the recoil, hence why it can be used as semi auto. The Muzzle Brake also bleeds some of the energy of the shot by directing it back, instead of letting it push back from the front of the muzzle like most rifles.

RC: I don't live in the UK, you ignorant prick. :wink:

The FACT of the matter is that the Gepard (and others, including some made in the USA) are better than the Barrett, and that has nothing to do with the US in the slightest: it just is. Were you born in the US, RC? Is that why you have to wave the flag so hard, poephol.

1) As much as i like seeing RC fluster people in US vs The World arguments, would you please take it to the Political Forum?

2) If this gun is so useless, why is every other country purchasing them? Sweden was the first country to buy them. It was a Canadian sniper team that took out the insurgents from 2430 meters through a tin cover.

3) in the segment the gun is going through 3 feet of cinder block form well over 1000 meters and penetrating a thick plate of steel from nearly the same distance. With regular bullets. not explosive tips.

4) It's a multi purpose sniper rifle. who gives a flying fuck if 14.5 mm makes more power than a 25mm. who has the longer, more accurate range in under 10 seconds delivering 10 rounds down range?

You aren't going for muzzle velocity in a sniper rifle. You are going for effective accuracy from as far away as possible. hell, effective accuracy is the point of any firearm. But 2700 fps does make for a flatter trajectory after 1+ miles :D

Zf: why would I take it to the Political Forum? There is no Political stance or bias on my part. This isn't about Politics, just me saying that there are more accurate rifles than the Barrett, some that use a Russian cartridge, and some that use the .50 BMG, just as the Barrett does.

The Barrett is a very capable rifle, but it is also the only one in this class that most people know of, yet pretty much every country makes a .50 Anti-Material rifle, from England through to South Africa through to China. This is a discussion forum, and I was discussing this rifle in context, and it isn't my fault if certain people (not yourself) want to throw their toys from the pram.

they say the barret has the same amount of recoil as a 12 ga shotgun, due to its recoil canceling design :)

Maybe it's me. I couldn't hit shit with it. With a .45 the same day, I had a three inch spread after 16 shots at 25 yards. Not bad considering I have very little experience with handguns. Soon to change though, permit has been applied for.

BTW, as a target gun, a Desert Eagle would be a terrible choice for your wallet! Ever seen what the ammo costs? LMAO
A day at the range will run into the hundreds just for ammo.

Yeah, in .50AE and .44 Cor-Bon the Rounds are about a Buck each, which is not that bad, but not that great when you take in the fact that you have to shoot a lot of shots to get used to the gun. The reason why it can jamb and be inaccurate is that it's gas recoiled, unlike 99% of handguns, and that means that the whole action needs to cycle fully in a straightline, and if anything interupts that the accuracy goes to hell. Basically the gun is great for hunting and silhouette shooting, but terrible for self-defence.

i have alot of experience with a 44mag desert eagle from israel arms, and it was a very accurate handgun, but then again i also have been shooting since i was 9 years old. it was my fav, with the second fav handgun i used to target shoot with, a springfield armory 1911 .45...

I didn't start shooting real guns until i was about 20 and my roomate bought a Taurus .44 Revolver. I couldn't hit a god damn thing for the first 10 shots :roll:

A few months back, my current roomate and i went shooting with his parents. Two .44 revolvers and a Glock 40. I was 2 inches low and right but clustered prettey tight with all 3 of them. Couldn't figure out for the life of me why i couldn't hit the bullseye until i went shooting with my coworker to sight in his 300 Winmag (fucking christ that thing hurts!) Now that day was fun :D Both my roomate and i hit dead center with his M1 Grand from 116 yards, open sight :D But it was switching to my coworkers .22 Ruger that i realized why my pistol shots are always low.

When i shoot a rifle, i sight with my right eye. And for some reason i was using my left to sight with the pistols :? What diff does it make? Well, point your finger at something in the room using both eyes. Now close your dominant eyeand see where your finger seems to pointing, then switch to your weak eye. Most people will see a difference :wink:

Well - you have insinuated that many times - besides you sure act like liberal britocrat anytime you get - maybe if younother to put an accurate place name in your avatar we would know where you are from.

If that was your inference why did you go to great pains to point out the origin of each?

So - is the south african afrikaans refence a clue?

If only you bothered waving a flag - any flag. Seems you are not proud of where you live.

I would if he had anything worthwhile to say there.. :P

I am guessing this chap is not the greatest firearm buff either?

I was looking at SA 1911 .45's as the potential purchase. Nice guns for the money. I was looking at the Mil Spec in particular.
There are a few others I'm interested in as well from Charles Daly and Kimber.
We'll see, it'll be a few weeks before I make a choice, so it's not like I don't have time to decide.

I also might go for a 9mm, just because ammo is a bit cheaper. LOL

what do you expect from someone who doesn't have the right to bear arms :wink:

So, the fact that I come across as a Liberal to you makes you assume that I live in England, does it? Am I to infer then, that from your self-righteous, right-wing postings that you live in 1930s Germany? I wasn't aware that my, or anyone's, exact location was that important to you. However, maybe it is, as you love nothing better than putting people in neat little boxes, don't you? Is that all that your brain can digest?

I didn't go to great lengths to point out the origins, laaitle, just that there are alternatives to the iconic Barrett. You then went on a pro-American rant by saying that I was knocking your adopted country (funny how you didn't answer my question about your Nationality or place of birth, isn't it?) and generally acting like the supercilious person that you are.

We have .50 cal sniper rifles in my battalion, although I don't know if it is this one, and the snipers haven't used it yet, but I think they'll have them when they go to Afghanistan...

No - the fact you sometimes posted common "yeah thats right" and "I can identify" style responses to posts made by poms that referenced local discussions... isn't that right ross...

Uhm - considering that nothing I have ever posted comes close to a nationalist bent but rather a freedom from all control and interence angle, only a complete idiot would even contemplate such a foolish notion.

It's not just "for me" - but it is common courtesy to allow people to be aware of you current location (country at least) while trying to participate in a community and conduct discussions.

After all, what good would it be if you aksed "Know any good BMW service centers around?" And some one answered - sure, down at the corner of Main and Voortrekker road you'll find a great BMW dealer - it would be of nop use to you if you don't live outside Kuilsrivier would it?

It's also nice to know how great of a mastery of the english language people have so you can conduct decent and appropriate discussions.

So - if you pulled your liberla cone head out of your pompous arese long enouhg to be able to catch a breath of fresh air, you would know and understand that its just fukcing good manners to know your audience.

Uhm - again - you uncouth unsocial trilobite - it's good manners and polite to be aware of where your audience is from.

You did - its in your original post.

There was nothing pro-american about anythign I posted - it was simply a counter point to yet another of you thinly and poorly disguised anti-us rants.

There is nothing secret about my naitonality or country of birth - never has been, and never will be.

You seem to be going to great lengths to hide yours though.

Not even worth a reply.

There's an airsoft rifle copy of the barrett, weighs over 20 kilos and uses larger BB pellets. I'd love one, but the cost is also much higher, something like $2000 (used to be $5000).

I used to have a PSG1 (looks awesome) with the muzzle tip like the Barrett's. I had it running at 450fps or so. Was an awesome gun, broke a guys nose with it when I shot him from close range (oooer...). Although it was in a legitimate airsoft match, so we all knew of the dangers...

Nice clip tho' :)

lol at the risk of getting caught up in yet another useless discussion here on JW, and maybe even stirring it up again, i seriously dont think the post made by teflontron was anti-us. If i say there's a more powerful car than the Saleen S7 twin turbo produced by Bugatti and that the bugatti also has a nicer interior, for instance, its not an anti-US post its a comparison between 2 products of which 1 happens to be from the US.

Seriously, where in this post do you see anything anti-US?

Barrett itself acknowledges the M107 isn't the most accurate weapon in the world, they also produce a bolt-action rifle (also .50 i believe) that they themselves say is more accurate than the M107. The most accurate rifles in the world aren't .50s i believe, they're mostly 7.62 bolt-action sniper rifles afaik.

not that any of this is gonna convince RC45, since i'm saying it :roll:

Well, if RC45 thinks that I must do something, then I must do it. Afterall, he is the Lord and Master of the Universe and all that is in it.

That being said, I find it implausible that anyone could possibly think that my original post, or any of them since, are anti-American, as all that I did, as gucom pointed out, was mention that there are better choices than the Barrett and that those choices are far more likely to fall into the enemy's hands, so there is no need to worry about the Barrett. Somehow this gets turned (yet again) by RC45 into someone saying something bad about the US. Oh, and talking of commone courtesies, RC45: learn how to type, spell and use Grammar.

Why would you assume that? - ross... from the UK..

Nope - you specifically took the time to say what you did - you have a pattern of anti-us rhetoric - that's your track record.. not mine.

My typing, spelling and grammar use if far better than yours has ever been - but the fact I don't take the time to correct common types or mistypings when talking down to you is par for the course... the same way I woulded stop to take the time to piss in your mouht if your teeth were on fire, I coulnt be bovvered wif spellin stuff right - yeah?