If the military adopted the .416 and made an AP round, that is

So the .50 doesnt even have Anti-Material going for it

...

Oh

And btw

maybe just that they've been making it forever?

Twinvickers is a retard

The .50 is most definitely overhyped

Specifically in the amateur LongRange community

And the normal Gun Community

my understanding was that the .50 is really only good for light armored vehicles and infrastructure

and that it's not a pinpoint accuracy weapon

because of the crazy shit they have to do to make it work

Dont get me wrong, it's still accurate...Its just, not that accurate...The grouping is inferior to the .338 lapua at practically any range

Or even the .300 win mag

Keep in mind the 50 can reach out much further than the 300 win mag

right, that might not matter if you're blowing up a transformer at 1500 yards or something

True...But atleast with a .416 you get all the advantages of the .50, with godlike accuracy and grouping

It's just funny to see the M82 Barretts effective range being the same as a .300 win mag🤣 like only 1800 yards🤣

right, I don't think you need a 600+ grain projectile to take out a transformer

or some kind of infrastructure like that

The semi-auto Barrett sucks...idk why but they group like horseshit

Atleast the McMillan 50 and M99 bolt action 50 seem far more accurate...But that can be due to individual rifles...I just have yet to see an M82 that doesnt have the grouping of a child with cerebral palsy at 1600 yards

I saw something about hte .50 barrett sucking because the barrel has to flop around in the recoil absorption process when firing (I think?)

That's my guess

I can tell you a McMillan, an M99 or a custom is tremendously more accurate than the M82 tho, from all the empirical evidence I've seen

guess you could get lighter projectiles/lighter loads that wouldn't be so bad in a bolt action of some sort

hm, i can't even find 416 barrett ammo

Idk why the military doesnt adopt a barret .416, but with a magazine

They're single shot, no capacity

Which is an issue, for military purposes

maybe it's because they have .50 bmg machine guns on all kinds of things so if they can get 80-90% of the performance without rolling a new cartridge and having to fuck with the manufacturer

though I dunno if the .50 is 80-90% of the performance

The .50 Barretts and McMillans have a very niche military role anyway...Pretty much just Anti-material...

The .338 Lapua pretty much gets you were you need to go, in terms of sniping

That's why the military barely has any, in all reality

I try to think of what the best types of rifles to own would be, for theoretical situations - it's kind of a fun exercise. i.e. financial collapse, invasion etc

or what the various use-cases would be

Well...a .50 typically weighs 30 pounds...My 338-378(shoots about 150ft/s faster than lapua) weighs as much as a typical hunting rifle...Both could be used way past 2000 yards

So from a military/defense standpoint those big guns are only relevant for lightly armored vehicles

right, that would make a much better combination anti-material/sniper rifle but I doubt ammo is all that available