P1020803

For some situations, an AR-10 in 308 Winchester just isn’t enough gun. If you feel the need to stretch your legs and shoot out to 1,000 yards and beyond, but with quick follow-up shots, you need Miller Precision Arms’ new .300 Win Mag AR-10 style rifle.

P1020781

The gun may be 80% parts compatible with existing AR-15 and AR-10 parts, but the oeprating mechanisms are all new. The magazines are stretched and polymer walled, but with an aluminum base plate and 10 round capacity. The barrel is a cut rifling Krieger barrel tailored to your desired length. The camo pattern is optional. And the whole thing weighs just a hair more than your bog standard AR-15 rifle.

The gun comes either as a standalone rifle for $5,400 or as a kit with multiple magazines, rangefinder, optic of your choice, spare pins and springs, and all in a convenient case for $15,000. As the MPA folks say, it’s a sniper in a box — minus the trained trigger finger.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

52 COMMENTS

  2. No offense but can you post things that some of us poorer shooters can actually afford? I’d rather see more of the newer pistols and rifles that are in the $1000 and lower range TBH. I’m pretty sure that’s on that 4(?) football field sized show floor, right?

    • I’m pretty sure they are going to cover just about every booth they can get to in the allotted time at the show. Most folks like to see the hyper-priced stuff, as well as what they might actually be able to afford.

      We’ll see if I’m right. In the meanwhile, enjoy, or wait for something you will enjoy.

    • No shit!!….unless these manufactures are trying to convince that anyone can be another Carlos Hathcock…in other words a Wannabe Warrior…or this rifle is build trying to impress perspective military contract buyers/suppliers.

      G.D….there can’t be that many people running around with a spare $15,000.00 to lay down on a sniper rifle of all things! So is this to say that the citizens of the USA can expect the warmongers in D.C.that never toted a firearm in battle and seen the blood and guts war causes to continue starting wars?

      Shit…it’s hard enough feeding 308’s let alone a 300 Mag and I have three bolt action 300’s and finishing a forth!! Christ!!

      Jesus A. Christ this country is screwed I swear.

      • $5,400 isn’t too bad for the basic instrument………… I think I will pull the trigger on this one!

  5. You had me sold,

    “The gun comes either as a standalone rifle for $5,400…”

    …and then you lost me.

    • The pricing makes no sense whatever. Therefore I conclude that the 5,400 is for show and the 15,000 packaged gun with box and spares is what they’re peddling to a few military units at typical direct-to-taxpayer bargain (cough) rates. This isn’t a sniper gun, but it’s also not going to be a battle rifle. The cartridge is too heavy for that, and no squad’s going on the move with you if you’re running a muzzle break.

      I vote we provide all the military super-snipers with a good .308, .338 Lapua, or .50BMG bolt action, their unit’s choice, and let them cope. It used to work. My theory is that it doesn’t matter if you have 10 rounds semi-auto. If you are indeed sniping you have to move after your shot anyway or they’ll blow your ass to hell. Fire off three or four rounds and they’re definitely going to locate you, somewhat suppressed or not. If it’s actually a battle, not sniping, just use an M249 already.

      • Well, the scope could easily be a couple grand, and the night vision device could be up to $5-6000, so I could see it adding up. That magazines are going to be expensive, too, being proprietary.

        • Whether or not the hardware is worth it does not change the fact that it costs 10 times as much as I’ve got. And if I had 10 times more money I think I’d just step up and go with the Lapua.

        • The $15,000 does not include “the night-vision device of your choice,” at least not in the posting. Since the NVD of my choice costs $16,000, I doubt such a term is included.

      • I guess you really don’t understand modern sniping. The idea of firing one shot has kinda gone away in the last decade. The whole one shot one kill thing has gone out the window. Most sniper schools (I have attended two for the record) state once you start getting past around 600meters you can no longer guarantee a first round hit. And with runners it is much better to have a semi auto. Look up pretty much any shot past around a 1000 yards, they almost all have been multiple shots per target. If we end up having to go back to old school one shot, stalking and sniping, you are going to see the distance come back down to well under a 1000 yards a shot.

        • I agree with part of your comment: Most of the longest shots have not been classic sniping, but rather very long-range shots by people firing from within squad or larger positions defended by multiple people, not just a sniper or, in the recent decades take, a sniper and spotter team.

          I see this as a bifurcation of the sniper role. I disagree completely that snipers no longer have to move after one shot if they are in forward positions. At some point the ‘sniper’ is really just ‘long range battle rifle guy.” The skill of sniping was, in the past, a hunting task. More and more today it is a long-range target shooting task without the need to approach the enemy exposed and fairly alone.

          As for the actually longest shots, made variously with .338 Lapua and .50 BMG, I haven’t heard these shots included multiple shots in quick succession, meaning second shots that were not either made or “could have been made” by a bolt action rifle. As rifles and cartridges improve, sniping can be done from safer and safer positions. I accept that as true. I don’t accept that that kind of ‘sniping’ is any different from lobbing a mortar round with state-of-the-art electronic calculation.

        • Snipers today aren’t working solo or in pairs. They are working with assault elements providing containment and SA. Or our setting up OPs and calling in air from a safe hide sight. Whats the point of firing a single shot and having to change positions. Thats what Radios and JDAMs are for if you are worried about giving up your position. And if I am going to be shooting its typically in cover that provides plenty of protection or outside the enemys effective range. So semi come in real handy for that. You ever try to shoot a guy on a motocycle with a bolt gun? Its much better having a semi for that. The days of guys hunting down individuals like Hathcock did are over.

        • Until we fight another war in terrain like Hathcock fought in. Very close stuff with little clear space.

        • “That’s what radios and JDAMs are for.” My point exactly. Sniping was, in the past, a terror weapon meant either to demoralize the enemy (‘you’re never safe’) or take out a high-value target thought to be inaccessible to enemy fire.

          So we agree on what is most often being done these days, but disagree on what to call it. Increasingly today the definition of “sniper rifle” is “what you use when you see a guy that isn’t quite worth a JDAM or mortar round.” “Does it really matter?” Well, for the record book comparisons, yes. And I’d note that the old-fashioned sniping is still being done. It is just rare.

        • Yes, I agree. Today’s mission based sniper wears many hats. This weapon could be ideal for some.

  8. Again, why does this even exist? Initially I thought it was cool, but about 20 seconds later I saw how much it costs… There’s just no excuse for that.

    I’m not buying a $2,000 gallon of lowfat milk, either. It’s absurd. It’s not about what you can afford at this point, it’s about there being absolutely no reason for it to cost that much.

    If people are this desperate to waste money, I’ll sell them my belly button lint for $5,000.

  9. Camo pattern is optional, but damn well encouraged! This thing is sick, wish I had a caribou hunt or something to take it on.

    SHOT 2014: Year of the fancy stuff no one can afford 🙂

    • I can say it, no problem: If I start seeing heavy-caliber rapid fire entering the class 3 game hunting field, I’ll be against it openly and advocate Game Commission regulations against it. Why? Fair Chase will be pushed farther into history and the guns will feed the anti-hunting crowd powerful and legitimate fuel. We have enough problems already. Please keep the heavier caliber highly portable low-weight guns with rapid fire capacity out of the woods. We have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms, but we do not have a right to hunt on public lands, nor an unfettered right to hunt our own forest and fields.

      Maybe, though, this is the way it has to go? The industry and the rapid-fire power enthusiasts push things to the limit just to f’g see what will happen. Then it happens.

    • I personally am not a rapid fire enthusiast (or someone who could ever own this), I kind of feel it just gets chocked up to “Hey what if we did this?” or “We could be the first people to do x?”. Lately that seems to have added up to a whole lot of, this is a term I heard here lately, an answer to a question no one asked.

      To the rest, that is an odd question to have to ponder now, I wouldve never thought about lots of people not hunting with bolt guns until the past 4 or 5 years. I think shot placement should still be taught priority and that extra shots are wasteful, particularly if you are harvesting to fill your freezer.

      • I agree that efficiency should matter, the skill of hunting and shooting, and with your “last five years” comment. I have an even bigger problem, though, with a semi-auto .300 WM or .338 Lapua in the Class 3 (elk,etc.) hunting field, because large game herds can be reduced very quickly, as opposed hogs or even white tails.

        Missing badly with multiple shots is difficult with a bolt gun. More often the animal escapes or an effective shot is made. Bringing down an animal with three quick shots from a semi-auto shooting heavy fast bullets will be quite simple, really. It will change the sport. I’ve already seen this with the “fly in, get driven to your buffalo, fly out” two day shoots in Africa, still rare but real. The ethos is undermined in the public perception. And rightly so. If the ethos in Alaska or Idaho moves to the “three powerful shots fast” school, hunting is going to be wrecked. It happened in Alaska in 1975-76 when military rifles were used in the Caribou fields, using National Guard armory guns stored in the villages. It will happen again with guns in private hands at the rate we’re going, until it is outlawed, which it eventually will be. Just my prognostication. I hope the blow back doesn’t harm the self-defense semi-auto world of Everyman. It probably will.

        • If you have came back around to view any replies to your post….here is a clasic case in point.

          I believe the year was 1979/1980 in western Colorado during the rifle season…hunting partners were there that year and the news spread like a wild grass fire. A gent from Missouri was elk hunting and came across a herd of elk. Gent aims and shoots….elk didn’t go down so aim and shoot another…repeated this action til firearm emptied and then slip in another magazine….emptied his rifle again. If the Dinosaur National Monument Ranger was correct (And I’m sure this info was correct) after the term…”The Smoke Had Cleared”…there lay 5 dead elk. I believe this gent was using a BAR.

          Since the accuracy of this event is factual…this gent was nailed mostly on the fact that he “Reloaded” and emptied his firarm again on the herd of elk….the fine was said to be $20,000.00 and 2 to 3 years in a state prison. And it was said he got off lightly for the offense.

          I know that using a AR 10 type rife can and does take animals…no different than a BAR or a Remington simi auto hunting rifle. But G.D….with the speed at which a new magazine can be slammed home….it is hard enough keeping dudes from killing just one animal during the seasons (And I know what I’m saying cause I live in elk/deer/antelope country and this occurs on a very regular basis during hunting season. Buck Fever is very difficult for many to contain/control)….when AR10 type simi auto rifles show up more and more…I can only see more wasted animals that are left to rot.

          Nothing replaces experience and practice….and I see the inexperienced knotheads every season…every season here. And there’s a bunch if them!! They get here then bitch that where are the animals at?! I’ve drove hundreds of miles and there’s no animals. The turds just needed to park the truck and walk away from the roads plus you’ll have a much higher percentage of tagging an animals by the way. But when DOW personel are called out to a now crime scene with multiple animals down and no one around to except responibilty…it calls to conclusion that inexperienced socalled hunters can reek havoc on animal numbers let alone using rapid rifle rapid reloading firearms. Buck Fever has been the main culprid on many a wounded animal that ran off and died unclaimed.

          As far as snipers go…..I suggest that those of you who think that war is a beautiful thing and that your AR 15/10 is beyond jams/etc…go to Youtube and watch the Syrian Civil War vidios which are real. And you’ll understand why AK’s are king when it comes to reliablity….and why I read comment after comment after comment about sniping (But it’s just a hobby and not the real McCoy!) why would anyone actually want to enage in war?! It’s pretty F’n bad when the biggest “Doves in Washington DC” tends to be military top brass that have been in conflict and seen the carnage and death war causes. Sniping is being glorified a beautiful thing…I contend unless you’ve seen people blown apart you’ve don’t have a F’n clue!!

          Let’s play this fair…most of the vidios on the Syrian war shows dudes exposing themselves unbelievably bad!! So I see the stupidity in how these socalled rebels are conducitng their civil war and screaming God is Great….unF’n Believeable!!

          Shooting is suppose to be fun and fault no one wanting to relax and have some fun…but cost have gotten so F’n out of countrol mainly thru the firearms industry and ammo suppliers seeing so much green…..and I have more firearms than I possibly will ever even use. I have many a firearm that I haven’t shot since building. Now I could liquidate and buy one of these 300 mag autos….but with a bolt action rifle I must take and use my experience and use my long years of experience if I want to take an elk/deer/antelope and kill humainly not just mowed them down!! But then again….I’ve taken only one animal in my life at long distance….a mule deer buck in Nevada in 1987…and that shot was an extremely long shot….I was true in windage but low on elevation…I blew the deers front leg out at the joint and had to track that deer well over a mile…what was the F’n point!! More to the point….I now have these animals during spring/summer/fall….drinking from my watering trough….this places these animal 30 feet from my back door….not much of a challege now is it!

          I’m confident this 300 Mag AR type rifle is being shown/made because of a pipe dream of selling to the military….but it’s total B.S!

        • Yeah, what happens after some intruder is hit in the chest at close range with one of these things???? The anti-nuts will jump all over this.

  10. It is funny to read all the comments complaining about how much this rifle costs but I have read multiple requests for an AR type .300 win mag. The price for these would come down if there was competition for your dollars, but everyone is booing it now that it is built. I liked the idea when I read about the omen but rifles like these need to sell to encourage other makers to get in the game.

  11. The last .300 win mag semi I shot was a Belgium made Browning. Absolutely awsome and looked nothing like an AR. Any of you other guys remember when not all rifles looked like an AR? Anybody?

    • The hunting industry and professional hunters keep saying “we recommend a stainless steel action and synthetic stock.” But the PH’s keep buying steel guns with wood stocks. I wonder why. Not.

    • Before three-gun, the small-arms industry’s big run was with “sporting clays.” Trap, skeet, and sporting clays generated large shotguns-with-wood-stocks sales. I listened to Steve Hornady at a three-gun tournament last year, and he said “three-gun is going to do for us what sporting clays did.” Yep. In spades.

      I know of almost no one who shoots three gun. Participation in actual outdoor-range three-gun tournaments is rather small. What three-gun did was provide a marketing platform. There are millions of people getting to two guns, or even three, but only competing with, at most, one, and rarely. But damned if the closets aren’t stuffed with AR’s, 1911’s, Glocks, Benelli’s, Mossbergs, and AR’s some more. It’s like surfing: huge board and clothing sales by selling an image. And the boards get used how much?

      Indeed, this web site was developed to compliment a booming market by people who’d barely touched a gun before the web site was created: That isn’t a negative, but is rather very much a characterization of the industry overall. Everybody and his mother is making guns today, and the volume is all in steel and plastic, not wood. Margins are high only in certain areas: Exotic editions of guns. “Competition” guns for people who don’t compete. High quality carry and home defense pistols. And last but certainly by no means least…accessories. Scopes, red dots, HWS, and other sighting devices. Magazines. Slings. Replacement stocks. Oh, and ammo.

      I know many excellent hunters who shoot, mostly on their own property, 15-20 deer and several moose a year. They probably have been shooting the same two rifles for twenty years or more. They don’t go through more than sixty or seventy rounds of ammo a year, including season warm-up zeroing their scopes and shooting the “moving moose” target a bit. There just isn’t ‘enough’ volume in the hunting market. High margins exist only in the high end rifles, and even that segment is a bit unpredictable.

      Compare that to all the weekly or monthly self-defense oriented shooters, who burn through ammo and churn their weapons like mad. The industry and the typical gun-stuff consumer have changed drastically over fifteen years, especially over the last ten.

      “Where’s the wood?!” Decent wood is inherently expensive. It can’t be turned into a mass-market item.

    • Well shortening the barrel does increase accuracy. You are going to lose MV, but with a 300 win mag you got plenty of range to begin with.

    • No, there isn’t. The cartridge is designed for a longer barrel if the you want the advantage of its potential velocity, which is the only reason to buy it rather than a standard .308.

      • You really aren’t going to be losing that much range chopping off roughly 6 inches of barrel compared to something like the MK13. I will take the gain in accuracy of having a shorter barrel. And if you can get me a 15 round magazine it would be nice, wouldn’t have to carry two guns in.

  14. To quote MPA’s own website: “The first and only 300 Win Mag on a true AR platform!”

    I know I’m being a buzzkill, please don’t think that I think this is anything less than awesome, even considering the pricetag, but has nobody heard of the Nemo Omen? That rifle came out in 2012. I’m really curious see how the dimensions compare, not that you’ll ever find someone to buy both just to whip out a set of calipers on them.

    I really hope that someday it will be possible to build a 300WM or 30-06 AR from parts like you can build an AR-10 now. I’m not confident it will happen, but it would be nice if the demand caught on and companies started producing more affordable caliber-specific components. I figure the biggest hurdle would be the BCG, the receiver halves can be made by existing billet manufacturers, most other components should carry over from the AR-10, a barrel would come from a standard AR-10 blank just chambered differently. You might need a sturdier buffer tube? And a stronger spring, but that’s nothing compared to the rest.

    • I think they’re BSing on being the first.

      I’m pretty sure Noreeen offered their .300 Win Mag AR before MPA.

  15. Any organized military that attacks the U.S. will surely issue at least a minimal level of ballistic vests to its soldiers. What is the maximum range that a typical .300 Win Mag will penetrate a type IIIA ballistic vest? I have my doubts past 600 yards.

    And another important question. At 600 to 800 yards where .300 Win Mag bullet velocity is down to something like 1800 fps, how seriously would a full metal jacket (non expanding) bullet wound someone after passing through a type IIIA vest … assuming it can even penetrate a type IIIA ballistic vest at that relatively low velocity?

    I ask these questions because I am seriously questioning the rationale for such an expensive rifle.

    • Actually not sarcasm: this rifle has sporting purpose.

      I really don’t think an invasion scenario is helping in determining the usefulness of any rifle’s design. It’s like a New York or Los Angeles resident trying to justify a vehicle purchase on the merits of how many guns they can display in the rear window.

      Besides, who the hell is going to invade the US, with all the press we’ve gotten over the gun panic? They probably think we’ve got flak cannon and coastal artillery in every back yard.

      /notabadideathoughrite?

Comments are closed.