AR Sponsor
Posted: 2/6/2004 7:28:15 PM EDT
|
We are presently considering the use of AR-15s with .50 beowulf uppers for our maritime officers assigned to protecting cargo ships from piracy and terrorist attacks. Originally, we were going to equip our shipboard officers with Barrett M82s and short-barreled ARs for CQB. However, the .50 beowulf seems to offer the features we would ideally like in one package...a good balance between penetration capability, stopping power, and magazine capacity. With a 16" barrel, the weapon is short enough to permit onboard CQB as well as hard hit capability when repelling boats from the deck. However, I do have some reservations... 1. I have heard conflicting comments about the range capability and ballistics of the .50 beowulf. Some say that with a 16" barrel they can achieve effective groups at 400 meters. Others say 200 is the max. With virtually nothing in print on the caliber's ballistics, I am somewhat in a quandry about how well the weapon may perform at longer ranges (Up to 500m). 2. Does anyone manufacture a foreward rail system for the .50 beowulf upper so that we can attach the same sighting and grip accessories that we use on our standard ARs? 3. We love the ACOG 4x32 for our .223 ARs. Does anyone make a similar scope with ballistic markings for the .50 beowulf? If not, how much difference is there in the ballistics? Could we still use the ACOGs and have an accurate and reliable system across all platforms (.223 & .50)? This may also be an issue when it comes to night sights. We would like to use PVS-4s, but the reticle is set up for 5.56 ballistics. 4. From those that own .50 beowulf rifles, how does reliability compare to standard AR-15s? Any advice is greatly appreciated!! Craig |
|
Mine is set up with an eotech and I've only shot it out to 100 yards so I can't help with longer range ballistics. I've got about 800 rounds through mine with no problems at all. Not one malfunction yet. A mid-length ARMS SIR rail system "Ought" to work on the .50beo upper. I'm planning on heading down to ARMS after the SHOT show with my upper to test one out. I'll let you know when I get back. |
|
Gene, I agree. However, the idea isn't to necessarily match the 50BMG's capabilities, but to find a versatile weapon platform that has both CQB and anti-boat capability. I think that is also what the Coast Guard had in mind when they recently adopted the .499 Mini-50 rifle (a competitor to the .50 Beowulf). Since we only have a few officers on each vessel, issuing two weapon systems is a real headache..not to mention semi-auto 50BMG rifles are super expensive. But I certainly understand your comment. The .50 beo is a powerful cartridge, but nothing like the 50BMG. Likewise, even though the 50 beo has some magazine capacity and is manuverable in tight spaces, the mag capacity and recoil is far from ideal for multiple target CQB engagement. I am just hoping at this point that the .50 beo can provide us effectively (not necesarily ideally) with both capabilities. Craig |
| How about the LW 499 CQB? 12.5 inch barrel, integral rail upper, 12 round mags, select fire, more MV and ME and LESS recoil. Navy are evaling them at the moment as are USMC, all reports are favorable, we've had a few on eval for about 6 months and they have been faultless, the new frangible rounds with Accutec projectiles are perfect for boarding operations, we've done FBI protocol ballistic gelatin testing and we may well be adopting this weapon for specific purposes. |
|
Thanks for the suggestion. We are also considering the LW rifles in the .499 caliber, but the initial test information that we have seen seems to be more promising for the .50 beo. The weapon you describe sounds great for ship boarding and onboard CQB, but with the 12.5 inch barrel, I don't think accuracy would be too good for engaging boats at a distance from the deck. Plus we would have to stick to civilian-legal variations, as we are a private agency. In intl waters that doesn't matter, but it does create an issue when we are in port in the US. Have you tested any other variations of the LW rifle, perhaps with longer barrels? I would be very interested in your opinion of the round's ballistic qualities. Craig |
|
We have all three configurations on test, the 12.5" barrel CQB, the .499 SFR with 18" barrel and the DMR with 24" barrel. The CQB is good to about 220 yards and can easily hit a 6" steel plate at 200 yards freehand when used by any of our operatives with iron sights, the SFR (which is the plain vanila USCG model) is more than capable of engaging targets in the 350 to 450 yard range. The DMR makes maximum use of the cartridge's potential and is accurate to 500+ yards. We were at Quantico recently and were destroying small clays at 320 yards first shot each time. Additionally, we are currently evaluating their new SLAP round with 180 grain penetrator whivh has an MV of 3,300 fps and is good at 900 meters, better than 308 and something they have developed for a specific overseas use. If you are constricted by civilian regs the 10 round mags give you three more than Beowulf. Regarding the Beowulf, it is fine but not suitable for our requirements; the bolts break regularly during full-auto use, the extractors break at about 1,200 rounds or so and the recoil is too punishing for sustained use, the other problem we found was getting the weapon back on target for a follow-up shot - it took four times longer than the LW and the 308 weapons we are evaluating. All said, the recoil, mag capacity and bolt/extractor problems made the choice for us. Please note that these weapons went through more use than most civilian or military weapons normally go through so I would not expect to see the same things in "normal" use. Just my 0.2 from lot's of range time. 6.8 SPC is sweet too! |
|
Thanks for the info! Given the fierce competition between the two (LW .499 & .50 beo), it would be great if some objective third-party did a side-by-side comparison. Of the models you described, the USCG variation with 16" barrel is probably more suited for what we need. However, the ten round magazine is a litttle discouraging. Although the stock beo mags are 7-rounds, it is my understanding that the round will feed very reliable from standard AR mags with slight modification to the feed lips. We would obviously have to test it out, but theoreticaly, we could fit up to 15 .50 beo rounds in a 40-round AR/M16 mag. Either way, there seem to be trade-offs. I would love it if I could secure permission to just buy both and then run some tests. |
|
We were concerned about magazines but for a different reason, we wanted a clear distinction between 5.56 and .499 so in a SHTF situation you would not load the wrong mag. The 499 feeds 7 rounds reliably from the USGI 30 rd mag with no mods, it won't do any more than 7 as they won't negotiate the curve. We have found major problems with 40 rd mags in any caliber and would not advocate them. One school of thought is that if you run out of ammo with any of these big bore AR's, then you really should have been using artillary! One of my buddies in Alaska just IM'd me that there is now a revolver in .499! |
|
We also debated about the issue of mistaking mags during a SHTF scenario. However, our current thought is leaning toward pulling the ARs altogether from the ships (except in certain situations) if the .50 or .499 makes the grade. With no ARs onboard at the time, there should be no confusion. Although most enagegements involving piracy at sea are resolved with few rounds fired, out on the open water there is no cavalry to assist when something goes down. Regardless of which rifle we end on deciding on, I want to make sure that our officers have plenty of ammo just in case. I would never want and empty gun to be the deciding factor in an incident at sea. |
|
As a major Alexander Arms distributor who does make sales to multiple government agencies including Federal ones, we find it extremely strange that all these extensive trials have been conducted without having any communication with the manufacturer. It is equally strange to hear that an AR15.com user has personally uncovered all these faults with a weapons platform that has been in use with the US military for over 2 years including active service in Iraq and other places. Regarding bolt head breakage and extractor claw breakage with the Beowulf, this was a subject cited on AR15.com just prior to the SHOT show last year by a competing manufacturer hiding behind the veil of an annoynmous screen name in order to promote sales of their own product. Currently, there over 6,000 Beowulf rifles in use, and there has not been one return to Alexander Arms of a bolt or extractor claw due to failure. Included in this rifle total are many that are operated with M16 lowers in full auto operation. To the original poster with a question, Alexander Arms would be happy to discuss your individual requirements and needs and provide your organization with substantied information and data to support your procurement process. You can reach Alexander Arms at the US Army Radford Arsenal at 540-639-8356. |
|
I recently, in January, used the Alexander Arms 50 BEO at a range (gate 24 range) setup in BIAP (IRAQ). The SF guys let me shoot their toys and one happened to be the 50 BEO with a 16" barrel. Their comments were nothing but praise for the weapon platform and performance. An Eotech sat on the flat top upper and loads were factory. Acuracy was outstanding out to 100 mtrs. Range wasn't setup for any further distances. SF was using issue 20 rnd mags. No mod's to the mags. Feeding wasnt a problem unless you selected 3 rnd burst and then only occasionaly. Personaly I thought the 50 BEO kicked like a 12 ga but was still an agile weapon. SF in Iraq uses the 50 BEO as a engine block killer at TCP's and for door entry during sweeps. Weapon has plenty of knock down power. JohnM in Iraq |
|
Thanks for your reply. When I can secure some time this week, I am going to contact Alexander Arms and see if they can answer some of these questions. I may also do the same for LW. I think that ultimately, whichever platform looks most promising, we will end up purchasing one and doing some tests of our own before we formally adopt the system for use by our maritime ATOs. I would love to do our own trials with both systems, but as a private company we don't have a large budget for equipment tests. - Craig |
|
Quoted: How about the LW 499 CQB? 12.5 inch barrel, integral rail upper, 12 round mags, select fire, more MV and ME and LESS recoil. Navy are evaling them at the moment as are USMC, all reports are favorable... coast Guard is unhappy. [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=180913[/url] |
|
Recon, When you speak to Alexander Arms, in addition to the 50 Beowulf, which is outstanding for close quarters and shattering engine blocks, ask about the 6.5 Grendel with the Lapua 144 grain FMJBT. It is a magazine length load in the AR15 and the bullet has a .636 BC giving you a large mass bullet with high velocity retention and impact energy. |
|
I am a civilan owner of a .50 Beowulf and can say I have been very pleased with it's performance. I use a "Limbsaver" recoil pad and recoil is very managable with it in place however shot to shot time is a bit much, I have added a vertical foregrip and that helps. I use an Eotech holosight and can engage deer silhouettes at 400M very relaibily from a bench. I have shot at spinners at 100M and can say that they are impressive to watch when hit by the beo. Once I shot 80 rounds in almost constant fire/reload and had only 1 failure to extract (I also had not cleaned the gun since my last trip and so that might have been a factor) In all I love this gun and would feel very confident with it in almost any situation, I wish they made longer clips, but at $1 a round maybe it's a good thing ;) My $.02 RGUARD |
AR Sponsor