300 AMU?
I have some empty cases fot the 300 AMU round used by the Army as a Sniper Round. Cases are marked 300 REM-UMC. Box is marked improved with a 200 gr. Match Bullet. The box does not list the velocity. When comparing the case to a standfard 300 WM the AMU case is longer. Anyone know what the case was based on and the the specs of the round. I understand it was used when the 7.62 x 52 ran out of steam and also used for long range competition.
0
-
Parent case is the 300 H&H
ETA:
Synonyms:
.300 Match
.300 Magnum Improved AMU
.300 Advanced Marksmanship Unit, U.S. Army
.300 Army Marksmanship Unit
.300 Ackley Magnum
.300 Ackley Match
7.62 72mm
The .300 AMU is the .300 Ackley Magnum. It could also be called the .300 H&H Magnum Ackley Improved, but it doesn't have the common Ackley standard 40-degree or 28-degree shoulder.
It has seen service with the US military in match competitions and as the premier sniper cartridge for several decades, most notably with the US Marine Corps.0 -
thanks 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Tailgunner1954
Parent case is the 300 H&H
ETA:
Synonyms:
.300 Match
.300 Magnum Improved AMU
.300 Advanced Marksmanship Unit, U.S. Army
.300 Army Marksmanship Unit
.300 Ackley Magnum
.300 Ackley Match
7.62 72mm
The .300 AMU is the .300 Ackley Magnum. It could also be called the .300 H&H Magnum Ackley Improved, but it doesn't have the common Ackley standard 40-degree or 28-degree shoulder.
It has seen service with the US military in match competitions and as the premier sniper cartridge for several decades, most notably with the US Marine Corps.
Tailgunner,
You've got me confused on this one. I'll acknowledge this round existed and was called most of the names you mentioned. Even it's parent cartridge, the .300 H&H, is correct. Although, the .300 AMU is a couple mm's shorter.
But, while I also know it was tested as a sniper cartridge, it was never adopted. It saw short service in the Army Marksmanship unit and to my knowledge, again never adopted mainstream by the Marine Corps as a sniper cartridge. Both the Marines and the Army remained mostly with the 7.62x51, and in many (not most) cases rifles chambered in 30-06 were still being used, i.e. M1C/D Garand, M1903 and the M70.
Edit:
Ahhh, ...thanks0 -
SW
That was copied from the Accuload notes on the 300AMU.
They show using Jean Huon's 1988 book "Military Rifle and Machine Gun Cartridges" as a reference source.
My first choice of reference, Hackley/Wooten/Scranton's, for US military rounds doesn't go past 1945. I expect that the 300 AMU will be in volume 3, which is rumored to be coming out in the next year or so.0 -
See here...
http://www.ammo-one.com/300ImprovedAMU.html0 -
The CALIBER 300 MAGNUM IMPROVED AMU is,for all purposes, a 300 Ackley Magnum. It was loaded for only a short time using REM-UMC 300 MAGNUM bunter with the "MAGNUM" ground off. A nearly identical cartridge was loaded by Western in the 1960s and they called theirs by the correct name 300 ACKLEY MAGNUM. You have to be careful when using Huon's book, he made a lot of mistakes.
Today, things have been simplified and most use the plain old 300 WinMag.
Ray
0 -
Ray
I bow to your superior knowledge of the subject. Thanks for weighing on on the topic.
For those that don't know "Cheechako"/Ray, he is not only a great guy, but an advanced collector who specializes in benchrest/competition, wildcat and US Military cartridges in addition to his benchrest shooting hobby. He has also had several articles published on wildcat and competition cartridges in collector journals.0 -
Thanks for the kind words Bob. But I don't claim to know anything. The older I get the less I thought I knew.
With due respect to Jean Huon's book, I probably should have used a word other than "mistakes". It's a very good reference on military cartridges throughout the world. But, you have to understand that it was written nearly 25 years ago and we have learned so much more about the US Military cartridges in that time. And there's not a day goes by that we don't learn more. I understand that HWS Vol III will be 600 pages long and yet it only covers the years 1946 - 1977. I have been priviledged to see some of the drafts and the authors are already thinking about an addendum to cover any new material that they have found just in the last two years. So, even it will have "mistakes". They simply had to stop and print the darn thing. All authors live through that same agony.
Ray0 -
Ray,
Appreciate you coming on board and enlightening us. I've known about the round since the early eighties, but never got a whole lot of reasonable information on it.
This round is a monument to what we forget between conflicts every time. Back in the mid-eighties, I was in S-3 in the 1st Ranger BN and I was under the impression that 'the' round was the M118 out of an M40 (which we did not have, our guys had M21's) Little did I know it was the bean-counters who made that happen. I always have to clarify that while I helped run the sniper training ops in '84-'85, I wasn't a trained sniper and I certainly didn't get to see all of the cool stuff. Just some of it. A lot of better options went by the wayside, I find out later. Snipers never get fully away from standard military though, just because supplying them can be a real tricky deal. Probably the biggest reason this and many other superior rounds end up by the wayside.0 -
This sounds similar to the 300 Hoffman. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments