Added: 5 years ago
From: DrWallritz
Views: 297,866
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (165)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • m107 men

  • i know what im going to write to santa this year.

  • I love how it has a free fleating barrel to lessen the recoil, if it didn't that would hurt like CRAP!

  • @FalingHamProductions The free floating barrel increases the accuracy, it has nothing to do with the recoil.. thats what the huge compensator and the hydraulic buffer is for.

  • @sucker1999 thanks fo clearing that up for me, I got my facts mixed up.

  • you better try the barret .50 in semiauto mode :P

  • whats trully crazy about it, is that you can shoot it standing up without it ripping your arm clean off :O

  • das ist keine m82

  • @MrLevinho Sieht nach einer M107 aus... eine M82A1 mit durchgehender Picatinny-Schiene, aber die Qualität ist zu niedrig ums zu erkennen... so wie das ZF montiert ist könnte es auch ein M82A1 sein.

  • Wait!! you can snipe peoples with it? i thought the longest confirmed sniper kill was with this weapon. Either way, that's a load of crap, it just kills them faster so they feel less pain...

  • @psychoclown420 your stupid the farther you are more momentum / pounds hit you

  • @kingbigdawg9 What are you talking about??

  • @psychoclown420 The longest ever kill was made by Craig Harrison of the Household Cavalry of the British armed forces in 2009 with a L115A3 which isn't even a .50 cal.

  • I have GOT to get me one of these Rifles.

  • what a camper. he needs to get a life and try to get a quickscope. what a campernoob

  • everyone thinks its a m82 its NOT. its a FUCKING BARRET M107. 50 CAL. SNIPER RIFLE.

  • @nerfsweeneytodd The M82A1 is the same thing as the M107 .50 CAL. they are both the same gun.

  • but not the m82

    that gun is old

  • Are only the names different?

  • Which IS an M82A1 Barrett... SAME GUN!

  • but not an old m82

    the m82a1 is a millitairy version of the old m82

    upgraded for the army

  • @dontmakemeMAD1990 The current Military version is the Barrett M-107. It replaced the M-82A1, 2 and 3 version of this rifle, though the M-82 A's are still in inventory. Outwardly they all look basically alike. The difference is in the action. Improvements to the bolt and carrier, Gas system, feed ramp to accommodate incendiary and explosive rounds and the muzzle brake. They all look basically alike, but are vastly different rifles. A good used M-82 still brings around $5000, A 107, $13K.

  • @Nicodemus98 realy ?

    i thaught the m82a3 was more recent then the m107

    it has a longuer rail then the m82a1/m107 i thought

    and isnt it so the m107 is just the name the us militairy calls there m82 rifles ?

    the rest is sertaily right i think

    indeed the m82a1 is the big update of the m82 i know

  • @dontmakemeMAD1990 Nope, the various models are a progression of refinements made to the original M-82. The M-107 is the latest in the progression. It has a improved gas system and angular change to the feed ramp to accommodate rounds such as the Rufus and Slap-T. It is akin to the progression from the M-16A1, A2, A3, and finally the M-4. All basically the same in appearance, but very different internally.

  • @Nicodemus98 you mean the raufoss mk211 right

    and if i read wikipedia the m82a1a is the one adapted for that

    and the m82a3 is the newest m82 model if you beleve modern firearms and wikipedia

    and everyone say m82a1/m107 and m107 is a militairy renaming

    just like the germans rename their arctic warfare rifles

  • @dontmakemeMAD1990 If the M-107 is merely a rename, why do they also list the M-82A1? They are different models. My source is Barrett arms Co. But, as I stated they are essentially the same rifle. A few refinements, angular changes, cosmetic upgrades. Just like the M-16 progression from the A1 to the M-4. And Yes, I meant Raufoss round. They also have D.U.'s for the .50 cals for use on armored targets. The problem with them is the radioactivity.

  • @Nicodemus98 but those radioactivity may never lay to high isnt it ?

    why is it a problem then ?

  • its indeed not the old version

    the m82 was the rifle that was designed by barrett whitout adaptions for the millitairy

  • lets see some one run away know

  • @DanBarker1155 was it loud?

  • how come you cant shoot a person with it just because you blow them in half doesnt mean anything a kills a kill no matter what

  • Ins't this a Barret?

  • m82 is a barret

  • barrett

  • ooooohhhh jeeeahr!!!!

  • These guys below are forgetting one thing ...

    The Geneva Convention does not apply to isolated Terror groups such as Al Qaeda or the Taliban.

    The Convention ONLY applies to warfare between sovereign states.

  • horay for al qaeda!!!

  • a rifle is only as good as the ammunition used..google blended metal bullet technology. the u.s army and branches arent allowed to use them as per the geneva con. but theres always blackwater.

  • Actually I read something about a court ruling that said these can be used on humans. I think it was somewhere on the Wiki page about these guns. Not that anyone pays attention to, or enforces that thing...like the Constitution.... *sigh.

  • geneva convention >_> correct me if i'm wrong but the US army uses the m107 series as a counter sniper weapon to penetrate cover and reach out to 1800meters. They use dual purpose rounds to ensure kills on soft targets. Geneva convention my ass.

  • you are right, and the marines us the M82.

  • Dear Santa,,, lets talk.

  • @1shot1kill197435 Hahahaha agreeed. :D:D

  • the M82: For when going through a tank just isn't good enough

  • Actually, you can use anything you want on an individual, sort of.

    As long as it is a legal weapon of war, the restriction is to use the smallest force necessary to complete the objective. So, if one guy is shooting at you and you are out of ammo and the only ordinance available is a MOAB. You can legally use the MOAB on one guy. HOWEVER, that is obviously unrealistic despite being really really cool.

    Basically don't use a .50cal armor round if you can take out your enemy with an M16.

  • OMG DOES HE HAVE RED TIGER FOR IT?

  • hahahahahaha

  • Not quite, but he's close to the ACOG.

  • Lol the ACOG looks really wierd on the barret...

  • haha yea youre right

  • cod 4 n00b

  • The Barret M82A1 is not an anti-tank rifle. It's an anti-material rifle, and is capable of taking out lightly armored vehicles.

    The longest shot resulting in a hit with a .50 BMG under 2,500 meters, which is less than 1.5 miles, not 2 miles, but still a very good shot.

    The Geneva convention doesn't bar the use of .50 caliber, it's the Hague. It only limits ammunition designed to cause excessive harm, which is anything not FMJ Ball. M33 is just fine. It only applies to those who signed it.

  • Yup,these days they use .416 rounds for more accurate shots

  • I don't think they're using many of those just yet. The Chey-Tac is a bit too expensive and low-production to widely field, and there's already a good many Barret M82 and M107s in service.

  • Wait, scratch that.

    But similarly, with the .50 BMG that's there, it's a bit silly to switch to a round with a marginal performance gain.

  • well,in the assasinations they use. try find future weapons episode 'bout that

  • I don't put much faith into that show. Mack isn't a real SEAL, you can check with VeriSEAL on that when their website comes back up. He also says that a .308 WIN rife's maximum range is 800 yards, but it's commonly used in 1000 yard matches, and there was a confirmed kill with a .308 at a hair past 1400 yards in Afghanistan.

    The .50 BMG, with quality copper solids, is capable of 2500 yards. The military is still using lighter FMJ Ball ammunition. Improved munitions are cheaper than rifles.

  • Okay look like u seriously researched this thing...But wait,Mack isnt real seal ??LOL!

    cant believe that someones lumpying around and claims that hes SEAL :S

  • I know a bit about this stuff. It was my job for a while there, but only a hobby now. But me and a couple other guys, some time ago, went out to try and find out conclusively if Mack was a seal, or if he's nothing more than an actor. While we couldn't find any evidence to disprove it, we couldn't find anything, including with VeriSEAL, to suggest he was. There is no such thing as a classified SEAL, so we're pretty certain he's nothing more than an actor.

  • This was ur job????Geez,thats cool.

  • Nice one there. Just like shooting with Sergei :D the anti air gun 12.7 or something :D still nice I would love to shoot with something this cool

  • damn he unloaded on that last target

  • "genva convention says"

    w00t

    It is being used by NATO

    Only thing anyone has ever gotten yelled at for is to use Multi Purpose munition in it

  • Also, TallStuff222 - The .408 CheyTac round is smaller than the .50BMG, but because of how good the ballistic coefficient is, it actually has more power than the .50BMG anywhere past roughly 720 yards.

    The .50BMG slows down far sooner than the .408 CheyTac, which is why the smaller round has more power at a distance.

    Groupings depend on the day, as any wind gusts will throw the bullet off target.

  • Against the Geneva convention my ass. The Browning M2 is the same caliber, and it's a machine gun. It's used against people all the time, just like the Barrett is, because the Geneva convention doesn't say shit about it.

  • l.o.l. it would make a nice papershreder for that "geneva covention document"

  • thank you lovshooting, couldnt have said it better myself

  • MSRP at just $8,650. might as well get 2 for that price...

  • never mind all the technical stuff... Holy shit!

  • And lastly, I am sure I will take some flak for saying this but the CheyTac Intervention M200 is unlikely to make much of a splash. while from a ballistic point of view the round is good for long range [high velocity, good Ballistic Coefficient] it still cant [from a blunt physics point of view] match the BC of the heavy .50BMG. The impressive long range groups are probably to be attributed to the fact that they were test models, built to higher standards than possible in mass production

  • 'One shot kills' are basically redundant with this. any hit will have a human target in an unfit-for-combat situation, dead or not. the shooter, if aiming at a human target, will aim for center mass so as to increase first shot probability, and realistically any hit will kill the target instantly.

  • It definitely will NOT accomplish 'silent kills'

    no 'sniper' rifle will, apart from the *extremely* rare subsonic sniper weapons such as the VSSK Vykhlop. the M82 is extremely loud, made moreso [from the shooter's perspective] by the muzzle brake.

  • The M82 of course is rarely used as an extreme range AP weapon because of its slight inaccuracy. Extreme range rifles are generally manually cycled and rarely have floating barrels or moving chambers, which would negatively alter accuracy properties. It is officially considered a "Special application scoped rifle" and is deployed as a support weapon capable of defeating most light armor, and owing to its semi-automatic nature, is capable of rapid follow-up shots.

  • it IS against the 'rules of war' to use ammunition that explodes inside human targets. The US policy is that unlawful combatants [though personally i disagree with the term] are not covered by the treaty, but explosive ammunition is still not used by US forces in AP roles.

    Commonly used in .50BMG weapons are multi-purpose rounds which combine kinetic, explosive and incendiary properties. they are occasionally used in AP roles, but explode AFTER passing through the body. the legality is dubious

  • It is not illegal to use .50BMG in an antipersonnel role like the video poster said. It is, however, overkill. .50BMG rifles with ultra low drag boat-tails get insane ballistic coefficients and are occasionally used as ultra-long range AP rifles, just google Tac .50

  • Okay a lot of people are putting in their two cents without knowing jack about what they are saying, and a few people actually DO know, but noone can sort them out so ill clear a few things up okay?

  • sounds more like a 22

  • but even whith the springs and the mussel in the front of the you cant fire more than one shot then you loose the target, but it's so powerfull body armor dossent protect you, so you wont be needing more than one shot. ( this gun is more or less only used fore ''silent'' kills in the army.:)

  • 82 is a veary powerfull wep but u have to get one shot kill cos of recoyl

  • the gun uses a floating barrel design and has extra springs making the barret very stable and easy to shoot even at the shoulder. the muzzle brake in the front is the key though, i wouldnt want to fire it without it. ouch. if you dont argee with me do some research on the barret m107.

  • The cheytac M200 isn't even being used in the military yet i think. Its still in a few testings... I could be wrong though lol

  • the brits are using it

  • Cheytac M200 is better. Search that rifle people. .408 cal, longest distance shot holder, etc. looks nicer too. But i like the M82 and M200.

  • No, they just no how to deal with the recoil and know exactly where to put the butt of the gun for maximum accuracy.

  • canadian sniper holds the record for furthest kill not a marine

  • WTF that guy has a steel arm to stay that accurate :)

  • CAZZOOO E UN CANNONE!

  • I wish I could say nice shooting; but I dont know what distance your shooying at

  • damn it its my favourite weapon at cod4

  • same here

  • This isn't an anti armor weapon. It's an anti materials weapon used for destroying light skinned vehicles and supplies. It is most commonly shot at ranges of near 1,000 yards. It is a very effective sniper weapon, there is nothing in the Geneva convention about using it on enemy personnel.

  • if i shoot someone with this sniper in CoD 4, they sometimes dont die with one shot omg

  • u must be really bad at shooting then

  • sometimes they survive a headshot.

    cuase they have Juggernaut :S

    increases health very lame

  • only newbs and people with low prestige use juggernaut

  • wtf scrwe u cod 4 wow, i play that game but seroiously you go watch a real vid of this gun and put a game up, wow!

  • yer its a known bugg for the ps3 but on the pc and xbox360 it works fine

  • ... It's a game.

  • *laugh*

    it is a game-.-

  • yeah same here

    VERY frustrating

  • Actually, that was the gun for the One Shot One Kill mission. The only target was Zakhaev, and he wasn't meant to die anyway. The regular sniper rifle is an M21 or something like that, which is different.

    Bottom line: It's a game.

  • xbox live 1 shot is all you need to kill somebody..

  • nope.

    i even shoot them in the head.

    Stopping power Deep impact and somethimes they dont die but i figure it out. u must take Iron Lungs then when its all steady like after 1.5 secs you can shoot and then its always 1 shot but somethimes sniper sucks in cod4

  • My dad told me that when he served in the US Army (77 to 80), his superiors would tell him (in response to Geneva) to shoot at the man's webgear, his uniform and his other supplies; if he happened to be behind any of those, that was his fault.

  • ROFL

  • xD Yeah, no kidding.

  • I would love an M82...

    If firearms weren't banned here.

  • Where do you live?

  • M82A1 owns

  • Power of the M82 even isn't demonstrated in that vid. you should see what it can do to a head.

  • seen sum pics of taliban soldier who got hit in the head with one round! jesus fuckin christ! not much left! lmao!

  • I want to see it.

  • i'll try n find it again for ya its abit sick tho lol

  • im american.

    shut up.

    before we blow you away.

  • why not shoot'n each other, you're allowed to kill someone whith an M2 firing the same round

  • stupid americans

  • The Americans would Just Shoot Each other.

  • oh really? The most cordinated, funded, and dedicated fighting force in the world, would shoot each other? Are you French?

  • yeah fuck you if your british i read an article about your fucking friendly fire oh and uh we have the most powerful armed forces in the world and we have the fucking bombs and theres nothing any ones gonna do about it, especially you you prick

  • Actually, 2st3p69x, THE RUSSIANS have the most powerful army in the world; we may have better equipment, but they have the numbers, let me put this in perspective, we have about 5 to 6 thousand nukes, the ruski's have 15,000! they also have more people the china!

  • no hommie, get your facts straight. the russians havent made a good tank sense the t34. all theve done is update the t52 a bunch of times to get a t 90. they still us ak's even tho there pretty old and there tactics are horrible. our SPECIAL FORCES did in 1 month what the ruskies couldnt do in 8 years in afghanstan. weve takes over afghanastan, they never got a grip on it. THERE STILL FIGHTING THE CHECHENS!

  • Does that mean that viet nam has the most poweful army since they U.S. didn't do so well against them?

  • we withdrawled from vietnam because of the vietcong. they attack using guerilla warfare and then withdrew. our outstanding weapons were of little use due to not being able to fight well with them. we left the south vietnamese because there wasnt any progress. a few years later, north vietnam took over, making our affiliation with the south usless. the vietnamese are only strong in their country, not on other soil.

  • awesome history. Does Vietnam ever raid other countries these days or are they mostly at peace with other nations now?

  • to be honest with you, the vietnamese dont get involved with other countries so i guess their is peace. if their was peace broken which involves the vietnamese, you can bet that we will get involved again... others dont like them much though, then again some others do because of communism.

  • I'm not an adovocate for military adevnturism, but political popular views really piss me off and dumbs people down. Vietnam has been nvolved against other nations esp. as a proxy of soviet unuion before, i.e. sino-vietnam war, and vietnamese involvement in cambodia which llead to the khmer rougue and their 4 millions kill genocide tally. Yet it's all the time, we armed them, the hell we armed the, we were fighting other people, we also armed other factions, but today we are enemies of laden&co.

  • Who also trained and supplied the Afghans too against the Soviets? So this is what you have. A smart leader, yes. Constant supplies, yes. Training, yes. Numbers, yes. And fighting an enemy in territory they've never been in, yes.

    Everything was bad for the Russians.

  • ilwayz your a sick fuck... you typical violent american.... thats why most of the world hates you.... not all americans lots of americans are cool but ilwayz is the reason terrorists kill you...

  • LOL LIBERAL

  • If you're engaging personell at a range where only a .50 cal rifle would be effective, you wouldn't hit anything in 99% of the cases anyway due to wind and general ballistics. This is why the M82 is used as an anti-material rifle against bigger armored targets for example. For anti personell work, it is alot more effective to use smaller calibers, and at closer range, since pretty much every possible hit on smaller targets beyond 3000ft is pure lucky shots.

  • there are rports though of insurgebts being shot with it then either being shot in half or amputated

  • i would get great joy on shredding a fucking rag head to bits with a fucking .50 cal any day.

  • its perfectly within the guidelines of the geneva convention to shoot people with a .50BMG cartridge, most of the worlds armies have these or the russian equivalent. What IS illegal is to shoot people with the RAUFOSS round which is an armor piercing explosive incindiary round

  • Thank you. I was going ot say it, but you beat me to the punchline. Besides, the US doesn't subscribe to half the treaties that govern the use of this type of weapon. AP or otherwise, the US deploy a number of munitions on soft targets with this type of gun. And personally I don't have a problem with it myself - kill more I say.

  • wow. are u kiddin me. u would have to be a demented person to wanna shoot another human with a .50, it could literally break u in two pieces, or a million. more like use it to shoot down a cessna

  • Hey, if u need 2 shoot a terrorist or a dictator but cant get in close 2 em, id use a fucking 50cal. Fuck u if you think thats demented.

  • I'd use laser beams.

  • no your demented. if some guy was about to blow him self up in the middle of disney world, and all you had was a 50 cal round. I think you would use it.

  • fuck i would rather take the quick death from a .50 than a slow bleeding death from a smaller round. and if you can shoot down a flying aircraft with a semi automatic weapon with a 10 round magazine you are my new hero.

  • The USA have not signed the St. Petersburg Convention so it is legal for them to use these cartdridges against personnel...Though legal does not necessarily mean it is cool to do it...

  • what the heck is the st. petersburg convention?

  • Contrary to popular belief it is not the Geneva Convention which regulates the usage of this or that type of ammunition or weapon against this or that target (being the Geneva Conventions a bunch of treatises on the treatment of POWs and injured personnel captured in combat, as well as an effort to assure the non-targetability of medical personnel and non-combatants in the Theatre of War).

  • You know the red cross over a white background medical personnel use in combat? That's the Geneva Convention at work...

    Tbh I cba to go on about the St. Petersburg Convention, google it up ffs...

  • omg

  • rofl terrorists dont use the genva convention why do you think they behead civilians all the time

  • "Terrorists" dont use m82's, they use SVD's Dragunov's

  • Good night, child. It's past your bedtime.

  • I would assume you're allowed to shoot people with this rifle, I mean why would it not be allowed?

  • awesome i love this gun!

  • they cannot explose head with it ? it has no purpose then... oh yeah in desert, I'm gonna shoot on that rock for a fragment to bounce over him.. ?!

  • LOL!

  • um... wtf are u talking about???? lolz

  • hey dude, geneva said not to shoot a man with a .50 cal, "anti-armor"? xD, but in the military they say to shoot the man's faituges, web gear, and supplies, if he happens to be behind them, that's his fault

  • haha, thats a way around it XD

  • check out my video its the full video of it.

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=hDO­BtgdScPA&search=m82

  • have it too , but cut a best of out of it..its too long

  • thats right =D good work but only to bad that the results arent shown =(

  • I think you mean "geneva convention"...

    (lol at "genver conversation")

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more