Mk 13 Mod 0 stock

Random Guy

Private
Belligerents
May 16, 2012
127
111
49
49
It was suggested on another thread that I post this request for information on this thread, since its dedicated to the Mk 13 Mod 0 stock, so here goes:

There is a lot of great information in this thread, and I am trying to learn more about the history of the Navy 300 Winchester Magnum rifles - specifically the dates of when certain permutations occurred from the early 1990s to the early 2000s - before their nomenclature became Mk 13 Mod 0. Why?

Well, I have an early Mk 13 grey stock that was painted tan while in service, but I don't have a McCann/MIRS rail that would designate it as a Mk 13 Mod 0. Below is what I have gathered thus far: A 2003-dated Leupold MK 4, 16x scope; Leupold medium height Mk 4 rings, Badger Ordnance Mk 13 recoil lug (in white box), a 2002 dated Turner NM sling, and an original Navy issued Kalispel case for a Mk 13.

I have a long ways to go, and still need to find an early Remington long action with a C-prefix, but I am trying to build an accurate tribute/replica of a circa 2002-03ish Navy 300 WinMag rifle, hence my interest in trying to piece together the "pre-Mk 13" history.

7092824


First, I can't recall if anyone else posted this informative article on the Mk 248 cartridge, but its very good and discusses the Navy's interest in developing an accurate 300 WinMag cartridge. This article provides excellent historical chronology for the cartridge from 1987 to 2011, but unfortunately a similar history does not exist for the Navy's 300 WinMag rifles (which as noted by Alan Brown, were often customized for the individual SEAL team member).

.https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2017/5/24/unsung-hero-the-mk-248-mod-1/

Unsung Hero: The Mk 248 Mod 1

by Aaron Carter - Wednesday, May 24, 2017


1987: Navy solicits a 300 WinMag cartridge for use by both the Navy shooting team and for sniper use. Federal cartridge wins a small contract, but the ammo does not perform well beyond 800 yds.

1990: Hunter Shack Mfg (HSM) wins a small contact. Ammo is accurate enough, but testing reveals pressure in excess of SAMMI specifications.

1992: Federal Cartridge wins a contact with ammo using the 190 grain SMK bullet. Meets both accuracy and SAMMI pressure requirements.

1993: Ammo was approved for 'evaluation' as a sniper rifle cartridge in Nov 1993, and results were very positive. The ammo was designated as Mk 248 Mod 0. Effective range was 1200 yards.

My assumption: Presumably in 1994 the Navy started using their 300 WinMag sniper rifles in operational settings with an 'approved' cartridge. I will refer to these Navy sniper rifles loosely as the "pre-Mk 13" rifles or more correctly: "Rifle 300 Mag Rem 700".

Mid-2000s: Based on experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Navy sought to improve the performance of the Mk 248 Mod 0 cartridge so it could be used effectively out to 1500 yards.

2009: Crane formalizes the specifications of the MK 248 Mod 1 ammo, which uses a 220 grain SMK bullet.

2010: Federal cartridge begins production of the Mk 248 Mod 1.

2011: First shipments of Mk 248 Mod 1 arrive in Afghanistan for operational use.

**

Researching NSNs, I found this info re M91 vs what became the "Rifle 300 Mag Rem 700":

"M91 Sniper Rifle

Weapon Specifications NSN 1005-LL-L99-5443 (LH) 1005-LL-L99-5442 (RH) Model M91 Manufacturer NSWC Crane Caliber .308 Cal Mechanism type Bolt-action Magazine type Ammo capacity Rate of fire N/A Weight (empty) 14 lbs 8 oz Overall length 44.5 inches Barrel length 24.0 inches

Ammunition: ball (M59, M80 & M80E1), match special ball (M118), match (M852), match short-range (A169), and match longrange (A170 & AA11). Logistics: In-service Date 1975 Life expectancy 6,000 rounds Technical Manual # NA Operator Manual # SW370-BF-OPI-010

Discussion: The M91 is a Remington model 700 modified for use at sniper schools. It has a Remington trigger, a 1 in 11.2” twist chrome moly barrel, a HS Precision fiberglass stock, a Leupold 10X scope, a Harris bipod, a cleaning rod and guide, and an aluminum case. The rifle has a 1.0 MOA accuracy with M852 ammunition. Accessories: None

.300 WinMag Sniper Rifle

Weapon Specifications NSN 1005-LL-L99-5364 (RH) 1005-LL-L99-5477 (LH) Model 700 Remington Manufacturer NSWC Crane Caliber .300 WinMag Mechanism type Bolt-action Magazine type Fixed box Ammo capacity 3+1 rounds Rate of fire N/A Weight (empty) 16 lbs 4 oz Overall length 47.5 inches Barrel length 26.5 inches

Ammunition: Mk 248 Mod 0 (A191).

Logistics: In-service Date 1975 Life expectancy 6,000 rounds Technical Manual # NA Operator Manual # SW370-BE-OPI-010

Discussion: The .300 WinMag is a modified Remington model 700 with a Remington trigger, a 1 in 10” twist chrome moly barrel, a McMillan fiberglass stock, a Leupold 10X scope, a Harris bipod, a cleaning rod and guide, and an aluminum case. The rifle is capable of 0.5 MOA accuracy with Mk 248 ammo. Accessories: None
***

I have reached out to some former Navy personnel, including the former Crane employee who invented the recoil lug for the 300 WinMag rifles. I have not spoken to Alan Brown yet, but will try to do so in the near term. With that said, here's my impression thus far of the basic chronological history - this may contain errors - but its a start in an attempt to piece together the "pre-Mk 13" history.

1990-1991: Crane made some 300 WinMag sniper rifles for NAVSPECWAR DEV GRU only. They developed a recoil lug that increased the bedding surfaces and bedding rigidity, given the 300 WinMag's recoil forces.

The other teams continued to use the 7.62x51mm sniper rifles built by Crane since 1982. In addition, around 1990-91, Redick Arms Development (RAD) provided the Navy/Crane with approx 300 long action sniper rifles in 7.62x51mm NATO, as replacements for the M86 SOCOM sniper rifle. (The M86 was a short action 7.62x51mm made by the defunct G. McMillan Rifle Company).

The Bausch & Lomb (B&L) 10x Tactical scope was initially used, which comports with the order of these scopes that the Navy procured in 1989-1990 for the old M14 Physical Security Sniper Rifle. However, the fixed M3A Ultra 10x Leupolds were also reportedly in the inventory and were presumably used as well. There is a well known picture on this thread of Kyle Defoor training with an early Navy 300 WinMag with the B&L scope.

Late 1993 appears to be when the DEV GRU teams with their WinMag sniper rifles get the new Mk 248 Mod 0 ammo, and thus were 'officially' married up, so to speak.

1994: Crane provides a sample recoil lug to Precision Reflex Inc (PRI) and they offered the lug as a commercial item, apparently called the 'Big Foot' lug. Not sure how long it was offered as a commercial item. I was told that some benchrest shooters used this lug.

1995: It is decided to provide all SPECWAR SEAL teams with 300 WinMag sniper rifles, and thus Crane converted the M91 rifles to the 300 WinMag caliber. The rifle was simply called the ‘Rifle 300 Mag Rem 700’. (I have seen references to these as "M91A2" rifles - but I don't think that is technically correct as that does not show up in the nomenclature. It might have been a RAD-based ‘marketing designation,’ as Earl Redick offered rifles commercially that were based on the Navy rifles). Navy NSNs exist for both a right-handed action and a left-handed action (Right handed action: 1005-LL-L99-5364, and left handed action: 1005-LL-L99-5477). The Navy presumably ordered a bunch of solid gray McMillan A2 stocks for these rifles, and I get the impression from one Navy source that McMillan pre-inletted the stocks for the unique Crane-developed recoil lugs.

Regarding the long action receivers, I think this history helps explain why we see old Navy aluminum transport cases with stickers that refer to “C” prefix receivers from the early 1990s. These receivers were apparently the original M91s in 7.62x51mm - but like the M24 - the M91s were long actions, so the conversation was performed, along with opening up the bolt faces for the belted 300 WinMag case. Stock picture for the early Navy "Rifle 300 Mag Rem 700 (RH)", perhaps the 1995 era.

7092828

Mid-1990s: The Navy apparently purchased the Leupold Mk 4, fixed 10X scope with M1 turrets for the M14 SSR rifles, and vintage pics of the Navy 300 WinMag rifles seem to have that 10X Leupold scope. I suspect this is also when the old B&L 10X scopes were replaced with the Leupold Mk 4, 10x scopes.

After 9-11-2001, Crane apparently made 200 or more of these sniper rifles per year to meet operational needs. Presumably this is when all the tan colored McMillan A2 stocks were ordered. I don’t know what year they adopted the McCann rail, but I will keep researching this key piece of information.

Anecdotally, per Alan Brown's comments to another forum member, some SEAL team members replaced the 10X Leupolds with the Leupold 16X scopes on their 300 WinMag rifles. The Leupold fixed 16X scopes had been used since the late 1980s on the M88 single shot 50 Caliber rifles, followed by the Mk 15 Mod 0 rifles, and thus they have been in NSW's inventory a long time. (BTW, the 10x Leupold scopes with M1 turrrets have 90 MOA of elevation adjustment, whereas the taller turrets on the 16x scopes provide a whopping 135 MOA of elevation adjustment.) I will use the 16X (top) for my 300 WinMag build, although the bottom 10X version is probably a little more 'correct' for a pre-Mk 13 replica.

7092830

As shown by USMCSGT0331, there were 3 flavors of one-piece scope rails that were used from roughly the early 1990s to early 2000s on the 300 WinMag sniper rifles. They include a Crane scope rail (or more likely Leupold rail, per NSW personnel) with Weaver slots, (top) an early PRI rail with Weaver slots, that is about 1/2" longer (bottom). Both appear to be 0 cant rails. The 3rd and final rail used a Pictatinny style rail. With his permission, here's a picture of the unmarked rail with Weaver slots that looks just like the original M24 scope rail, along with the slightly longer early PRI rail that is marked "217" on the bottom. Both of these were used on Navy 300 WinMag rifles before the Mk 13 Mod 0 McCann rail was adopted.

Honestly, I think the top rail is the same early Leupold part used on the M24 SWS circa 1988, based on the identical physical aspects of the rail, and the fact that Leupold supplied the Ultra rings to Crane at that time.

7092831

(Note: If someone has a an old Leupold one-piece M24 scope rail for sale, or the discontinued Badger Ordnance M24 rail as shown below, please let me know. This BO part was sold a few months ago on this forum for $50, but I wasn't looking for one at the time...but it would be worth $80 or $90 to me)

7092835

Here's a picture of US Army personnel using what I would call a ‘late pre-Mk 13’ 300 WinMag sniper rifle. Note the Picatinney scope rail, 10X Leupold scope, and black barrel. My guess is this configuration was probably the final version before the platform got the standardized Mk 13 Mod 0 designation and the McCann rail.

7092833

2002-2004?: I don't know which year the McCann rail was added and the rifle and its nomenclature became the Mk 13, Mod 0. The repair Manual is dated December 2005. One Navy vet said "early 2000s" and another said 2003 or 2004, but can't remember exactly what year. What is clear is that NSW operators were still using the 'pre-Mk13" configuration in Iraq circa 2003.

I suspect that in 2003 or 2004 Crane ordered a bunch of McCann rails, tan McMillan A2 stocks, and perhaps the NightForce scopes as well, but I’m not sure on that last item, as the Leupold 10x scopes still show up on rifles with the McCann rails.

The below pic from 2005 might be the same rifle as seen above, not sure. This is the configuration that I will seek to build with my early stock, including a black barrel, but as noted, I will be using the Leupold 16x scope instead of the 10x scope seen in this picture. I think I'll use a PRI rail that has been shortened slightly to match the length of the original rails - unless I can find an old-school/discontinued Leupold rail with Weaver slots or the Badger Ordnance M24 rail (also discontinued).

7092841

NOTE: This thread has a lot of info re the Mk 13 Mod 0, which can also be found in the Mk 13 Mod 0 Repair Manual (Dated December 2005). Its the Pre-MK13 era before the McCann rail and NF scopes that is more of the mystery. I have read that Alan Brown said there wasn't much 'process control' for the rifle in the early days and that there was a lot of variation/permutations depending on the preferences or requirements of individual SEAL team member(s). For example, one Navy veteran told me that circa 1992-93 a left-handed frogman on SEAL Team 6 had his 300 WinMag sniper rifle built with a McMillan Baker Special stock, as he preferred its ergonomics. I suspect he used a left-handed action too.

So I am sure there was some evolutionary variations in the decade before rifle got its official nomenclature as a Mk 13 Mod 0. Nonetheless, here's the topics I"m interested in understanding, to the extent possible

1. What year did the nomenclature change to Mk 13 Mod 0, which is presumably the same year the McCann rail was introduced? (It appears to be 2003 or 2004, based on what some Navy vets recalled, but I was looking for a more precise data point).

2. What year did Crane start using Lija barrels? (I have read that the 300 WinMags used Hart, Douglass, and maybe even Krieger barrels, but clearly the Lija became the standard barrel at some point, and I was curious as to when that might have occurred). UPDATE: 1995.

3. What year did Crane start doing the SAKO-style extractor on the bolts? (I have read it might have just pre-dated the Mk 13 Mod 0 designation). UPDATE: Extractor Mod likely done to 308W bolts that were opened up for the 300 WinMag cartridge. Bolts for or from original 300 WinMag rifles might not have gotten the extractor modification...that is my impression.

4. What year did Crane start using NF scopes? (I think it was shortly before the Mk 13 Mod 0 designation)

5. What year did they switch from the Weaver style rails on the old M91 rifle to the version with the Picatinney rail?

6. What year was the Mk 13 Mod 3/4 nomenclature created? (a few suppressed versions were made that pre-dated MK 13 Mod 0).

Any assistance from those with specific knowledge re the Navy "pre-Mk 13" or “Rifle 300 Mag Rem 700" is much appreciated, thanks.
 
Last edited:

sinister

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 16, 2002
1,641
84
154
College Station, Texas
In Army we transitioned from Remington 40Xs in commercial MacMillan prone and A2 stocks to 700s in MacMillan A2s after Larry Freedman and a few other guys departed the new SF Sniper School in the mid-80s.

I had a number of McMillan 700 7.62 rifles in blue-grey, desert, and woodland smear camouflage A2 stocks. These were before the "Big Foot" or "Boot Lug" recoil lug, and had Sako-style extractors. All had Leupold 16Xs. I don't think the Mark 13 designation came until the mid- to late-90s when Nightforce started becoming popular.

This is kinda-close to the 7.62 700:

7093070

Many had problems with the Leupold bases "Springing." I think those were eventually replaced with Badger Ordnance rails after Marty Bordsen moved the factory from Wisconsin (I think -- I can't remember) to Kansas City.

The flat Badger was for use with the Leupold M3, and the 20-MOA for M1-16Xs.

SF CW3 Mike Haugen designed and patented the McCann MARS rail when he retired and became the Remington Military Sales rep around 2004. McCann's Spanaway, Washington machine shop (where Mike had these things made) wasn't too far from Fort Lewis.

While heavy and ergonomic, I scored an Air Force shooter at Camp Perry shooting a 22-shot 1,000-yard match using a MacMillan-stocked 300 around 1999 or 2000. He was doing well until around shot 12 when the recoil punishment just destroyed his confidence and position, and his score went into the toilet.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FatBoy

spooledup

Sergeant
Belligerents
Jul 28, 2007
219
14
22
Marion NC
This is a original MK13 or pre MK13 bolt. I was fortunate enough to pick this up with one of the two stock I purchased. As you can see it doesn't have the extractor mod. It does have the original riveted Remington extractor. I do remember looking at some pics of the return stocks and you could see where some had the rail installed when they were rattled canned. Others were rattled canned but its apprent there was no McCann rail installed when painted.
 

Attachments

Random Guy

Private
Belligerents
May 16, 2012
127
111
49
49
Sinister: Thanks for the info. I have read that SF CW3 Mike Haugen designed the McCann rail while he was still active duty, but still not sure when Crane ordered them and started installing them. I am 99% sure it was either 2003 or 2004, but perhaps I should try to reach out to him. He used to post here on the forum... I'm pretty confident the Mk 13 Mod 0 designation occured concurrently with the McCann rail. ON EDIT: That stock and action look like the old M86 rifle's made by McMillan for SOCOM. Curious what year is that picture from?

Spooledup: Thanks for the pics. The SAKO-style extractor timeline is unclear, but its good to see how they were marked by the Navy. I've made a mental note on that detail.

Massoud, thanks for that pic too of a fresh, non-painted Mk 13 Mod 0. That new looking barrel appears to be freshly powder coated or something similar when it was built at Crane. So, it appears some had barrels coated tan like that, some had black barrels, and some had the barrels left in natural stainless steel. Looks like the later tan stock too. Its interesting that as of 2005 the newly built ones like that still had a Leupold Mk 4, 10X M1 scope - but not surprising. I've heard that Alan Brown said the NF scopes came only in the later Mod 0s.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: crazynoto

FatBoy

Chris Hayes, Nashville TN
Belligerents
Jul 29, 2001
1,128
598
219
45
Nashville, Tennessee
My SF buddies "first " round in Iraq in 2003 he had a 700/300 with 16x Leupold, one piece rail of unknown original and a Sako extractor. I have a pic of it on the team room floor with the base hack sawed to take the center section out because the Sako mod to the bolt was causing the brass to bounce back into the ejection port. He hated the sako mod and suspected the only reason the early rifles had the mod was it looked like the bolt face was opened up to accommodate 300wm.

This was end user info, nothing official but he had three different versions of the mk13 before he retired and liked the 700/300 the best. Said it was more comfortable to him and inside 600 with the mk248 mod0 it was devastating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sandwarrior

sandwarrior

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 21, 2007
5,076
706
219
in yooperland
My SF buddies "first " round in Iraq in 2003 he had a 700/300 with 16x Leupold, one piece rail of unknown original and a Sako extractor. I have a pic of it on the team room floor with the base hack sawed to take the center section out because the Sako mod to the bolt was causing the brass to bounce back into the ejection port. He hated the sako mod and suspected the only reason the early rifles had the mod was it looked like the bolt face was opened up to accommodate 300wm.

This was end user info, nothing official but he had three different versions of the mk13 before he retired and liked the 700/300 the best. Said it was more comfortable to him and inside 600 with the mk248 mod0 it was devastating.
Always gotta love first account opinions. I always see over the years some “expert” seem to give different accounts. Some love or hate a weapon but the expert writing the story will always tell you it was next to perfect. First account people always include the “warts” and what they did to overcome it. Even on a weapon system they loved.
 

Random Guy

Private
Belligerents
May 16, 2012
127
111
49
49
FatBoy, thanks for that info. Alan Brown is reportedly not a fan of the SAKO-style extractor. I might leave my bolt in original configuration, not sure yet. If you can share a picture of that rifle with its 16X scope that would be great, and thanks again for your contribution to thread.
 
Last edited:

FatBoy

Chris Hayes, Nashville TN
Belligerents
Jul 29, 2001
1,128
598
219
45
Nashville, Tennessee
FatBoy, thanks for that info. Alan Brown was not a fan of the SAKO-style extractor. I might leave my bolt in original configuration, not sure yet. If you can share a picture of that rifle with its 16X scope that would be great, and thanks again for your contribution to thread.
I have zero combat experience, with or without a mk13 but after hanging out with guys who do I took their advice and left the Remington extractor in and stayed with the 700/300 configuration. I have zero regrets, it's a great platform all these years later. I don't run a clip on so there was no reason to add all the extra rails.
 
Last edited:

0812guns

Private
Belligerents
Oct 5, 2012
81
17
22
32
In Iraq in 2005, this was my Mk13. I can't remember if we deployed with it or fell in on it. It did have the Sako extractor and as you can see a Lupy scope and Mccann rail.View attachment 7092906
I really like the look of the tan barrels with the later medium tan stocks. The tech manuals say they're powder coated, but does anyone know for sure what powder coat color was used? What would the closest color match be if one were to use KG Gunkote or Cerakote?
 

Random Guy

Private
Belligerents
May 16, 2012
127
111
49
49
I am not an expert re Cerakote, but I do recall that their ‘SAGE’ color was very close to the FDE/tan McMillan stocks used on the Navy SSR rifles. I do not know if matches the color used on the Mk 13 barrels, but it should be very close to the stock.
 
Last edited:

sirhrmechanic

Command Sgt. Major
Belligerents
Feb 23, 2010
13,291
28,544
219
54
The Snobbiest Town in The Snobbiest State in the N
FatBoy, thanks for that info. Alan Brown is reportedly not a fan of the SAKO-style extractor. I might leave my bolt in original configuration, not sure yet. If you can share a picture of that rifle with its 16X scope that would be great, and thanks again for your contribution to thread.
Alan is also a wealth of informaton and I posted some of his thoughts and observations from when we got together c. 2016... earlier in this thread.

One of the questions you had asked was 'when did they switch to NF scopes' and IIRC the answer was "there was not set date... but sometimes we could Leupolds, sometimes we could get NF. Eventually we started ordering just NF."

He also said that there was a lot less 'operator-bought' (either themselves or with unit credit card) scopes than legend implies. A few oddities made their way into the field and into sniper lockers and team rooms for evaluations, but for the most part, the 'run what you brung' and 'use what you were issued' mantras applied. What did happen quite a bit, though, was that teams could mix and match their gear and optics. If you're not using the scope on that Barrett on this deployment or mission, and you want that scope on your Mk13... well, it doesn't bother accounting as long as it stays on the books. So you may see an optic or accessory on something that never came from Crane... and wasn't 'user purchased' but was simply swiped off something else in the inventory.

Last, (and some other folks have asked about this from time to time) some Mk 13 Mod 0's were threaded for suppressors. But Alan said that none left Crane that way in their first iteration. In other words, a few were done at Crane when sent back for repair, rework, etc. And some were done by gunsmiths near the bases (or on bases in some instances -- where machine shops were available). But the Mod 0's were not threaded.

I am sure I'll remember some other stuff. Alan is a great guy. I first met him c. 2002 at an armorer's school at Crane. He does not frequent Interwebs discussions at all because he got tired of posting something and then having some keyboard gunsmith tell him he was wrong about the details of the guns that he built! And had a hand in designing.

@Massoud great to see you in this discussion! If you want to get first hand info from a guy who has BTDT and got the T-shirts, folks... listen to Massoud!

Cheers,

Sirhr
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vargmat

Random Guy

Private
Belligerents
May 16, 2012
127
111
49
49
Thanks for the input. I've read that NightForce first got military orders in the "early 2000s" but I have not yet identified the specific date of which the NXS 5.5-22X scope got its National Stock Number, which would indicate what year the Navy ordered them. Still researching that topic, and the McCann rail issue. BTW, I think the NSN for the 16X Leupold scope (w/ Duplex reticle) you are using on your Mk 13 Mod 0 replica was created in February 2000, so the military was able to buy that scope via official channels as of early 2000. Just an fyi...

One comment re this:

"Last, (and some other folks have asked about this from time to time) some Mk 13 Mod 0's were threaded for suppressors. But Alan said that none left Crane that way in their first iteration. In other words, a few were done at Crane when sent back for repair, rework, etc. And some were done by gunsmiths near the bases (or on bases in some instances -- where machine shops were available). But the Mod 0's were not threaded."

The suppressed versions of the Mk 13 with the McMillan A2 stock is a bit of an enigma. Very, very few pics exist, but my understanding based on researching National Stock Numbers (NSNs) is that the Mk 13 Mod 3/4 was basically the suppressed version of the Mk 13 Mod 0/1. This National Stock Number was created in 2006: https://www.iso-group.com/NSN/1005-01-537-1996

I recall seeing a picture of laser engraved bolts, presumably removed from decommissioned rifles. They were the Mk 13 Mod 3 and an M14 bolt marked Mk 14 Mod 0. Alan Brown noted that very few early Mk 13 were suppressed, and my guess is this Mod 3 bolt came off one of those rare suppressed rifles. In fact, I am pretty sure that laser engraving was only done at Crane, and not at a base or a gunsmith. The suppressor was reportedly the KAC Mk 11.

7094842

So it is correct that Mod 0s per se were not threaded for the suppressor - but those early rifles with the McMillan A2 stocks that were later threaded for the suppressor were apparently given a new NSN, and designated the Mk 13 Mod 3 and Mod 4 (Mod 3 was right handed, Mod 4 was left handed). At least that is my impression based on researching NSNs and anecdotals from Navy vets.
 
Last edited:

0812guns

Private
Belligerents
Oct 5, 2012
81
17
22
32
Thanks for the input. I've read that NightForce first got military orders in the "early 2000s" but I have not yet identified the specific date of which the NXS 5.5-22X scope got its National Stock Number, which would indicate what year the Navy ordered them. Still researching that topic, and the McCann rail issue. BTW, I think the NSN for the 16X Leupold scope (w/ Duplex reticle) you are using on your Mk 13 Mod 0 replica was created in February 2000, so the military was able to buy that scope via official channels as of early 2000. Just an fyi...

One comment re this:

"Last, (and some other folks have asked about this from time to time) some Mk 13 Mod 0's were threaded for suppressors. But Alan said that none left Crane that way in their first iteration. In other words, a few were done at Crane when sent back for repair, rework, etc. And some were done by gunsmiths near the bases (or on bases in some instances -- where machine shops were available). But the Mod 0's were not threaded."

The suppressed versions of the Mk 13 with the McMillan A2 stock is a bit of an enigma. Very, very few pics exist, but my understanding based on researching National Stock Numbers (NSNs) is that the Mk 13 Mod 3/4 was basically the suppressed version of the Mk 13 Mod 0/1. This National Stock Number was created in 2006: https://www.iso-group.com/NSN/1005-01-537-1996

I recall seeing a picture of laser engraved bolts, presumably removed from decommissioned rifles. They were the Mk 13 Mod 3 and an M14 bolt marked Mk 14 Mod 0. Alan Brown noted that very few Mk 13 were suppressed, and my guess is this Mod 3 bolt came off one of those rare suppressed rifles. In fact, I am pretty sure that laser engraving was only done at Crane, and not at a base or a gunsmith. The suppressor was reportedly the KAC Mk 11.

View attachment 7094842

So it is correct that Mod 0s per se were not threaded for the suppressor - but those early rifles with the McMillan A2 stocks that were later threaded for the suppressor were apparently given a new NSN, and designated the Mk 13 Mod 3 and Mod 4 (Mod 3 was right handed, Mod 4 was left handed). At least that is my impression based on researching NSNs and anecdotals from Navy vets.
Mk13 Mod 3's were not common. In May of 2009, there were only two at LOGSU 2 on the East Coast. G63943XX and G65539XX. Both with Mk11 suppressors.
 

cherokeefan03

Private
Hessian
Belligerents
Apr 18, 2017
8
1
6
From my understanding and looking at photos, the MK13 Mod 3/4 used a kind of indexing collar/donut to mount/index the MK11 can.

Mk13 Mod 3's were not common. In May of 2009, there were only two at LOGSU 2 on the East Coast. G63943XX and G65539XX. Both with Mk11 suppressors.
By 2009 wouldn't many of them been sent back for conversion to Mod 5s by then?
 

0812guns

Private
Belligerents
Oct 5, 2012
81
17
22
32
From my understanding and looking at photos, the MK13 Mod 3/4 used a kind of indexing collar/donut to mount/index the MK11 can.


By 2009 wouldn't many of them been sent back for conversion to Mod 5s by then?
I don't have any info on the rebuilds...just some inventory info from that time.
The lowest serial number Mod 5 I have info on is G65538XX (that was inventoried as early as December 2008), so that would overlap with the known Mod 3 at the east coast teams.
 
Last edited:

Random Guy

Private
Belligerents
May 16, 2012
127
111
49
49
0812guns, other than prefixes "C6xxx" and I guess "G6xxx", what other prefixes show up for the Mod 0/1 and 3/4? Any D prefix Remingtons? Just curious, thanks.
 
Last edited:

bolt56

Sergeant
Belligerents
Nov 17, 2009
142
2
22
63
West Tn.
On the subject of receivers, I have started collecting pieces for a MK 13 MOD 0, I am searching for a "C" prefix receiver. If anyone has any info of where and how to get one I would appreciate it very much! I have really learned a lot from this thread guys, thanks again, Jerry
 

0812guns

Private
Belligerents
Oct 5, 2012
81
17
22
32
0812guns, other than prefixes "C6xxx" and I guess "G6xxx", what other prefixes show up for the Mod 0/1 and 3/4? Any D prefix Remingtons? Just curious, thanks.
I know that E66733XX was used on a Mod 0. I've heard B's were used, but I can't confirm that.
 

sirhrmechanic

Command Sgt. Major
Belligerents
Feb 23, 2010
13,291
28,544
219
54
The Snobbiest Town in The Snobbiest State in the N
On the subject of receivers, I have started collecting pieces for a MK 13 MOD 0, I am searching for a "C" prefix receiver. If anyone has any info of where and how to get one I would appreciate it very much! I have really learned a lot from this thread guys, thanks again, Jerry
Your best bet is to watch gunbroker and buy a hunting rifle with a c prefix. The one I bought was not a .300, but had the right bolt face. It was very, very cheap! In the $400 range iirc. That was before I sold the barrel and stock on eBay.

Finding an action alone... good luck. Just watch GB. Used 700 hunting rifles sell for squat.

Cheers, Sirhr
 

bolt56

Sergeant
Belligerents
Nov 17, 2009
142
2
22
63
West Tn.
Your best bet is to watch gunbroker and buy a hunting rifle with a c prefix. The one I bought was not a .300, but had the right bolt face. It was very, very cheap! In the $400 range iirc. That was before I sold the barrel and stock on eBay.

Finding an action alone... good luck. Just watch GB. Used 700 hunting rifles sell for squat.

Cheers, Sirhr
Thank you Sirhr!