TrackingPoint
Weapon technology company
TrackingPoint is an applied technology company based in Austin, Texas. In 2011, it created a long-range rifle system that was the first precision guided firearm.
Formed by John McHale in February 2011, the company created its first PGF prototype in March 2011. The company offered its first product in January 2013 and a second, the AR Series semi-automatic smart rifle, in January 2014.
Variants of the company's bolt-action rifles use .338 Lapua Magnum and .300 Winchester Magnum ammunition. Semi-automatic variants are available in 7.62 NATO, 5.56 NATO and .300 BLK.
In September 2016, the company began selling the M1400, a squad-level .338 Lapua bolt-action rifle that can hit targets out to 1,400 yards (1,280 m). It can also acquire and hit targets traveling at 20 mph (32 km/h) within 2.5 seconds. The rifle is 45 in (110 cm) long with a 22 in (560 mm) barrel, weighing 15.4 lb (7.0 kg). It can be used with the company's ShotGlass wearable glasses that transmits what the scope is seeing to the shooter's eye.
In January 2014, the U.S. Army purchased six TrackingPoint fire control systems to begin exploring purported key target acquisition and aiming technologies.
The public source identifies “TrackingPoint” as weapon technology company. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around TrackingPoint, Weapon and technology.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “TrackingPoint”, the useful work is to connect “weapon technology company” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 21, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7831557. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2011, 2013, 2014 and 2016.
Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “TrackingPoint”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow TrackingPoint primary sources, TrackingPoint archive and TrackingPoint research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “TrackingPoint”?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “TrackingPoint” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.