And now I'll talk about the army and the 6.8
- Thread starter Edwardteach72
- Start date
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
So they are going to keep the heavy, inaccurate, clunky M249 Saw that slows down a fireteam.
BDinPutnam
.475 A&M Magnum
I am beginning to wonder how much experience you had with the M249. I have no combat experience with the SAW, only about 2 months of field exercises with it but I found it to be quite accurate, hitting pop ups at 300 yards with short bursts was very easy and the dispersion was a lot lower than I would have thought, maybe it held too tight. And while it was certainly much heavier than an M16A2 I was always always able to keep up with the squad, even with 600 rounds on me. I never had any problems with my issue SAW in the admittedly brief time I spent with it nor did I hear much in the way in complaints about it excepting the problematic plastic latch on the 200 round cans which I understand was rectified by issuing the Israeli 100 round soft packs. I still think the SAW was and is a great machinegun. And if we go to war with China or Russia instead of the ill trained, ill equipped and ill disciplined camel fuckers our forces now face
I think the sustained firepower of a proper belt fed, quick change barreled machinegun would be much appreciated. The new Knights Armament machineguns have all this while cutting the weight even further.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
On a bipod. Try being accurate with it standing or kneeling or during CQB. How much experience? Some. When in a combat engineer company you rotate it out. It came to me a lot when I was an E3. I hated it.
Afterwards while in the reserves in an infantry company, I witnessed firsthand as a fire team leader the Saw Gunner lagging behind while practicing doing drills. The Saw Gunner wasn't as agile as the other rifleman and much slower climbing over walls and going through windows. He also became a useless body during CQB exercises relegated to just providing security in hallways.
I think the Marines got it right by scrapping it. You don't need a cumbersome belt fed gun in a 4 man team that kicks down doors. That's what the 240's are for at the platoon level with proper 2 man teams. A full auto magazine fed lightweight weapon is much more versatile in the fireteam level and they double as a fire team based Designated Marksman.
The Marines have run tests on this.
Last edited:
I fired it without over much difficulty from the shoulder, especially kneeling. It's not something that can be done all day, it's meant to be fired prone and on the bipod, like any true machinegun. If shooting from irregular positions and on the move a machinegun is not what is needed anyway. Those HK ARs are stupid heavy for an infantry carbine and only somewhat lighter than the new KA 5.56 machinegun. By getting rid of the SAW in favor of an overweight and overpriced AR you reduce your firepower. We won't always be fighting unskilled desert rats, we might need that firepower someday. And by fielding SAWs the M240s, those stupidly heavy pigs, can be relegated to pintle mounts on the HMMWVs.
I loved the SAW, had no problem with it.
Even in MOUT training I only swapped out for an M16 when I was going indoors. I even tried the SAW indoors a couple times. There it is cumbersome, but not unworkable.
I had asked if I could be issued an M4 instead of an M16 for swapping out, to maximize the whole point of changing out in the first place. I got a "maybe". I mean the mechanics had em, why not me?
What I really wanted, but didn't know it at the time, was something like a P90. During MLRS type operations anyway. If a 13M comes under fire he's dead anyway, might as well have the lightest, smallest possible thing to lug around before you die I figured.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
The thing is a 4 man fireteam doesn't need it. The Saw Gunner becomes useless when going into buildings. And that's what 4 man teams do.
On an open field, you still have M240 gunners in the platoon to suppress so that the 4 man teams can advance and close in.
On an open field, you still have M240 gunners in the platoon to suppress so that the 4 man teams can advance and close in.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Anyway, somebody's going to put an end to all this bullshit real soon. The different uniforms, the different rifles, and now the different calibers between services.
It's a logistical nightmare that eventually someone will put an end to. When I was in Kuwait as a Marine, we got resupplied from the Army in Camp Doha. How would all this shit work in the future?
It's a logistical nightmare that eventually someone will put an end to. When I was in Kuwait as a Marine, we got resupplied from the Army in Camp Doha. How would all this shit work in the future?
Shadow2
6.5 Creedmoor
I've said it in other threads, Aside from AMU the army has not been making good choices when it comes to gear. I am not ex military and have no loyalty to any branch it just seems like the Marines choose utilitarian functional equipment and have proved on multiple occassions it should be up to them to make these choices. Then release it too all of the armed forces. Its like the army will buy the Subaru for more money just to replace 5 years in and the Marines buy the honda civic that gets the job done and runs forever.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Negligible ballistic difference within 1 to 200 yards compared to a 77 grain and also the logistics of changing barrels and magazines when NATO and the other services are not going to change.
That isn't enough of an improvement to make it worthwhile to replace hundreds of thousands of weapons for.
If the new round is not also able to replace the 7.62x51 it will be an exercise in folly.
The biggest argument for 5.56 for the civilian shooter is that a 1,000 round case can be had for around $300. The 6.8 SPC is three times as expensive. More cost, less ammo, less practice, less skill, less effective element behind the trigger.
The 5.56 has worked for years and years. Worked just fine for me. I'm good.
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
That price will Come down. I bought a 6.8 spc for hunting. It’s about $1.00 per round. Is what it is.
Robin
.577 Tyrannosaur.
6.8 has developed a fairly large following and is now manufactured by all the big ammo producers. The price has come down considerably, while not as cheap as .223 there are bulk rate deals to be had, but sadly, usually not for NY, FUAC!
I don't know, and from what I have been able to find, no one else does, what configuration this particular 6.8 will be, or even what configuration guns will have to be in order to shoot them. The negative nellies are out of the gate with speculation and the race hasn't even started yet.
Robin
I don't know, and from what I have been able to find, no one else does, what configuration this particular 6.8 will be, or even what configuration guns will have to be in order to shoot them. The negative nellies are out of the gate with speculation and the race hasn't even started yet.
Robin
Adopting a cartridge with the ballistics of the 6.8 SPC is a waste of money and time.
We need a cartridge that can be effective out to 800 meters in machinegun use. Then it can also replace the 7.62x51 and be a worthwhile change.
We need a cartridge that can be effective out to 800 meters in machinegun use. Then it can also replace the 7.62x51 and be a worthwhile change.
Cheap 6.8 SPC Ammo | SGAmmo.com
The cheapest stuff I'm seeing here is still twice as expensive as bulk 5.56. You can get 77gr mk262 clones that are nearly as effective, superior even at range, to the 6.8.
If the cost and availability were the same I myself would have my ARs in 6.8. But it isn't.
Hell, what I am fantasizing about now is a Definitive Arms AK in 6.5 Grendel.
The cheapest stuff I'm seeing here is still twice as expensive as bulk 5.56. You can get 77gr mk262 clones that are nearly as effective, superior even at range, to the 6.8.
If the cost and availability were the same I myself would have my ARs in 6.8. But it isn't.
Hell, what I am fantasizing about now is a Definitive Arms AK in 6.5 Grendel.
I don't think the pending cartridge is the 6.8 SPC though. From what I understand it will be some kind of polymer case, telescoped round of, apparently, 6.8 caliber.
Don’t think the 6.8 SPC is capable of penetrating advanced body armor at 600 yards like the Army CoS states the goal of the new round is. It has to be something in development that we have not seen yet.
Right. Still think 6mm is the way to go here. Heavyish 6mm scooting right along should be able to punch body armor well enough.
.60 a rd. @ TS.
All things being equal, if $ and logistics were no issue and you had your choice of an m4 outfitted in either cal. which would you chose? , and why ?
I am intrigued by the higher case capacity and larger pill of the 6.8
All things being equal, if $ and logistics were no issue and you had your choice of an m4 outfitted in either cal. which would you chose? , and why ?
I am intrigued by the higher case capacity and larger pill of the 6.8
Robin
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Of course its not as cheap as a .223, what is, .308, yeah right. before I started hand loading for it I would on occasion see it around .33-.35 cents per pound. I haven't really looked for it in a while.
I don't know what the military has in mind other than they said 6.8 and something about a tank, HAH!
Well there is a lot of new tech, both mechanical and chemical, i.e. powder. We can speculate what they have in mind but the fact is, at this point we don't know.
Shadow box all you want.
Robin
I don't know what the military has in mind other than they said 6.8 and something about a tank, HAH!
Well there is a lot of new tech, both mechanical and chemical, i.e. powder. We can speculate what they have in mind but the fact is, at this point we don't know.
Shadow box all you want.
Robin
ManrisFrack
6.5 Creedmoor
6.8 mm SPC Cartridge History & Development. Hornady's Ammunition. The Stag Carbine.
The military evaluated bore sizes from 5.56mm to 7.62mm during the development of the 6.8 SPC. They settled on 6.8mm as being the best combination of accuracy and terminal effect when using the .30 Remington parent case.
Correct, the 6.8 SPC won't penetrate advanced body armor out to 600 yards. Then again, I don't know of any round, that fits in an AR-15, that will do that. This will probably be a new round with a .277" diameter bullet and will probably require a new or heavily modified platform(s). Even with substantial projectile development and the increase in pressure to 62k PSI (advantages that 5.56 NATO currently enjoys over 6.8 SPC), I don't think the 6.8 SPC can achieve that goal.
To state that the MK262 is ballistically superior to a standard 6.8 SPC, 110gr offering is wrong. The TRAJECTORY of the Mk 262 is significantly better past 300 yards (the difference in drop at 300 yards is ~2"). However the energy advantage of the 6.8 SPC is enormous. It starts with over 30% more energy and still maintains a 20% advantage in energy at 500 yards. 6.8 SPC uses a 43% heavier bullet, so both of these points (along with lower velocities for the heavier bullet) are expected.
The military evaluated bore sizes from 5.56mm to 7.62mm during the development of the 6.8 SPC. They settled on 6.8mm as being the best combination of accuracy and terminal effect when using the .30 Remington parent case.
Correct, the 6.8 SPC won't penetrate advanced body armor out to 600 yards. Then again, I don't know of any round, that fits in an AR-15, that will do that. This will probably be a new round with a .277" diameter bullet and will probably require a new or heavily modified platform(s). Even with substantial projectile development and the increase in pressure to 62k PSI (advantages that 5.56 NATO currently enjoys over 6.8 SPC), I don't think the 6.8 SPC can achieve that goal.
To state that the MK262 is ballistically superior to a standard 6.8 SPC, 110gr offering is wrong. The TRAJECTORY of the Mk 262 is significantly better past 300 yards (the difference in drop at 300 yards is ~2"). However the energy advantage of the 6.8 SPC is enormous. It starts with over 30% more energy and still maintains a 20% advantage in energy at 500 yards. 6.8 SPC uses a 43% heavier bullet, so both of these points (along with lower velocities for the heavier bullet) are expected.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
What does 20 or 30 percent energy do in a human body?
ManrisFrack
6.5 Creedmoor
Why don't you tell me Will? I know you're dying to. Or are you more comfortable with frying pans as media?
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Since you ask, once the bullet drops below 2000 fps at distance, it'll make a hole the size of the bullet itself. So the pinhole would be .277 vs .223.
Percentages when used on things that small look good on paper but in real life, they are not noticeable. Both bullets will go clean through a human if below 2000 fps or fragment in a human if the velocity is up on the fragmentation threshold.
The energy numbers are just paper figures.
Last edited:
Cost no object......... hmmmmnn. 6.8 is certainly appealing, don't get me wrong, it does most things better than the 5.56. 6.5 Grendel and .224 Valkyrie all offer better performance at range however. I think the 6.8 is an ideal caliber candidate for a light carbine length hog gun.
ManrisFrack
6.5 Creedmoor
Bullshit. You can't draw a magic velocity line where terminal effect drops off a cliff. Terminal effect is WAY more complicated than that. Energy isn't a very good analog for killing power but it's much better, more accepted and has a longer history of use than your magic 2000fps.
Even if there is something magical that happens (or ceases) at 2000fps, we're taking about a 60 yard window from about 285 to 345 where the Mk262 has your magic velocity advantage over a generic 6.8 loading. This 'magic' zone shrinks even farther when we use 18" or 16" barrels instead of the 20" that I ran numbers for. This magic window and a better trajectory past 300 yards makes Mk262 better than generic 6.8? No, it does not.
I used data for Hornady's 110gr BTHP load and ballparked +25fps/in to bring it in line with the Black Hills load that is given for a 20" barrel. If you use a slightly lighter bullet for the 6.8 you can stay above your magic 2000fps just as long the Mk262 and maintain a significant energy advantage while doing it. Regular guys working in their basements, not the military or government arms contractors, have done this. What do you think would happen if .mil made the transition and actually put some real money behind a military loading of 6.8 SPC?
And finally, hunters who wish to hunt medium game are moving FROM 5.56 TO 6.8, not the other way around. They aren't doing this because of marketing, or military adoption, or cost of ammo or some paper figures (aka Physics). They're doing it because they see that 6.8 kills animals more consistently. Your claim that Mk262 is ballistically superior to 6.8 SPC is not supported by fact.