6.8 is the new standard?

[Mac]

Wasnt there just as much excitement, argument, hope and discussion about the 6.5 Grendel at one point? That wasnt the magical pew pellet either.

A switch would be pretty good for the gun industry though. Just think of all the new rifles and mags that would have to be made for Gov't contracts, plus the same for the commercial market that would soon follow suit. I mean, why not go ahead and build a 6.8 spc pistol and get ahead of this thing?

[bobofthedesert]

Originally Posted by Sharky

I get that. But I also think Kyle would tell you that is his personal opinion.

You must know him personally or something, he says exactly that.

Originally Posted by Sharky

I have killed deer shooting them in the ear with .22LR too. That doesn't make it a great choice for deer hunting for most people.

Concur. My State Police buddy is very clear that .300 supersonic IHO is a vast improvement on green tip, and he's shot enough mammals of roughly equivalent body weight with both to know.

Originally Posted by RGR.Montcalm

When I was the CALL LNO for Fort Campbell, we did interviews with every unit returning from combat, inviting over 15 outside agencies to conduct interviews. One of these sessions was for the M855A1 EPR (Enhanced Performance Round); according to the feedback, the Soldiers that used the round found it much more effective than the standard green tip. They reported a higher incidence of '1 round knock down and stay down as opposed to the green tip ammo.

"News we can use". Thanks for that. In light of this and all the $$ poured into that upgrade, if I had to bet I'd guess 6.8 is never going to happen. .300 BO with it's subsonic option makes more sense anyway IMHO. Same bolt head/mags, vs. needing non-standard of those for 6.8mm.

[EchoFiveMike]

I highly doubt 6.8mm SPC is what they're talking about, except as a performance benchmark.

The previous generation of this program was called LSAT, and there's tons of online info about it.

https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovc...ms/spiegel.pdf

https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovc...33_Shipley.pdf

My supposition is that they're trying to get/approach 7.62x51 performance within the 5.56 weapon envelope. I'm not sure the shorter 115gn class 6.8 SPC profile bullets are the method to that, but that may not be the supplied material.

This is a comprehensively new program, legacy materials don't matter. Shouldn't matter, some old fossil will doubtlessly fuck this up by demanding it be compatible with a stockpile of M14 bolts found in a warehouse in Alabama or some shit. Limiting the design of the cartridge to something that fits in 5.56 STANAG magazines or bolt heads or whatever doesn't matter.

Barrel life is directly correlated between powder capacity and bore diameter, all else being equal. Also, heavy bullets cause more wear than light bullets, at the same maximum pressure levels. S/F....Ken M

[Sharky]

Originally Posted by EchoFiveMike

I highly doubt 6.8mm SPC is what they're talking about, except as a performance benchmark.

Probably right. I have been out of the LR game for a long time. When I read 6.8 that's just where my brain went due to my history.

[EchoFiveMike]

I might be wrong, I don''t have any privileged info on this. I like the 6.8SPC, but the time when it would have made sense has passed. Mk 262 and more importantly Mk 318 and M855A1 have made 5.56 into an acceptable caliber from terminal performance standpoint, which was always where M855 was wildly random. This is going to sound crazy, but I'm not even that excited about occasional random flyers with M855A1. It's ball ammo, it still has a 4MOA or more lot acceptance standard. If you need match ammo for SPR/DMR work, issue Mk 262 or Mk 291. Even 12 MOA means you still hit the guy across the room CoM stone center, you need the ammo to frag and make the guy stop doing shit, at least long enough to shoot him in the face. M855 was prone to going icepick, that was the problem.

Anyways, reading up on the USMC long range plan for small arms, it seems the long range concept is a carbine/SAW replacement in 6.5mm 'ish(maybe this 6.8, IDK), duplicating the performance of the 7.62 to 1200m range, while weighing similar to the M249. The M240 (and in some cases the M2) is to be replaced with a 338 Lapua mag type weapon, giving approx 50cal range performance while allowing much more ammo to be carried, as well as actually being moved around without a vehicle or killing yourself.

I think this is a good plan, I've basically said as much since OIF2. The 50 caliber is too big for just being a bullet launcher. Even with SLAP it doesn't really kill anything you can't kill with 338 Lapua, and the 40x53HV grenade is just absolutely better for use on people. I really wish they'd make a 30mm gun about the size of the M2, as much as possible, and use the same projectile as the Apache. That could replace the Mk19/47 AND the M2 in direct fire. They tried and failed with the 25mm OCSW thing that blew itself up, but they went stupid fancy and too small. They always go too fancy and field nothing, probably because they have nothing at risk. When a project like this fails, if you took 5% of the staff out at random and hanged them, you wouldn't have projects that failed anymore. S/F....Ken M

[The Fat Guy]

I read a post on another forum from a guy that proclaims that he is involved in this process. His comments are summarized to say that the 6.8 projectile is the intended payload, but the 6.8 SPC II as we own and shoot it may very well not be the delivery system. The 6.8 projectile is nothing more than a .270. So here are my concerns.

As usual, we are planning to to fight the last war, again. Yes, we will likely all die seeing Americans still killing Arabs or Persians, requiring a longer one shot kill capability.

Next, we should be starting with the requirement from the Program Objectives Memorandum (POM) and build down from there to a weapon or ammunition that is needed to fulfill that requirement. Otherwise, its just another useless GlockTalk "Which is better" caliber discussion where people post to justify and seek relevance about their purchases and really no other knowledge, experience or requirement. There has to be an objective or standard to which to develop.

[EchoFiveMike]

http://www.ndia.org/-/media/sites/nd..._v4.ashx?la=en

Some more information about 6.8 future weapon. After reading about this stuff, as well as the 338 caliber medium machine gun replacement program, I think the US .mil procurement is completely devoid of anyone who actually shoots stuff for enjoyment or seeking to better themselves. There's nothing magical about the 6.8mm bullet diameter, in fact bullet selection kinda sucks. The 6.8 SPC was developed to fit within the M16 weapons platform, if you're ditching that, the rational for retaining 6.8mm bullets goes away. I'm getting a definite cargo cult/magical thinking vibe from the .mil; as well as a lack of interest in actually fielding anything, possibly to draw out the lucrative R&D process for as long as humanly possible while avoiding making any of those hazardous "decision things," for which you might possibly be held accountable. S/F....Ken M

[Stanley_White]

Originally Posted by EchoFiveMike

After reading about this stuff, as well as the 338 caliber medium machine gun replacement program, I think the US .mil procurement is completely devoid of anyone who actually shoots stuff for enjoyment or seeking to better themselves.

It is also devoid of anyone who understands the value of having weapons that are compatible with U.S. Allies.

DoD: "Counterterrorism is over! Great Power Competition has returned!

Also DoD: "What we REALLY need is a suite of small arms that does not use the same ammunition as our Allies despite this being a 'thing' the last time Great Power Competition was the order of the day."

Meanwhile, we all know that this is a technical solution (bigger bullet) to a training problem (Joe can't hit his target) just like three round burst was.

-Stan

[EchoFiveMike]

What allies? Oh, you mean the leeches

Given that we finally took reasonable measures to address the M855 problems, IMO the need to replace 5.56 has passed. Refine the training and user ergo items like sights. The general issue of compact thermal weapons sights is the next "big thing" , even more significant than general issue of night vision or conventional optical sights IMO .

The utility of a 338'ish MMG replacing both 7.62 and 50caliber MG's, and, more importantly, hanging one on every single tactical vehicle in the fleet has merit. The 50 caliber doesn't really do anything that you can't go with a 338, any real AFV needs a real autocannon to deal with, to the point that even 25mm is becoming inadequate.

Still waiting on 40mm ammunition that doesn't suck ass, both LV, and to a lesser extent Mk19 HV stuff also.

This fascination with long range engagement by general infantry units is prima facie evidence that our doctrine for supporting arms either sucks, or IMO, is being/has been ignored. S/F...Ken M

[gavin]

As I've written before...if you are slugging it with the enemy at carbine/rifle range, your plan sucks.

But, like all things with the US military, the "next great shiny thing" is always the best idea ever, and it will fix all the problems caused by the "last dumbass idea." Bullets, PT tests, recruiting strategies, armored vehicles, dress uniforms, whatever. Always the same.

[The Fat Guy]

Originally Posted by gavin

As I've written before...if you are slugging it with the enemy at carbine/rifle range, your plan sucks.

But, like all things with the US military, the "next great shiny thing" is always the best idea ever, and it will fix all the problems caused by the "last dumbass idea." Bullets, PT tests, recruiting strategies, armored vehicles, dress uniforms, whatever. Always the same.

And so endeth the CLIF notes on "So you wanna be a General?"

#getoffthelawn

[256]

6.8 does great with shorter barrels as well.

[Gsniper]

Reminds me of a gig I did in UAE a few years ago. Training Emirates on the use of the DSR-1 sniper rifle. Expensive, highly accurate sniper system that they had bought hundreds of with zero idea of how to use. They were already researching upgrading to a newer rifle and didn't even have the basic understanding of the systems they had.

[8654maine]

Originally Posted by Gsniper

Reminds me of a gig I did in UAE a few years ago. Training Emirates on the use of the DSR-1 sniper rifle. Expensive, highly accurate sniper system that they had bought hundreds of with zero idea of how to use. They were already researching upgrading to a newer rifle and didn't even have the basic understanding of the systems they had.

Damn.

This is a macroscopic mirror to the "rifle ranger" who wears multi-cam, 5.11 tactical pants, & the M4gery with an ICOG and the latest railed foregrip and has targets that looks like buckshot at the 25 yard line.

It's great foraging ideas for the ETOTAWKI.

[Gray Rhyno]

Originally Posted by 8654maine

Damn.

This is a macroscopic mirror to the "rifle ranger" who wears multi-cam, 5.11 tactical pants, & the M4gery with an ICOG and the latest railed foregrip and has targets that looks like buckshot at the 25 yard line.

It's great foraging ideas for the ETOTAWKI.

I see guys showing up to the local shooting range with a $3,000 pistol when what they need is a $500 Glock and $2,500 worth of ammo.

[leopardprey]

Originally Posted by 8654maine

Damn.

This is a macroscopic mirror to the "rifle ranger" who wears multi-cam, 5.11 tactical pants, & the M4gery with an ICOG and the latest railed foregrip and has targets that looks like buckshot at the 25 yard line.

It's great foraging ideas for the ETOTAWKI.

Haters gonna hate.

[leopardprey]

Originally Posted by Gray Rhyno

I see guys showing up to the local shooting range with a $3,000 pistol when what they need is a $500 Glock and $2,500 worth of ammo.

Yep.

Or instead of owning multiple black rifles or multiple glocks, spend more on training and ammo. (Well unless you are so financially well off you can do both)

I always tell students that with whatever firearm they purchase, the same cost for the firearm should go into training/ammo. So figure that into their budget. Buy a $1000 AR, spend $1000 on ammo and good, effective training.

[GPC]

Originally Posted by 8654maine

Damn.

This is a macroscopic mirror to the "rifle ranger" who wears multi-cam, 5.11 tactical pants, & the M4gery with an ICOG and the latest railed foregrip and has targets that looks like buckshot at the 25 yard line.

It's great foraging ideas for the ETOTAWKI.

And they have no clue how to use a cleaning kit.

GPC's tips for new AR or any other gun owners

1) Cleaning kit

2) Decent Irons if not equipped

3) Mags and training ammo

4) A basic GI web sling to get started. Money spent on a $100 sling can go to ammo.

That's why I like Colts, they come with a cleaning kit and basic sling out of the box.

[EchoFiveMike]

Starting to see delivered prototypes, this is the SAW/GPMG type weapon. As I said, it's a 6.8mm bullet, with a proprietary casing. IOW, this is an experiment like SPIW, like OCSW/OICW, like so many before it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPhUsS-DEx4

The pessimist in me says it's all bullshit, being used as an excuse for the spending of taxpayer funds on green welfare R&D. This has been repeated over and over again. Like I said, you setup a program with real requirements, you have ONE (1) guy in charge, by name, by law if possible, and then if it's fucked up, at the very least you put that guy in prison. Ideally, you hang that SOB live on the emergency broadcast system on every channel, and put 10% of the "executives" in prison, and confiscate all their worldly goods.

We spend more money on "defense" than all other nations combined, and what do we have to show for it? Armored box trucks and guns/bullets that some dude at Camp Perry designed 15yrs ago in his basement or garage. It's like going to car dealership and they straight faced ask for Bentley money for a Hyundai Sonata with some RICE on it. And the "system" lets the crackhead parts fetcher employee you sent return brake drum cores sign away your entire business for it. S/F....Ken M

[Gsniper]

Well, at least that suppressor, that is going to cause major heat problems, is going to keep the carcinogens out of Joe's face. Blah, blah, blah. But hey, the stock folds.