View Full Version : Is a 6.8 spc worth it?
So I've been thinking about building a 6.8spc gun, but the biggest issue I have is that I have a hard time finding ammo and mags for it on a local level. My plan is on using it as a home/property defense weapon, and maybe use it for hunting. I understand it's a heavier bullet and therefore carrying more kinetic energy, but with the ammo not being cheap and I've yet to find it carried at any of my local stores, I'm wondering if this cal is really worth the extra dollar.
Oh, and I'm looking to build it with a LMT MRP upper, just a fyi.
It really depends on what you plan to do with it. I had a 16" and 12.5" 6.8 and they were allot of fun. In many ways I think it's a perfect patrol rifle caliber, or home defense caliber. For plinking at the range it doesn't really matter if your holes are .224 or .277 diameter.
I had originally adopted the caliber as a "do all" gun. The thinking was I was going to use it for hog hunting at some point but I never did so I sold it built another 5.56 AR.
I was considering a 300BLK for the same reasons (potential hunting) but for the 1 hog I may shoot every 3 years a 77gr 5.56 will be just as effective.
It depends on what you want the rifle for. If you just want to plink at the local range, probably not. There is no cheap equivalent to the cheap 55gr FMJ rounds you can find for a .223/5.56 rifle.
However, if you want a hunting or patrol/home defense rifle, then the 6.8 may be just your cup of tea. When you start comparing costs on 6.8 ammo to .223 or .308 rounds you would actually hunt with (such as Nosler Accubond or Barnes TSX,) the 6.8 compares closely with the .223 and is usually cheaper than .308. The same goes for Hornaday TAP for duty or home defence.
I am currently getting SSA 110gr ProHunter on various sales for $17-18 per box. SSA TSX rounds generally run in the mid $20 range, depending on whether you want 85, 95, or 110gr bullets. The Federal TSX rounds I got for my .308 and my kid's .270 ran around $40 per box, so the 6.8 is almost a bargain.
As for magazines, C-Products are a only little more expensive than 5.56 mags, in the $12-13 range. They have usually worked well for me. Now, if you want PRI or Barrett mags, then you are talking some bigger bucks, but about the same as HK asks for their AR mags.
Stormrider
02-23-11, 01:22
I looked at the 6.8 to use mostly as a hunting rifle. My son had a bad experience with the 5.56 so I decided to use a bigger gun. I compared the 6.8 and 6.5G and decided that 6.8 would be better for me. I bought a barrel/bolt/bolt carrier from Constructor and am now waiting on the other small parts I need.
So for me the answer is yes, it is worth it.
For shame. You ask if it's worth it and give us no idea of your purpose. And do you really have a hard time tracking down mags and ammo; I never did. A simple call to Palmetto and sha-zaam there it is. Why not be specific and honest and get a good thread going, or better yet, search for all the other ones about the exact same topic? Yes, I could guess and write experiences and scenarios, but you have to at least put a good foot forward. Just my 2 cents plus COLA.
O.K. It's a very good short distance hunting round and is much better all around than 5.56. If you are shooting so much that the ammo cost is prohibitive, then you might as well start reloading.
However based on what I see in your details, have you considered an LMT in 308?
End use is going to matter. and yes there are threads and threads that already cover this topic. but since I'm up anyway...
For me the answer turned out to be "no". and I say this because I do own a 6.8 upper that I have never fired. That tells me something. I have the upper, magazines, ammo, etc. and I've never fired the 6.8. Never had occasion to reach for it. Never went anywhere and thought "damn, I wish I had that 6.8 right now". never found a use for it at all.
Now, if I were a different kind of shooter, or had a different job, maybe that would be different.
If I were a hunter, that persisted in using the AR for some reason, I might like the 6.8 more.
If I were a long-range shooter, where quality 5.56 costs as much as like quality 6.8 ammo, I might like the 6.8 more.
If I were a cop, with some extra cash (is there such a thing?), I might buy a 6.8 upper to ride with in the car and outfit an identical 5.56 upper to train with.
6.8 spr - optimized for an SBR, good terminal effects
But it has a trajectory like a mortar beyone 300 yds.
My only AR so far is a 6.8. I love the damn thing but I hardly get to shoot it. Ammo costs too much, so with bills to pay I have to content myself with making it out to the range once a month.
Terminal performance of the 6.8 is definitely better than 5.56. The gain in weight and recoil is negligible. During one of my shooting sessions I let another shooter heft my AR and he commented on how light it is. (It does, however, make a much more satisfying boom than the light crack of the 5.56. :D That always gets people's attention at matches.)
If you want just one AR as a bedside gun and a hunting rifle, the 6.8 will fit the bill. But if you want to train train train, you absolutely must get a 5.56 or 5.45 upper to go with it. It will pay for itself after just one carbine class.
For my next acquisition I'm going to do what I should have done a long time ago - pick up a 5.56.
If you have to ask the answer is no.
I think you have to like reloading and tweaking ammo or know you want the benefits of more power, more range or what ever for the nonstandard AR calibers to be worth it. They are just a bigger pain in the ass than 5.56. But I do like my Grendel it's been worth ever penny.
For what you want to do with it the 300 Blackout looks like something you should consider. Using 5.56 mags is a real plus.
However based on what I see in your details, have you considered an LMT in 308?[/QUOTE]
I've thought about a 308 platform, but weight is the one issue I worry about with any 308, and the last thing I want to do is lug around a 13 lb rifle; that may be fine for bench shooting, but I don't bench shoot. I'm a very big fan of the intermediate cartridge, as it will generally keep weapon weight down, which allows me to carry more ammo and keep my mobility, which is why I've been playing around with the idea of a 6.8 something that would give me that extra firepower and mobility. People can give the 5.56 all the gruff they want, but I can carry a lot more of it compared to the 7.62.
I guess like a lot of people, I'm just looking for the perfect cartridge in the perfect gun.
I went with the 6.8 because it is a good distance cartridge, and similar to the .308 out to 500 - without the weight and recoil. It was designed specifically to add 40% more power than 5.56, and be 200 fps faster than 7.62x39. It makes an AR all that it can be.
6.8 was deliberately fitted to the M4/M16 action - not the longer, heavier .308 platform that died with the M14. There are lots of .308 fans, but they never admit the first problem with the cartridge is power -the recoil is actually intimidating and slows the shooters reaction. It's the major reason it's been replaced by intermediate calibers. The few armies that use such calibers do so as a supplementary weapon by a few, not the majority of soldiers.
If you choose to use 6.8, it's very much about using it's unique power in the AR15 - to actually shoot live targets. For paper punching or competition events, 5.56 is economically better, but certainly has been questioned for it's results. In some states, it's simply not allowed. That's where the 6.8 shines - it only uses a different barrel, bolt, magazine, and ammo. .308? It's an entirely different gun. It's no longer a matter of what to shoot in an AR15, it's what AR10 you get to pay another $1000 to purchase. Few are even close to the same price of an AR15. Most are compatible with each other or the AR15.
If you've hunted for decades with the .308, you know most shots in woodland won't ever take advantage of it's reputed long distance power - which often doesn't come in commercial hunting loads. That ammo isn't milsurp cheap, either, but hunters know it's not about blasting thousands of rounds in the dirt. 5.56 is cheap for that. So is .22. 6.8 is simply run of the mill in price, like the two boxes I bought at Academy last week, $17.99 each. .30-30 Leverevolution was $24.99. Premium hunting and target ammo is not ever cheap, and it's misleading to compare it to military surplus.
As for getting it at the local Boxmart, 5.56 was hard to find in the '70s, and M16 mags never on the shelf, either. That's very much different these days, you actually find M4geries and such in the rack. If 6.8 is a little hard to find, it's because the average brick and mortar shop owner selling to his tradition bound customer hasn't learned about it yet. That's not a bad thing, like owning one of the first .30-30's out before 1900.
Of course, the Krag Jorgensen shooters don't much like it, it's just more handwriting on the wall.
I'm 'that guy' that Rob S alluded to above, the cop who trains with a 5.56 but has a 6.8 as a 'go to' weapon.
I won't redundantly re-state what others have about the merits of the 6.8, but if you already have a 5.56 upper,mags and ammo, then yeah, use them as a main training caliber with the 6.8 as 'the' gun. It's a great AR caliber. FWIW, I reload all of my 5.56 and 6.8 training rounds, so it's very affordable to shoot. If you have the money for one, go for it.
Pat
I'm 'that guy' that Rob S alluded to above, the cop who trains with a 5.56 but has a 6.8 as a 'go to' weapon.
I won't redundantly re-state what others have about the merits of the 6.8, but if you already have a 5.56 upper,mags and ammo, then yeah, use them as a main training caliber with the 6.8 as 'the' gun. It's a great AR caliber. FWIW, I reload all of my 5.56 and 6.8 training rounds, so it's very affordable to shoot. If you have the money for one, go for it.
Pat
I am working toward this as well. I've been carrying the 5.56 on duty for about 4 years now, but I'm thinking about building an identical upper in 6.8 and getting some mags to try out. If I ever have to shoot through an intermediate barrer (i.e. windshield, car door, trunk, windows, etc.) I would much rather be throwing a 110 grain bonded bullet than a 62 grain one (what I have now).
Just ordered my LMT MRP, in 6.8spc, and also got a 556 kit to go with it. Well there goes my tax refund... thanks guys. Tirod; also your post really helped me with my conundrum, kudos to you. I will be putting pictures up as soon as I get it and put it on a lower. I also know what I am going to my next carbine class with..thanks again to everyone:D
I am in the middle of building a mixed use, primarily hunting rifle for WT deer we can hunt with a .223 in Georgia. I reload and the choice is a Noveske 18 inch LW Mod 0 barrel to cast the 62 grain TSX at about 3000 FPS or their 18 inch SPR 6.8 barrel with 1-12 twist to shoot the 110TSX at about 2700 FPS. The BC of the bullets .287 for the 223 and .323 for the .277 are enough different that there is only 1 inch of drop distance at 300 yards which is as far as I feel comfortable shooting at a living animal. It is a tough decision as the 6.8 is the most logical from a pure killing perspective, yet the special bolt, magazine, AR's that fling costly brass into the next county, availability of cheap mil surplus .223 ammunition requirement for two upper if you want both choices make this a difficult choice.
The best "THEORETICAL" answer that I have seen is that quick barrel change nut by M & A parts. Buy one upper, one scope, two barrels, two bolts. So far I know nothing about this but am going to speak to Noveske about it.
all that said there is not a deer in GA that will not die when hit in the front half by a 62 grain TSX! Please don't tell me anything about what kills and what does not as I am one of the so called "Fudds" with 42 years of hunting and shooting experience and have seen animals run up to 100 yards when hit squarely in the chest/heart/lung with anything up to a .308/180 at 3000 FPS. It all "just depends".
Lots of hunters fling expensive brass in the leaves, simply because it's part of the cost. What's a few empty cases in a day of hunting?
1000 over the course of a weekend, I'd flinch regardless of what caliber. It's expensive, period.
6.8 is all about 40% more power delivered on live targets at hunting ranges, all in the same easy to carry package the .223 comes in. It delivers - with less risk of losing an animal, losing too much energy from a short barrel, or losing your humor hoisting a 12 pound .30 cal over rough ground. It makes the 6.8 the working legal choice in some states. Since any larger caliber is likely to reduce cripples and lost game, I saw it as an improvement. We're all looking for that one gun in just the right caliber.
The only caliber I've seen that was likely to put down an animal DRT was usually 8mm, Mauser or Rem Mag. Funny, nobody talks those up anymore. I guess the brass just got too expensive.:D
Yes, it is worth it. It was devoloped specifically for the M4 and its short comings of the lost energy of the shorter barrel. For that use, yes, it is worth it.
There are a few threads on the site here and there, and it should be pointed out that there is more than one chamber. Much like .223 and 5.56. The original design is not what Remington submitted to SAAMI. They dropped the ball, period. Anybody looking to get one needs to make sure it is a SPC II or better barrell.
I'm wondering if this cal is really worth the extra dollar.
For hunting... where you're using very low volumes of ammo? Maybe.
Other than that..... the cartrige is useless.
Other than that..... the cartrige is useless.
Then why does SF use it?
Then why does SF use it?
Let's assume for a moment that they do (I'd like to see documentation that they do, and how, but that's probably a bit much to ask)...
If they do, they aren't paying for it individually for one thing. For another, they actually would have a need perceived need for greater energy downrange than the average paper, cardboard, or steel target.
"Other than that..... the cartrige is useless."
I must respectfully disagree. If an AR15 is used for duty, self-defense, or hunting, then 6.8 mm is an extremely versatile and effective cartridge--it is at least as accurate as 5.56 mm, works better in short barrels than 5.56 mm, creates substantially larger wounds than 5.56 mm, and defeats intermediate barriers better than 5.56 mm.
For punching paper, going to training classes, or for folks who get free 5.56 mm ammunition at work, then 6.8 mm is probably not a viable option due to ammunition costs...
Based on what I've read around the interwebs there is value in 6.8 SPC or any of the newer AR family of cartridges. However, there isn't, nor ever will be, a universal "1-size-fits-all" cartridge.
So the big question is actually back to the OP. What is it worth to you in terms of improved ballistics? If you want the best ballistics, get a 50BMG upper (they exist in single shot capacity I beleive, or did when I first started around 12 years ago).
You want most capacity? Get a pistol or 22 AR variant! You want a tradeoff of capacity vs power? Look in the 5.56 "family" of AR cartridges.
Want long distance performance?
6.5 Grendel, 7.62 Nato, 300 WIn Mag.
But only you can really answer what your needs are. There are some real benefits and costs with going to 6.8. But that's a decision you can make with your cash, we can probably only tell what the costs and benefits are. Some will think it is worth it, some won't. In the end, you have to answer only to yourself.
Supergrade
03-16-11, 15:08
I went through the same process and decided to go with the grendel due to better ballistics compared to the 6.8. The problem I was warned about was lack of ammo for the grendel. I've yet to have problems getting ammo
Let's assume for a moment that they do (I'd like to see documentation that they do, and how, but that's probably a bit much to ask)...
If they do, they aren't paying for it individually for one thing. For another, they actually would have a need perceived need for greater energy downrange than the average paper, cardboard, or steel target.
They helped design it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.8_mm_Remington_SPC
They helped design it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.8_mm_Remington_SPC
He said "use".
Let's assume for a moment that they do (I'd like to see documentation that they do, and how, but that's probably a bit much to ask)...
If they do, they aren't paying for it individually for one thing. For another, they actually would have a need perceived need for greater energy downrange than the average paper, cardboard, or steel target.
That is exactly it. You have read the devolpment, right? The M4 isn't the best at long distance with the M855, aka green tip.
As for requisition, it isn't like SF would say what they ask for. But somebody is buying it.
And the 6.5 Grendel is inferior. It excels in one area, and it isn't an area the 6.8 was made for. The 6.8 is better out of a 16 inch barrel or shorter than the 6.5. The 6.5 was looked at. The 7mm was looked at. The 6.5 has that good ballistic profile, the 7mm hits harder. The 6.8 is the best compromise. Just like the original 270 that didn't get adopted because the 30.06 needed to get used up.
I appreciate the civil discourse on what seems to be a somewhat controversial topic.
I'd rather have 125gr .300 blackout.
Normal AR15 bolt and magazines.
I can gun Colt bolts and not have to worry about the substandard metallurgy in aftermarket stuff.
I don't have to pay $35 a magazine and worry about another AWB ban taking the limited supply of 6.8 mags away.
I get equal ballistics with .300 blackout under 200 yards when compared to 6.8.
I have the ability to have subsonic suppressed.
Like rob said, I have never thought I needed 6.8 in the spark of a moment.
I have other rifles to go hunting with.
I'd rather have 125gr .300 blackout. Well, we aren't talking about that. But for discussion sake, ok. It's the new kid on the block, and maybe in a few years, it will be as widely available, too. Right now, not so much. Less than 6.5G.
Normal AR15 bolt and magazines. Right, an advantage. Still need a different barrel, tho.
I can gun Colt bolts and not have to worry about the substandard metallurgy in aftermarket stuff. More likely in 5.56, the 6.8 bolt I have is an ITS. They aren't junk.
I don't have to pay $35 a magazine and worry about another AWB ban taking the limited supply of 6.8 mags away. Speculative, I don't live in fear. D&H is coming out with mags April/May in the $25 range. Announced at SHOT, BCM waiting to nail down the details. 6.8 shooters only seem to need a few, not a footlocker full.
I get equal ballistics with .300 blackout under 200 yards when compared to 6.8. OK if that's your preference, some want to reach out to 500m. 6.8 does.
I have the ability to have subsonic suppressed. The 6.8 was designed to be 200fps faster than the 7.62x39, and 40% more powerful than 5.56. Running subsonic suppressed isn't what combat carbines are about. That's a much more limited CQB role.
Like rob said, I have never thought I needed 6.8 in the spark of a moment. Actually, I thought about it for a few months, and realized it fit most of what I wanted a hunting rifle to do. It shouldn't be an impulsive choice.
I have other rifles to go hunting with. I have other rifles, too, and they aren't so great after lugging them around for years. Different people favor different qualities in their firearms.
Frankly, nobody has to like a caliber,, ask the .308 fans from the '70s who prevented the .300 Whisper wildcats getting into matches. It didn't stop them, time moves on, and people make new decisions. Even the AMU switched to M16's, and what do you know, that's what wins matches today.
A caliber is just part of how to set up a tool to be used, like matching a socket to a bolt head. 6.8SPC fits in pretty good used on live targets, as it was designed and intended. That's what many shooters choose it for.
D&H magazines are not up to the same standards as Okay, New Haven, Colt mags.
And some people think Colt builds junk. For a 6.8, a $25 mag for hunting does just fine.
D&H is issue, plenty of users seek them out deliberately. I'll worry about it if one actually gives me trouble. Right now, Cproducts isn't the prime candidate in 6.8, and look like they may lose some market share.
If I wanted good 5.56 mags, I'd use Pmags, not a GI.
You keep coming back to this "for hunting". That's it? and that's the cop-out answer everytime a potential issue with the caliber is brought up is that "oh well it's good enough for hunting"?
Don't get me wrong, I like shooting pigs with my AR, and would be into shooting other food-critters with it too if the opportunity presented itself, but frankly for the dedicated hunter I don't get the AR-as-hunting-rifle thing, and in some ways I think that niche has been detrimental to the 6.8 as a whole. Much like the light geeks have been detrimental to the "tactical light" market. 6.8 makers keep responding to the squeakiest wheel, which is the "hunting" community and so things like load development keep going that way to appeal to that market. The ammo makers would rather address a known, if tiny, market than try to churn out some cheap training ammo and expand their market.
and, like it or not, this is why 300 BLK is likely to succeed where the 6.8 hasn't. Less parts to change, cheaper ammo, wider variety of applications within the limits of where most users operate. I don't mean to get too much into a comparison between the two, but the 30BLK (at least on paper) makes exponentially more sense for all but a very few 6.8 shooters, and potential shooters.
Imagine, if you will, an ACR-type rifle with barrel changes that quick, and with the negatives of that platform addressed, where one can go from 5.56 for training and plinking to 300BLK for uses where heavier bullets are beneficial. Christ you could have an integrally suppressed barrel for the thing and change it out in a matter of seconds.
IMHO the 6.8, generally speaking, is a niche caliber gone bad, set on a false start, and then railroaded by a niche market. Which is fine. I don't have to own one (even though I do), and I bear it no ill-will or those that worship at it's alter. I see the 6.8 crowd and the 6.5 crowd as Sunni and Shi'ite: both part of a screwball religion that I'm happy to see fight with each other as I don't really care about either one and the more time they spend fighting with each other the less I have to hear from either. :sarcastic:
ETA:
that said, and as posted earlier, if I were a cop and could get authorized for it, I would already own two identical guns: one in 5.56 for training and one n 6.8 for work. I see a definite application for more energy downrange along with a higher volume and rate of fire potential given that application. but I'd still be watching the development of the 300BLK REAL close with an eye towards replacing the 6.8 in a year or so if the 300BLK works the kinks out and load development lives up to the promise.
And some people think Colt builds junk. For a 6.8, a $25 mag for hunting does just fine.
D&H is issue, plenty of users seek them out deliberately. I'll worry about it if one actually gives me trouble. Right now, Cproducts isn't the prime candidate in 6.8, and look like they may lose some market share.
If I wanted good 5.56 mags, I'd use Pmags, not a GI.
DH mags have sloppy welds and bends and are not made to the same level as OEM Okay, New Haven, and Colt.
You keep coming back to this "for hunting". That's it? and that's the cop-out answer everytime a potential issue with the caliber is brought up is that "oh well it's good enough for hunting"?
Don't get me wrong, I like shooting pigs with my AR, and would be into shooting other food-critters with it too if the opportunity presented itself, but frankly for the dedicated hunter I don't get the AR-as-hunting-rifle thing, and in some ways I think that niche has been detrimental to the 6.8 as a whole. Much like the light geeks have been detrimental to the "tactical light" market. 6.8 makers keep responding to the squeakiest wheel, which is the "hunting" community and so things like load development keep going that way to appeal to that market. The ammo makers would rather address a known, if tiny, market than try to churn out some cheap training ammo and expand their market.
and, like it or not, this is why 300 BLK is likely to succeed where the 6.8 hasn't.
I lost three hogs with the 75gr 5.56 this last friday...hits felt good but they are tough critters and really hard to head shoot in a large group as they scurry quite a bit when competing for the chum. Now this was done under moonlite and distance was about 200yds. Shooting suppressed so the thud and squeels confirmed hits. Our brush is too thick to go chase them and we have orders to shoot on site anyway. I just wanna see the critter dead & try to get pics.
I'm the geek wanting the 12.5" sbr 6.8 for hunting...not saying I would not use it as my primary rifle for protection as well, but I 'get' where you are going when we mention hunting on M4. I understand it's a combat site but I can take some of this over to my even darker side.
Now we hunters have the 300blk to consider but my gut tells me the 6.8 is the way to go since I think it is flatter out to 300-350 with the shorter bbls but need to study this more.
I think the AR suppressed SBR combines the best of what I need in a weapon for the conditions I hunt pigs in. The AR-10 is just too big and heavy & minimal recoil is a must when the scattering starts. Another plus for the 6.8 over the 300 BLK??
I'll continue with the 5.56 until I can figure all this out...plus, there are no funds for another can & upper anyway. Sorry my hunting applications keep getting tossed into the mix on many of these threads but this is the only AR site I visit. The others make my head hurt.
Frank Castle
03-22-11, 13:08
Rob- Why do you feel the need to contribute to a thread in which you have no first hand knowledge? You should have stopped at post #8. Get back to us after you make the time to get to the range with your 6.8 upper/ammo and subjectively evaluate the benefits/limitations of this platform and ammunition.
You keep coming back to this "for hunting". That's it?
What else is there? People or animals. Paper? That isn't a part of the topic. It is superior to the green tip.
I think that niche has been detrimental to the 6.8 as a whole.
Niche? The 6.8 is the number 2 caliber of the AR now. And mostly from the hog hunters from what I see.
Thankfully, I made my decision with a lot of simple research. Bogus claims like expensive ammo, mags, nobody buys it, can easily be checked and shown to be false. It is now the number 2 AR cartridge for a good reason. These arguments remind me of some car magazines back in the mid 80's declaring performance and hot rodding was over because fuel injection came in. Not only are they wrong, the opposite is ture.
I will take my 110 gr TSX at 2630 over 62 gr at 2800 no questions asked. Or for the subborn, an 85 gr TSX at 3000 feet per second compared to the smaller and slower greent tip.
is it the #2? I would have guessed it would be 308, but it would be just that, a guess.
Where does that number come from (I'm not doubting you, I'd really like to see a breakdown).
6.8 is not for everyone!
For me it is worth it due to the fact that I cannot use 22 cal guns for hunting unless it's for small game (state laws).
I use my 6.8 for hog and deer hunting. The AR is my favorite gun and as others have stated some of us must use an AR:D
It is not a plinking gun unless you have $ to burn, which I don't.
6.8 is my go to Predator weapon, and it doesn't matter how many legs they have either.
85gr Barnes TSX has been a great load for me, and I'll switch modes now with the 95gr TTSX load. Wilson combat is now loading the 95 TTSX to Spec II pressure:
http://shopwilsoncombat.com/68-SPC-95-gr-Barnes-TTSX-2850-FPS-16-Barrel-20_Box/productinfo/A68-95-TTSX/
I might get 2900fps out of that load in my 18 inch ARP barrel !!!!!!!! Me thinks that's a big step up from any 5.56 load, and my 6.8 is MUCH lighter than an AR-10T.
I'm glad we can have more than one rifle, out with friends blasting with a 5.56 AR is priceless(in the field, or 3 gunning it), putting the sneak on the Jack rabbets with a 10/22, that will never get old. Dropping the hammer on P-dogs in Wyoming where the wind always blows with an Heavy AR-10, pretty cool. I might try a 6.5G for paper punching, and p-dogs in the future. I'm also having a blast with the 300 Blackout, and have bagged many yotes with it, but even with a 125 BT, it's not 85gr Barnes TSX material in a 6.8, the 6.8 is good medicine for Predators.
Maybe in the future we'll see Higher BC bullets, GS and Elite are looking promising, and the new coated gun powders should yield more fps in the future.
It's funny though, I have lots more 5.56's than 6.8's in the safe,lol, and it's likely to stay that way, 5.56 ROCKs too.
Surplus military firearms are what made the American gun market what it is today. What has happened with the AR is that we have over 20 million soldier, sailors, airman, and Marines trained on it for over 45 years - and not one of them can buy one surplus.
And yet they all know for a fact their fathers and grandfathers got to buy them, shoot them, and hunt with them - and hunting is the only live target you can engage in.
Hunting hasn't hurt the AR at all, and the AR isn't going to hurt hunting, either. From the sporter 'O3's, Mausers, Enfields, Arisakas, and SKS's, we've had one type of gun that is affordable and can be used.
I started hunting deer when HK91's were $160 - and used one with a 1Gen Aimpoint in the 1970's. I wasn't about to use a lever action (all I do use now until the AR build is complete in the next few weeks.) The HK has significant advantages over a Rem 700 bolt gun, and I'll likely not go back to using that again. Point being, the advantages of a ergonomically laid out firearm that doesn't lose its sight picture during recoil and invites shooting it without flinching has as much to offer the hunter as it does a combat soldier.
I thoroughly expect the AR design to seriously influence hunting rifle design in the future - as either a direct semi auto rendition, or with the significant design features. The BLR already is using the multilug barrel extension, and Savage the barrel nut. A simple upper extrusion using a shortened bolt carrier and having a straight pull handle is entirely possible - and styled classically, would have the potential to sell quite well. Ask Blaser, who has simply evolutionized the design with a collet lock, instead of a turning bolt head.
I certainly don't excuse the cartridge as being "good enough for hunting." It wasn't even meant for it originally, it was specifically meant as a combat round with more power and range than 5.56, which means more lethality. That is proves to actually do that on deer and hogs is simply widespread anecdotal evidence that SF and the AMU knew their stuff. Combined, the 6.8SPC in the AR is, to me, a synergistic pairing that makes the whole better than the parts separately. That's coming from a guy who thought .308 was completely superior, and the Stoner design inferior, so much I put my money on other guns for the entire 22 years I was forced to suffer using the M16.
I found out I was entirely wrong about the gun - and the 6.8SPC is about as well placed right now as anything. With millions of prior servicemen and women now approaching a time when they want to own their generation's combat rifle, the AR is and will be in great demand, and using it humanely on game animals is the biggest application that every generation has used their battle rifle.
It's not meant to be a cheap paper punching round, circumstances have not conspired to make that happen, any more than dozens of other almost - became - military - issue calibers. But in the restricted atmosphere of game laws, NFA regulations, and the complete loss of the sales of M16's to the public, this generation can at least accomplish much of what it is wanting to do: own their issue weapon, and shoot it in the open field.
Hunting with the AR isn't the exception, it's actually conforming to exactly what previous generations did with their combat rifles, and you can be guaranteed their were those who clucked their tongues and disapproved of it as "not being proper."
Like Jim Zumbo - who shot the military surplus guns of his day, too.
That is one nice post, Tirod. For those who are shooting .243, 7.62x39, .30-30, or even heavy .223s, I agree the 6.8spc is a fantastic alternative. Other than the combat alternative to 5.56, for which it is undoubtedly superior, it makes a great starter or short range hunting piece. Without sidetracking too far, it is fair to welcome other similar calibers, including the .300BLK in this regard.
However, it is equally fair not to allow newcomers to persist in the allusion that these AR-15 platform-bound calibers are a substitute for the .308 level, when that is desired/required. Thinking particularly of longer reach, bigger game, or defeating barriers. Likewise, you don't choose the .308 if the .300WM or larger is indicated by the purpose, and so on. Right tool for the right job. Anything else is Kool-aid.
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.