AR-10 or .308 AR variant vs 6.8 vs FN FAL

[Bubba FAL]

The 7.62NATO and .30-06 are also intermediate cartridges, still some work can be done at long ranges.

This data sheet is for the Nosler 125 grain partition bullet fired at 16 inch barrel velocities. Minimum expansion velocity is 1800 fps at the target, however, the penetration of this bullet is substantial at any range at which velocity translates to at least 500 ft. lbs. or better.

So what you're saying is that particular load in the 6.5G will provide expansion to 300yd and terminal effectiveness to 700yds - admirable for a cartridge in it's class, but not necessarily the end-all for 1000yds. To use my example of the Creedmoor, add 600f/s to the velocity and see where you end up.

Also, while I believe I understood your intent with your first sentence, I cannot let it go unchallenged. The .30-06 and it's contemporaries (7.92x57, .303, 7.62x54R and yes, the 7.5 Swiss, among others) have been for 100 years considered full-power battle rifle cartridges. As to the 7.62N, though it is younger and .5" shorter than the .30M2, ballistically it is close in performance (and within the performance of the other traditional full-power battle rifle cartridges).

Perhaps the more appropriate term would be "standard" rifle cartridges, but the performance advantage vs. "intermediate" cartridges exists nontheless.

Certainly, there exist many rifle cartridges that exeed the power level of the "standard" class of cartridges (the "Magnums", .338L, .50BMG, Cheytac, etc), but they bring with them substantially increased recoil and ammo cost.

To address the original post - recommending an intermediate-level cartridge (no matter how ballistically impressive) for 1000yd shooting is disingenuous at best. Yes, hits can be made, but still not the best choice, even if only punching paper (consider trajectory, range of adjustment on sighting system, etc.).

[EDBSO]

Thanks again to all with your replies. It's all very good information. I think Bubba sums up my current position pretty well in stating that there are other cartridges out there (most all of which are non-AR platforms). I'm not so much afraid of the recoil as I am the cost to operate the beast. Although shooting at 1000m for terminal effect would be fantastic, I'm happy thumping 8" steel plates and things of the like. The K-31 is a great vintage piece to achieve that and still go a bit beyond.

Understanding and being able to implement the use of different calibers for longer distances other than a typical battle range from a shoulder fired weapon is what I find most enjoyable for me.

As I mentioned in my OP I came back to this black rifle after swearing it off many years ago. Now with the platforms abilities to change it's configuration based off of a standard design really opens up a renewed interest for me in these rifles. Not to mention the redesign of the platform itself which originally was an epic failure in the field. I've taken the 7.62/.308 option off the table (for now) and I am really looking at the 6.5 and 6.8.

Everyone has provided great information to help me make a more edumicated decision, thanks again.

[fastpat]

There's an excellent review of the 6.8 SPC here which describes the good along with the not so good. It delves well into the limitations of the cartridge and, more importantly, why they exist.

[carbinero]

Wow. Thanks for the update on paulo. That is a lot of good info. My needs are different from his, and thus my conclusion is also different re: the caliber. He ends up saying the 5.56 works better for him than 6.8, but of course this thread is not about going smaller than 6.8...for me, the 6.8spc is the best choice available between 5.56 and 7.62N. And if you need the 308, then that's what you should get. If you want less recoil and the ar-15 platform, then the 6.8spc is the best choice IMHO.

I also can state that I have one of those uppers he refers to, and the only issue I had was that it didn't feed out-of-spec ammo (>0.306 neck). To attest to that, the manufacturer actually reimbursed me MORE ammo than originally purchased. SPCII apparently has a larger neck and would accomodate even that. Mine is more accurate than I can shoot, and perhaps some of that is due to the chamber, which I have described to some as similar to Noveske's Mod 0 or the Wylde approach to the 5.56. However, www.ar15performance.com has moved away from that, due to popular demand, so it's a non-issue. They have also offered to anyone who purchased an Xtreme upper with the early chamber to ream it for free. I don't know if I'll do that, since I've had no problems with in spec ammo.

[VooDoo6Actual]

fastpat,

thanks for that post.

Great info & appreciated.