Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: 6.5 and 6.8 new official calibers for Big Green?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    21,901
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)

    6.5 and 6.8 new official calibers for Big Green?

    Claiming Army will adopt a 6.5 for rifles, "...this new round is 30% more lethal than 7.62mm NATO."

    I have my doubts on that claim but:

    http://americangg.net/armys-next-bat...rLYmJqByoqSLXs

    Claiming Army adopting 6.8 for SAW:

    https://www.tactical-life.com/news/u...eapon-systems/
    - Will

    General Performance/Fitness Advice for all

    www.BrinkZone.com

    LE/Mil specific info:

    https://brinkzone.com/category/swatleomilitary/

    “Those who do not view armed self defense as a basic human right, ignore the mass graves of those who died on their knees at the hands of tyrants.”

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in the Sierras
    Posts
    2,026
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by WillBrink View Post
    Claiming Army will adopt a 6.5 for rifles, "...this new round is 30% more lethal than 7.62mm NATO."

    I have my doubts on that claim but:

    http://americangg.net/armys-next-bat...rLYmJqByoqSLXs

    Claiming Army adopting 6.8 for SAW:

    https://www.tactical-life.com/news/u...eapon-systems/
    That 30% claim comes with the qualifier of "downrange" performance that they defined as 1200 yards. At that distance, then yes, it is an accurate statement. Bring the distance to 800 yards, then it's inaccurate statement. 7.62 holds the near/middle range energy advantage. That crossover point is of course dependent upon the actual projectile and load being used as well as environmental conditions. All that said, in the areas that .308 holds that advantage, I don't think that the difference is going to cause anyone to look at the hole in their chest and say "I'm sure glad it wasn't a .308!". However, the 6.5 round discussed isn't going to do anything beyond 1200 in reality. 6.5 CM in most high BC loadings will start to go subsonic somewhere after 1400 yards. Not that the average GI can use it, but at least it's there.
    IMHO, I don't think it is a big game changer either way, but it is nice to see progress.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    21,901
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by soulezoo View Post
    That 30% claim comes with the qualifier of "downrange" performance that they defined as 1200 yards. At that distance, then yes, it is an accurate statement. Bring the distance to 800 yards, then it's inaccurate statement. 7.62 holds the near/middle range energy advantage. That crossover point is of course dependent upon the actual projectile and load being used as well as environmental conditions. All that said, in the areas that .308 holds that advantage, I don't think that the difference is going to cause anyone to look at the hole in their chest and say "I'm sure glad it wasn't a .308!". However, the 6.5 round discussed isn't going to do anything beyond 1200 in reality. 6.5 CM in most high BC loadings will start to go subsonic somewhere after 1400 yards. Not that the average GI can use it, but at least it's there.
    IMHO, I don't think it is a big game changer either way, but it is nice to see progress.
    It seems evolutionary vs revolutionary improvements.
    - Will

    General Performance/Fitness Advice for all

    www.BrinkZone.com

    LE/Mil specific info:

    https://brinkzone.com/category/swatleomilitary/

    “Those who do not view armed self defense as a basic human right, ignore the mass graves of those who died on their knees at the hands of tyrants.”

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    17,452
    Feedback Score
    0
    Always fighting the last war...
    The Second Amendment ACKNOWLEDGES our right to own and bear arms that are in common use that can be used for lawful purposes. The arms can be restricted ONLY if subject to historical analogue from the founding era or is dangerous (unsafe) AND unusual.

    It's that simple.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in the Sierras
    Posts
    2,026
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHand View Post
    Always fighting the last war...
    Yeah, ain't that the truth!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Not in a gun friendly state
    Posts
    3,807
    Feedback Score
    0
    I don't see the telescoping ammo, in its current stage of technology, getting picked up. It seems to be trading a bit of weight loss for quite a bit of bulkiness. I think its a step in the right direction, but I don't know if it's ready for the real world yet.

    It seems pretty certain that the SAW is on its way out, and it seems like every other year, they're talking about replacing the M4, so it's going to happen eventually. The thing I wonder is if the next gen rifle will be an AR variant like the HK416, or will they go for a whole new system built around the 6.8?
    Last edited by BoringGuy45; 10-21-18 at 15:52.
    Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who do not.-Ben Franklin

    there’s some good in this world, Mr. Frodo. And it’s worth fighting for.-Samwise Gamgee

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,751
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by WillBrink View Post
    It seems evolutionary vs revolutionary improvements.
    What? Functioning polycased or polymer case telescopic ammo is pretty revolutionary. IF they can get it work.

    But until is actually proven to work, we'll be stuck with 5.56 and 7.62 NATO.
    Last edited by vicious_cb; 10-21-18 at 16:03.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    11,866
    Feedback Score
    0
    IMHO the caseless/poly/telescoping/etc. ammo isn't ready for primetime yet. That's what a lot of these proposals seem to revolve around.
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry
    F**k China!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,390
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    At least in their animated video, showing how it works, probably ok in a belt fed, but my guess is for precision work its a disaster. The bullet jump into the barrel is crazy...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    21,901
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by vicious_cb View Post
    What? Functioning polycased or polymer case telescopic ammo is pretty revolutionary. IF they can get it work.

    But until is actually proven to work, we'll be stuck with 5.56 and 7.62 NATO.
    I was speaking in terms of the calibers and such, but fair points. I don't know much about that tech.
    - Will

    General Performance/Fitness Advice for all

    www.BrinkZone.com

    LE/Mil specific info:

    https://brinkzone.com/category/swatleomilitary/

    “Those who do not view armed self defense as a basic human right, ignore the mass graves of those who died on their knees at the hands of tyrants.”

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •