looks like sig will be building the next army rifle

Well at this point I'll bow out of the conversation with a pretty safe assumption that those responding either didn't read the 6+ articles, or they read them and developed their own narratives, ironically, much like they've accused the journalists who wrote the articles.

35W

d2wing said:

Since WW2 the Army has been trying to come up with a rifle that will do the function of a BAR, M1 carbine, Infantry rifle in a single weapon. The M-14 did not work on full auto.

Click to expand...

This new 6.8 seems like it is more in line with 280 British

David Hoback said:

Of course there are going to be those 100% on board with this. Because: “De like da CHINY new toys meng!” Same people who have purchased the newest IPhone every new release… without fail…whether they needed a new phone or not. Or those who buy a new car every couple years. They also tend to believe in ridiculous concepts like “Knock Down Power”, or that CHF AR15 barrels are some new invention that somehow magically last so much longer and give far better accuracy. LOL!

It’s all good. Makes no never-jeebles to me. Smellin’ what I’m steppin’ in? They can have ‘em. I’ll stick with my bad butt AR’s in 223. And my 260Rem that will STILL reach out and touch a fool at greater distance than the Sig Furry.. I mean Fury.

Click to expand...

People spike similarly about 5.56 when it replaced and I'll bet similar things were said about the 7.62x51 when it replaced the 30/06. I'm curious to see where it all leads personally. 80,000 psi is the most significant advancement in small arms in my lifetime.

[QUOTE="redcon1, post: 12277334, member: 73198"People spike similarly about 5.56 when it replaced and I'll bet similar things were said about the 7.62x51 when it replaced the 30/06. I'm curious to see where it all leads personally. 80,000 psi is the most significant advancement in small arms in my lifetime.[/QUOTE]

Well said. And I actually agree with your outlook. I’m not sure of your age, and your contention is valid, but for me, I would have to say bullet design has been the greatest advancement in my lifetime. Especially when speaking of the modern hollow point.

Still I’m compelled; I can’t help but stress that while yes, the increased pressure(rather the velocity it affords, which is really all people are seeing), sounds appetizing, the potential for serious injury or death upon a KB is amplified. Also, while it’s designed to reach such velocity in a 16” barrel, I’m willing to bet it means there will be no drastic increases in extra barrel length. My meaning, it’s already meant to perform at peak efficiency in a 16” barrel. Going any longer and it becomes the law of diminishing returns.

I don't have as much of an informed or technical contribution as you all do, but I will say this: I think the platform itself seems to be a reasonable upgrade in terms of design enhancements (like the side charging handle, barrel change capabilities, etc.), and SIG makes good stuff. As someone with no military experience who is a fan of larger cartridges, I worry based on the video footage that I have seen that the recoil is going to be unmanageable for our troops when they are firing in full auto or in tight spaces. As a taxpayer, I don't really understand why we need a new round that performs similarly to 7.62 Nato and is nearly the same dimensionally when we have had 7.62 Nato for...70 years at this point?

All that said, I will be interested to see more as the civilian SPEAR versions drop in price with the next production runs and start to really work their way into the hands of the common shooter.

"The initial contract covers about 40 total weapons — 25 XM5s and 15 XM250s — that will be used to develop Sig Sauer's production line, according to Col. Scott Madore, the Army's Project Manager for Soldier Lethality."

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/heres-everything-we-now-know-about-the-armys-new-squad-rifles


Hahahaha. Yep, really getting them out there in numbers.

Definitely not just for testing guys. This one platoon is going to be our Super Soldiers!

35 Whelen said:

Well at this point I'll bow out of the conversation with a pretty safe assumption that the people disagreeing with me have actual first hand knowledge of the process which goes against my lack of understanding based on reading 6+ articles.

35W

Click to expand...

Fixed it for you.

One thing i noticed.

They keep promoting this round as having a 3000 FPS muzzle velocity with a 16 inch barrel. But the XM5 has a 13 inch barrel. What's the actual MV of the XM5?

35 Whelen said:

Well at this point I'll bow out of the conversation with a pretty safe assumption that those responding either didn't read the 6+ articles, or they read them and developed their own narratives, ironically, much like they've accused the journalists who wrote the articles.

35W

Click to expand...

Your name @35 Whelen and your signature line of "Your deep affection for, and loyalty to your favorite cartridge does not increase its effectiveness. (.223 lovers take note...)", tells me that you've created your own narrative on the subject at hand.

Much of the rebuttal of the articles in this thread is based on knowledge of how the military procurement process works and past experience with these type of "articles" and "journalists" as you called them.

These "articles" are nothing new, we've been down this road time and time again, these new Sig offerings very well could be the next new option for our military but now is definitely not the time to get all worked up at the thought of this actually happening.

My personal opinions are that Sig's offerings will run into issues that I mentioned before in this thread and they will be mothballed other than maybe very limited use.

The articles seem to be based on Sig's press releases. Based on published data, I don't see a significate advantage over the 7.62 NATO. There is a slight ballistic and weight advantage. The rifle shown in one article looked like a bolt action based on an AR. Civilian version I take it. I will stick with my Tikka 7-08.
Recoil must be about the same as a 7.62 NATO. I suppose it depends on greased palms. I doubt there will be much in the way of competition for Sig at those pressure levels. The promised civilian rifles to be available seem to be overstated as well.

C-grunt said:

Fixed it for you.

Click to expand...

Merciless brother!

redcon1 said:

This new 6.8 seems like it is more in line with 280 British

Click to expand...

And, that's probably a good, modern, comparison. The .280enfield (very briefly the .280nato) was like 7x52.
Historically, we have the .280ross and the .276pedersen and the .276enfield which are 7s with case lengths from 52 to 56mm. Their differences were typically in bullet weight and BC. They generally were all pretty high chamber pressure cartridges (which is why the P-1913 was such a heavy design, it was meant for the .276enfield).

So, this is not "undiscovered country." These trails have been traveled before.

In US service, the .276pedersen could have been a spiffy rifle cartridge, but, it was not going to be a very good MG cartridge, and the M2 Ball could be stretched out to 3200m in a 1917 or 1919--and the training and doctrine of the day mandated needing those sorts of fires. That was 1934-5.

In the 50s, the Brits rolled out the EM-1 and EM-2 in .280enfield, and that was looking like a great alternative to the militarized .308 and 7.62CETME which were competing for acceptance. The .280nato just could never be "good enough" for MG use out to the desired 2000-2500m ranges UK wanted. And, their budget did not allow for two kinds of ammo. So, the bent the knee to the 7.62nato. (Which the US did not get into general European service until 1962, to start dumping it in 1966-7 for 5.56nato.)

The Brits even tried out a 4.8mm replacement for 7.62nato before 5.56 was adopted. Chinese PLA also fielded a 4.8 briefly with their ugly bullpup (they kept the 7.62x39 for their RPD variant).

What was old will be new again.

d2wing said:

A Howitzer, like air support is pretty handy if you can get it.

Click to expand...

True enough, redlegs are stingy at times.
But, that's why the Company is supposed to have 60mm mortars, which can also suppress Bad People at a kilometer. And the mortarmen usually are bunked in some where near to you, so you can remind them whose side they are on, if needed.

Ah yes… that 280Enf. The British attempted to get all of NATO on board with that as the NEW standardized NATO round. When they pleaded with their DAUGHTER Canada, Canada said they would do…. just as long as The Unites States was on board. LOL! Obviously, we gave the Britts, in “NOT America”, THE FINGER (because “Murica!). Then Canada was immediately like “We’re with them.. the Cool kids just South of us.” And as it goes, the Canadians ALSO gave the Britts THE FINGER! Dipped in Mayonnaise for some reason.

C-grunt said:

One thing i noticed.

They keep promoting this round as having a 3000 FPS muzzle velocity with a 16 inch barrel. But the XM5 has a 13 inch barrel. What's the actual MV of the XM5?

Click to expand...

"Considering they are seeing a muzzle velocity of over 3000 FPS for a 16″ barrel, this is impressive. The Carbine on the other hand is delivering 2850 FPS with a 13″ barrel."

https://soldiersystems.net/2019/05/23/sofic-19-sig-sauer-exhibits-next-gen-squad-weapons/

The m5 seems like it will replace the M14 and rem700 designed marksman rifles with ease.
The m250 will easily replace the m240b, as long as 80,000psi doesn't melts barrels. I mean didn't they turn down the 308 and it's 55,000psi to make the 7.62x51 at 50,000psi to increase barrel life?
I'm sure nato would love to adopt a 7mm.

Goosey said:

"Considering they are seeing a muzzle velocity of over 3000 FPS for a 16″ barrel, this is impressive. The Carbine on the other hand is delivering 2850 FPS with a 13″ barrel."

https://soldiersystems.net/2019/05/23/sofic-19-sig-sauer-exhibits-next-gen-squad-weapons/

Click to expand...

That must be a cataclysmic muzzle blast.

Looks like a serious caliber vs the pathetic .22 caliber poodle shooter round.

N555 said:

I'm sure nato would love to adopt a 7mm.

Click to expand...

Italy just developed and adopted the Beretta ARX. Germany just adopted the HK416. France recently adopted the HK416. The Czechs just started fielding the Bren2. Croatia developed and fielded the VHS2. Turkey just developed and adopted two MKE rifles.

Most European nations don't have huge military budgets. Many Nato countries recently upgraded their service rifles. I highly highly doubt they want to change again, especially when they have to change ammo on top of it.

C-grunt said:

Most European nations don't have huge military budgets. Many Nato countries recently upgraded their service rifles. I highly highly doubt they want to change again, especially when they have to change ammo on top of it.

Click to expand...

Our allies complained when we were pushing still another US caliber and doctrine on them, 7.62, then 5.56.
I doubt they will bother to follow us to 6.8, if indeed we go 6.8 in a big way.

There are more effective weapon systems to neutralize threats at longer distances that don’t require magically transforming every soldier into a sniper with technology and tax dollars.

Nature Boy said:

There are more effective weapon systems to neutralize threats at longer distances that don’t require magically transforming every soldier into a sniper with technology and tax dollars.

Click to expand...

I think some of this drive for both the new 6.8mm cartridge and new optics of the NGSW program is for giving the common solder greater effective range but everything I have read this cartridge it is MORE about defeating top line body armor (whether Russian and Chine have it in numbers is arguable) than making snipers out of the common grunt.

So this “top line” body armor will stop a M855 round? I would be impressed if it does.

Nature Boy said:

So this “top line” body armor will stop a M855 round? I would be impressed if it does.

Click to expand...

The US Interceptor body armor does. M855 is not a great AP round with its steel/lead core. I am not sure if the US interceptor will stop our tungsten core M995 or the new M855A1. I can't find any data. I would bet it can stop M855A1 (steel/copper core) but probably not the M995 but I can't find data to support that assumption.

People spoke similarly about 5.56 when it replaced and I'll bet similar things were said about the 7.62x51 when it replaced the 30/06. I'm curious to see where it all leads personally.

Click to expand...

I was in the Corps from 64-70 and you are correct. I was present when both transitions occurred. I started with M1and transitioned to M14. Actually saw fights over which was more accurate and a better battle rifle. Was in Nam when M16 arrived. What a debacle that was! So do I think military needs a 6.8? Hell no!

CapnMac said:

Well, you can't get a 51mm case into a magwell meant for 45mm cases. The new round is functionally a .276pedersen shortened to 51mm, or the size of a .308 round. That will require an AR-10 lower & upper.

Click to expand...

It doesn’t appear to be based off of any AR15 or AR10 design, it looks like a design fully diverged from these platforms. Lot’s of semi-auto non-AR10 firearms out there.