6.8 SPC, 6.5 Grendel, .265 1*, etc.

[Glock Glockler]

If cost is that much of an objection you can have the Feds buy the rights to manufacture that bullet and they'll produce them en masse. Mass production tends to have the effect of lowering prices. If that's not good enough for you you can have them made in China (why not? eveything else is) which would further lower production cost.

If we are having this discussion about new calibers we are doing so because our current inventory is not cutting the ice and our soldiers lives are at risk. I, for one, want to see our soldiers gets the best training and equipment possible if they are going to be sent into harm's way, so cost isn't as much of obstacle to me. If the cost of Chinese made ammo still bothers you feel free to make up some of the cost by eliminating Federal welfare programs.

PS It also might not be a bad idea to train soldiers as riflemen once again and not as sprayers.

 

[atek3]

i was making an (apparently) REALLY rough guess...I didn't expect to be that off

re: cost. Using "mass production" of cupro-nickle lathe turned bullets could
produced at a reasonable cost, how reasonable is up to speculation.

Arthurd, have you heard of the 408 cheytac medium machinegun?
http://www.cheyennetactical.com/theis.htm
Tactical Machine Gun. The CIS 50MG platform (Singapore Technologies Kinetics) is now under study for conversion -- both in weight and in caliber to accommodate the .408 Cheyenne Tactical® cartridge. We completed a studies examining FN MAG 58 (a.k.a. M240) and the M2 HB to accommodate the .408 Cheyenne Tactical™ cartridge and determined that the costs would not merit the conversions.

atek3

 

[Tony Williams]

Yes, I had some discussions with the CheyTac people - they were interested in the 10mm GAU-6 MG I had some details of.

I think that the problem which the .408 round may face is that it requires guns almost as big and heavy as the .50, but doesn't offer the same anti-material ammunition as the bigger calibre. The .50 NM140 multi-purpose APHEI round is reportedly as destructive as early 20mm shells, and then there's the SLAP APDS. The .408 seems like a lot of gun just for the anti-personnel role.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum

 

[Gewehr98]

Glock Glockler, thanks for the link!

That 120gr Lost River 6.5mm bullet is something to behold. I'm ordering a batch for my 6.5-06 1000 yard rifle. Then I'll have to order new Ballisticards, since the Lost River bullet's BC is considerably different than either the 120gr Nosler Ballistic Tips and Lapua Scenars I usually run.

 

[Glock Glockler]

You're welcome

Feel free to check out some of the other offerings they have as well, and then tell us how everything worked out on the range

 

[tex_n_cal]

I guess I should bookmark this thread, in case I ever want to know anything about a SPC or Grendel, it's bound to be in here

I didn't see anyone say if the Grendel or SPC used a 5.56 case head, 7.62x39 case head, or something else.

It occurs to me that a 6.5 or 7mm TC/U. (Ditto the .300 Whisper) would accomplish the goal of launching heavier bullets from an AR, without a bunch of gyrations in the magazine. It would also not weigh a lot more than a .223 round. Case head tooling is the same, so cost of tooling the rifle and ammunition would be minimized. As I recall the 7TCU drives 120's about 2200-2300 fps out of a 14 inch pistol barrel.

 

[Gewehr98]

Tex_n_Cal, the other threads talk about the specific origins of each round.

I'll summarize.

Remington 6.8 SPC - The parent cartridge is the venerable .30 Remington, sort of an oddball rim dimension, known mostly for the Browning-pattern Remington Model 8 and 81 autoloaders of years gone by. The 6.8 SPC's rim diameter is the same as the parent cartridge, at 0.422". It's not as fat as the 6.5 Grendel/6.5 ever-so-slightly-improved 6.5 PPC, but also requires less machining of the AR-15/M16 bolt face to accomodate it.

6.5 Grendel - An ever-so-slightly-improved 6.5 PPC, which in itself is a child of the very popular .22, 6mm, and 7mm PPC family of benchrest rounds. These are all based on the earlier .220 Russian round, with a rim diameter of about 0.445". The case diameter is also larger than the 6.8 SPC, offering greater powder capacity, but the larger case head also requires more metal removed from the AR-15/M16 bolt face.

The 7.62x39 Soviet M43 round also uses the 0.445" rim diameter, with a case length very close to the PPC family. I agree, in a pinch it certainly could be necked down and fireformed to a minimal body taper and sharp shoulder, giving one the 6.5 Grendel or 6.5 PPC. Remington sells their 7.62x39 ammo and brass with small primer pockets, so there's a definite possibility...

 

[atek3]

.220 russian, fancy name for 5.45x39?

atek3

 

[Tony Williams]

No, the .220 Russian is based on the 7.62x39 case, necked down. The 5.54x39 uses a slimmer case.

Tony Williams

 

[only1asterisk]

tex,

The TCU rounds only make those velocities after being loaded to 2.5" or so. That's way too long to fit through the current action. With shorter cases on the 5.56 head there will not be enough velocity for bullet function or trajectory. As always, it comes back to trying to squeze more cartridge into a rifle that wasn't designed for it. There are limits as to what will fit through the rifle and these limits define the cartridge. What we need is a rifle that will take a 2.375-2.50" OAL. Then it would be on.




David

 

[atek3]

220 Russian is based on the 7.62x39 case, necked down. The 5.54x39 uses a slimmer case.

really? I'd always wrongly assumed that 5.45 was just 7.62x39 necked down. My bad.

atek3

 

[DavidZ]

OK, fellows, let me throw a scalded cat into the center of the ring...

I understand that this past Thursday and Friday, both the Barrett 6.8 SPC and the 6.5 Grendel were at Blackwater. I understand that when given the challenge of punching through armored glass, the Grendel succeeded in defeating the glass. The Barrett folks declined to even try it.

The 6.5 Grendel saw (20) shooters fire 10-shot rounds at 500 meters, with only 2 misses (on the gong). The Barrett folks declined to even shoot at 500 meters.

Who knows, though; maybe they were short on ammo.

 

[mattf7184]

I heard about the blackwater thing too, but I wanna hear from Barret why they wouldnt give the 6.8SPC a go.

 

[Zak Smith]

Anyone got a link to a report from Blackwater?

 

[DavidZ]

Oh, I can tell you why they *said* they wouldn't try the armored glass, and why they wouldn't try the 500 meter range: "we don't have the right ammo for that".

You know, one of my kids is in the military, and I can just hear him now: "Well Dad, we were under heavy enemy fire from rooftops 100 yards away, and from snipers about 500 yards away. But you see, the military issued us these new godawful beautiful Rambo-looking Barrett 6.8 SPC rifles, see...and I didn't bring the right ammo for that. They told us we could only shoot at paper 50 yards away, or at ballistic gelatin at 3 yards, and only if fired through a loaded AK-47 magazine. "

 

[DavidZ]

But of course that means my first guess (see first post above) was right: the Barrett boys were "out of ammo".

A challenge to Barrett: buy a sheet of 1.5" armored glass, and a dozen targets, and invite one guy -- a Jeff Quinn or a Chuck Hawks, let's say (with no ties to military) -- to shoot the 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC side-by side and try to poke through the armored glass at 15 yards (maybe the Blackwater test for the Grendel was just lucky?) and then fire a group of ten rounds at 100, 200, 400, and 600 yards.

Same barrel length, same (approximate) bullet weight.

I dare you; and if you don't do this, I think your project's days are numbered anyway with the military, so it's worth a shot, pardon the pun.

 

[Zak Smith]

DavidZ,

One of the reasons I'm looking for a detailed description of the event is to try to figure out what we really can learn from it. For example, if the Grendel was a 24" varmint upper with good optics, and the Barrett was a 12" for CQB, it wouldn't be an apples/apples comparison. I'm not saying that's what happened, but without the info, we don't know.

-z

 

[Zak Smith]

Does anyone know how other standard ammo penetrates "armored glass"? .308, M855, M193?

If I had some glass, I'd be willing to do a side-by-side comparison of M193, M855, 308, and 6.8.

-z

 

[TX65]

Zak,

The 6.5 Grendel was at Blackwater with 16 inch, 18.5 inch and 24 inch barrel versions available

The 18.5 inch Grendel was used with Lapua 144 FMJ bullets (no special bonded core or AP bullets) on armored glass. Any of the above 6.5 Grendel barrel lengths was available for use at 500 yards to be sure of fairness on the line.

However, since the 6.8 SPC chose not to shoot in either challenge, the 24 inch barrel 6.5 Grendel was used firing against rounds like the 408 Chey Tec at 500 yards. During the 500 yard shooting, a complete selection of 6.5 bullets were shot from 85 grain flat based to 144 FMJBT.

The 500 yard shooting started with a 12x18 silhouette with success measured as making hits on this standard target so this wasn't a competition of group size or score on a highpower target. It then moved to a 10 inch diameter gong to increase the challenge.

 

[atek3]

tx65, what else breached the 1.6" glass, and what didn't?

atek3

 

[jAK-47]

Thanks!

Amazing thread guys. I was just doing a quick search on the 6.8 and was lucky enough to find some real experts here on this interesting new cartridge/rifle.

NO FLAME PLEASE - I dumped my AR 5 years ago because, as cool-looking as it was, I felt that the .223 just wasn't a manly round; couldn't hunt deer with it either. So, I stuck with my AK or SKS when I didn't feel like using a "conventional" deer gun.

This 6.8 seems like it was just made for me! It will handle Zombies (you know they'll be here some day don't you ?) and I can take small deer with it. No, I don't feel foolish in the woods during deer season with a "Black Rifle". Now I wish I had kept my Bushy so I could just put an upper 6.8 on it.

One question - will civilians be able to purchase hi-cap mags for the rifle or will we be restricted to 10 round max?

Thanks again,
jAK-47

 

[Zak Smith]

Per the FAQ, 15 and 25 rounds magazines are currently available from PRI. If you live in a state that still has HCFD bans, you are SOL.

 

[jAK-47]

6.8 Choices

Thanks Zak,

In searching the different gun boards and magazine articles it becomes clear that there will be different ways to "get into" the 6.8; much has changed since the initial post on this thread. As far as Black Rifles, so far I see that Barrett is making "THE" 6.8 and there are other manufacturers who are making uppers for the AR.

Anyone familiar with the different options? I don't want to spend $2K+ right now. I see Robinson Arms is making the XCR Modular that is supposed to be offered in a 6.8; if it's 1/2 as good as Alex says it will be it should be THE .223/6.8 to have for the money.

No Flame - but I'm not a fan of the .223 unless we're talking target shooting and relatively cheap ammo. IMHO, the .223 just doesn't have the knockdown power of the 6.8; also, I can't even use the .223 for deer hunting in my area. The 6.8 would answer my concerns for more power (cost will be another thing altogether, at least initially). Also, the AR is pretty sensitive to dirt, mud, sand, whatever compared to the AK. Can I assume that putting a 6.8 upper on an AR would have the same potential for reliability issues? Alex Robinson claims to be addressing this issue in addition to others with his XCR.

I'm NOT a ballistics expert but one cannot read a thread about the 6.8 without seeing a comparison to the .308 as far as, "the 6.8 pretty much does what the .308 can do". I don't think you can say that the 6.8 is the direct equivalent of the .308 BUT... The 6.8 FOR ME PERSONALLY answers a lot of my needs and concerns.

I love my AK but I know it won't shoot much better than 3MOA and it's NOT a flat shooter compared with others. If the 6.8 approximates the .308, has more power and the same accuracy as the .223 and has the knockdown power and platform reliability of the AK, I can't ask for anything more. Hey, if it sounds too good to be true... But I'll be buying some kind of 6.8, even with the initial cost/availability of ammo - it's just worth it to me to find out if it really is this good! A target gun that can be used to take deer out past 200 yards and fend off Zombies (you do know they're coming, don't you?) could be the perfect gun FOR ME.

Krebs is making the KTR 03S and that's supposed to be THE AK to get if you don't mind it not looking and feeling like a REAL AK. In my dreams I see a RELIABLE AR platform where you can change out easily to 7.62X39 and 6.8 in addition to the .223. The ability to put AR type accessories on a platform that shoots the AK round is really nice too.

Thanks,
jAK-47

 

[Zak Smith]

Can I assume that putting a 6.8 upper on an AR would have the same potential for reliability issues?

It has the same operating system and (most) tolerances, so reliability will be similar.

If the 6.8 approximates the .308,

6.8's trajectory is virtually identical to 150-168gr 308 or 75-77gr 223 simply because it's a 0.340 - 0.390 BC bullet at 2550-2750fps.

 

[Rebar]

The bulk of this topic is from over a year ago. I wonder if the progress the 6.8 and 6.5 have made in that time be summerized by their proponents?