6.8spc Ar-15's

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zerodefect

member
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
6,401
Location
Yakutsk, Sakha Republic
Who has converted to 6.8spc in thier AR?
Deos it stay more accurate, drift less at longer ranges?
Deos it require any excessive holdover compared to 5.56 at longer ranges?
Deos anyone make a MPI tested bolt for 6.8spc?

I'm trying to figure out if it's wise to build up an Ar chambered for 6.8spc. It would be expected to fill the defense and carbine class/tactical training roles. It would be nice to have more punch at longer ranges as well. I usually use an Aimpoint ML3 and sometimes a 3x magnifier in Larue mounts. I'll eventually try a scope for the fun of it.

Is it really more effective than the 70+gn OTM 5.56 ammo?
 
You won't get much more range from the 6.8 spc, but you should get more energy at the same range. The 6.8 spc was specifically designed as a short range cartridge. It uses pretty low bc bullets and shoots them at an initially high velocity. However, its trajectory is better but similar to 7.62x39. Because of the higher initial velocity it should be able to retain more energy out to 3 or 4 hundred yards. It is a great cartridge for short range battle style shooting.

If you are looking for a long range target ar then you may consider the 6.5 grendel. With the ability to shoot very high bc bullets, your hold over is similar to a .308.

Both the 6.8 and the 6.5 offer increased energy on target at most any range that the .223 can reach out to.

As far as your mpi tested bolt goes, all manufacturers do some kind of mpi testing on their bolts. Some do batch testing and others test every single one. No one has yet shown that there is an advantage to individually tested ones over batch tested ones. Its not as big a deal as the "chart" makes it out to be. That said, expect to have this post generate the colt fans defending their superior bolts. Not that there is anything wrong with colts, they have a good following for a reason.
 
I have a 6.8spc and have handloaded some very accurate rounds using Sierra 110gr. Gamekings. Barnes has some bullets in 85 grains that should be great for the 6.8, but pricey. I have not used it at long range, but at 100-150 yards it has been great, and with more punch. I agree that the 6.5 should better at longer ranges.
 
I did the 6.8 for my kids (10,11,&12). They have no problems with 16" barrel and no brake. It has killed three deer with three 110 game kings. One deer 186 yards, one 60ish yards, and the last 25 yards at most. I am not sure what you mean by long rangs but the 6.8spc is not a long range rifle set-up.
 
If you are a casual shooter and not going to shoot seriously past 300yds, then the 6.8 should work very well. If you are shooting past that distance and serious about it, there are other cartridges that probably work better.

Think about this when comparing to the .223 70+ grain bullets moving at 2700fps. The 6.8 shoots 85 gr. bullets moving at least 2900 fps; or a 110 gr. bullet moving at around 2700 fps. Either way, the 6.8 improves on the heavy weight .223 load.
 
Thanks. It seems like the 6.5 Grendel should be the one getting popular not the 6.8spc.
I'll have to look into the 6.5 more.

Seems like the 6.8spc is desighned to do exactly waht the 5.56 deos only with a bigger bullet. But deosn't really have much added range. Realisticly I'm only going to be going out to 300y.

The Bison Armory SS barells ($200) seem like a nice way to start a build.
 
I experimented with the 6.8mm SPC (270 short) for about 18 months.
Mine will shoot 0.50 to 0.75 inch groups at 100 yards using 90 grain flat based HPs at 2,900 fps or 110 grain boat-tails at 2,550 fps. Even the 130s at 2,250 fps will group better than an inch.


The whole purpose of the 6.8mm SPC was to convert an M-4 sized weapon with a 14.5 to 18 inch barrel, and have more stopping power at close range. (IE Hey don't pull that trigger or push that button! Things that are not as important when you drill a 22 caliber hole thru somebody 300 yards away and wait for them to die or give up. )
Plus it had to be able to use the same web gear, mag pouches etc....
The 6.8mm SPC let the magazine shape stay the same since the magazine held the same curve profile.

Now as for this business about the ballistic co-efficient.
A 110 grain, 277 caliber (6.8mm) Hornady V max BT, a Nosler 110 grain Accubond BT and a Barnes 110 grain X-shock all have a ballistic co-efficient of .370 to .377. This is better than the .270 to .280 B.C. of the 62 grain boat-tail duty issue ammunition.
Only the 77 grain Open Tip Match ammo in 5.56mm has a similar B.C. of .376...



A 6.8mm SPC chamber AR type carbine with a 16 inch barrel (like mine) will fire a 110 grain boat-tail at 2,550 fps. At 300 yards the bullet is still going 1,905 fps. If zeroed at 300 yards the highest point of flight is 7.3 inches high at 150 yards.

A 5,56mm 62 grain boat-tail leaving the barrel at 2,900 fps (16bbl) will be going 1,996 fps at 300 yards and will have a high point in flight of 6.0 inches above the bore line at 150 yards , when zeroed at 300 yards.

So they are within 1.3 inches of each other out to a realistic carbine combat max range of 300 yards.

The 50 yard energy for the 62gr 5.56mm duty issue round is about 1,030 ft pounds while the 50 yard energy for the 110 grain 6.8mm SPC is 1,569 ft pounds.

ADD 100 fps to both for a 20 inch barrel.

On the other hand the 6.5mm Bullets in the 108 to 110 grain range have a B. C. of .452 to .478.

The 6.5mm Grendel does fire a bullet with a better BC, but most of the actual loads I have seen were from 20 inch or longer barrels. Thus gaining the extra velocity required to make the better BC wort- while at longer ranges.
I also believe the Grendel requires the magazines to have a different curve profile.
 
If only 300 yards look at the 7.62x39 as well.

Yep, there is nothing wrong with the 7.62x39mm.

The US Govt would NEVER, NEVER, EVER consider it as a duty issue round.

To have a similar BC using the .311 caliber carbine, you need to move up to a bullet like a 123 grain Nosler Ballistic tip. It has a BC of .366.

Firing that bullet from a 16 inch barreled auto loader, using the 7.62x39 brass will give you anywhere between 2,275 to 2,400 fps depending on how hot you push it. 2,350 fps is a realistic velocity from a 16 inch carbine.

At 300 yards that bullet will be going 1,728 fps. If zeroed for 300 yards it will have a high point in flight of 8.9 inches above the bore line.
The 50 yard energy is 1,369 ft pounds.
 
Zerodefect, check out titanarmory.net and ar15performance.com. They have some pretty cool 6.8spc stuffand I am thinking about purchasing on of their 16" barrels with bolt.
 
I also believe the Grendel requires the magazines to have a different curve profile.

Not true. It has the same taper as the .223 and 6.8. Both the 6.8 and the 6.5 require an adjustment to the feed lips though.

The 6.5mm Grendel does fire a bullet with a better BC, but most of the actual loads I have seen were from 20 inch or longer barrels.

The 6.5 grendel will shoot just fine at pretty similar velocities from a 16" barrel, but you are right that to get the most from the high bc bullets you need the longer barrel. That holds true to the .308 as well.

Here is a little barrel and velocity comparison of the 6.5 grendel. It starts with 14.5" and goes up to 24"

http://www.alexanderarms.com/grendel_ballistics.pdf
 
On the other hand the 6.5mm Bullets in the 108 to 110 grain range have a B. C. of .452 to .478.

You are comparing weights similar to the 6.8 spc. Most people using the grendel to its full extent are shooting 120 up to 140 grain bullets with a bc of about .55 to .61.
 
Not true. It has the same taper as the .223 and 6.8. Both the 6.8 and the 6.5 require an adjustment to the feed lips though.

Plus the magazine body on the 6.8 mags are thicker than a 5.56mm mag. The thin metal used in the 5.56 mags will spread too easy.

You are comparing weights similar to the 6.8 spc. Most people using the Grendel to its full extent are shooting 120 up to 140 grain bullets with a bc of about .55 to .61.

Yes I was , for purposes of simplicity is was better not to throw in other weights and oddball once in a life-time velocities.. (Like some guys claim to get from their 6.8s and 6.5s using special low twist barrels with three grooves and magic pixie dust.


Most people using the grendel to its full extent are shooting 120 up to 140 grain bullets with a bc of about .55 to .61.

I shoot lots of 6.5mm bullets in the 120 to 160 grain range in my various Swede Mausers.

The 120 grain Berger has a BC of .453
The 130 grain Berger VLD a BC of .552
The 140 grain Berger VLD a BC of .595
Hornady 129 grain SST, (which my rifles like better than the Bergers for some reason have a BC of .445
The 139 grain Lapua Scenar has a high BC of .615
The 123 gr SMK a BC of .510
and the 142 grain SMK a BC of .595

Of course the BC rating for projectiles changes at various velocity ranges.

I can't get too choked up about the 6.8, 6.5 G or the 7.62x39 when fired at real velocities from a 14.5 to 18 inch barreled carbine.
The darn standard size AR is too limiting for over all cartridge length.

Now if it was a 6.5mm bullet from a 260 Rem chambered AR-10 size rifle,, then you really have something
.
 
The average load of a 7.62 x 39 has drop at 300 measured in yards, not inches. Just like the .30-30. That's over 36 inches of drop, and the western nations aren't going to take a huge step backwards to accomodate a few fanboys.

As for the popularity of the cartridges, the 6.8 SPC is an open format wildcat - everyone is cooperating and contributing improvements to the cartridge. The industry is now seeing 90 grain Barnes loads going out of 16" barrels at close to 3000 fps, and handloaders are definitely doing that. Check the posts on 68forums.com for the extensive list of ammo and makers of 6.8 barrels, uppers, and complete rifles.

The 6.5 Grendel is a great long distance cartridge, and holds the 600m record. With it's high BC and PPC cartridge case dimensions, it does a great job out of longer barrels. What has restricted it's growth is that it's a licensed product of Alexander Arms. There are less vendors and barrel makers willing to pay the fee to produce "Grendel," and as a result, there is only about 1/3 the ammo offerings and barrels.

Because of the restrictive licensing, lack of ammo, and a cartridge design that is optimized for long bullets, it's not breaking into the tactical carbine or hunting market with the success of the 6.8.

Both Italy and Czech Republic are looking at the 6.8 to be exactly what it was intended, an improved 5.56. Even Remington is offering the optional caliber for the ACR. That the barrel was marked " 6.8 NATO" may have been more wishful thinking than fact, but the impetus is there.

The major reason assault rifle cartridges were designed starts with the combat studies that show most infantrymen fire their weapons at targets under 400 yards. The Germans were the first to realize more powder or bullet than that was a logistical waste. The Soviet Union followed, and then America. NATO followed after. The average infantryman now carries a 4 pound lighter carbine and twice the ammo. (That's right, no net change, but the weapon is lighter.)

The calibers can be cussed and discussed, but the ones used worldwide are 400 yard cartridges in combat - not 600 yard paper punchers. Claiming the 6.5 is "just as good" out of a 16" barrel misses the point - it's not their best application. It's not for the .308, which requires an 18" barrel, and is considered inferior to the 6.5 according to some.

Because of all that, reduced recoil, and bullets designed for a higher KQ - Kill Quotient - the 6.8 is the fastest growing hunting caliber in America for medium game, such as whitetail or hogs. It's effective, flat shooting, and logistically supported by the industry with plenty of ammo available just as cheap as any other hunting ammo.
 
Anyone know if that has m4 feed ramps or not?

Are you planning on running your gun full auto? Cause that was the original purpose for m4 feed ramps. You are getting stuck on "the Chart" again. Just FYI. Several makers make rifles more accurate than a colt. They use different steels, different twist rates, different bolts and carriers, and different aluminums. The chart was specifically designed for comparing rifles to mil-spec. Mil-spec is good but should never be considered the best of the best. Sure they are reliable. That is what they were designed for. But there are too many options out there to limit yourself to just mil-spec stuff.
 
I have a DPMS rifle in the 6.8 SPC . I've harvested five deer so far from ranges to 120 yds to 275 yds . I'm very impressed with the round. So is Special Ops community along with the FBI , Secret Sevice and the Marine Corps have done extensive testing with this round. The 6.8 SPC was developed by a 5th Special Forces SGT Major back in 2002. The 6.8 round has been used in Iraq and Afghanistan. It has been reported; one shot kills at 500 yards with 6.8 SPC.The 6.8 SPC can used in a M4 lighter rifle .Plus more magazines are available ,along with different types of ammo.The 6.8 has eighty percent the power of a 308 with less than fifty percent the recoil. Good luck in your search.
 
Yeah I can see the 6.8 getting more popuar.

I don't even have "the chart"? But I have figured out why alot of Ar's break down when we throw a tactical oriented competition. Colt/BCM/LMT seem to allways rise to the top. Noveske, Larue, and KAC are better....but noone really shoots those. Too expensive to scratch. LOL.

I keep hearing about the increased diameter of the 6.8 case puts the bullet tip a bit lower than 5.56 in the mag. So the m4 ramps could be handy.
CMT makes m4 uppers as stripped uppers and for other companies, I don't know why they dont also make them for thier own house brand name? (Stag)





I think an Upper with a Bison Armory 16" barrel and a rifle length Troy TRX extreme FF tube would make a fine addition to my collection.
 
When the 6.8 SPC round was developed back in 2002. It would be an easy switch over from M4 5.56mm . Simply just change out the barrel , bolt and magazine .If the military did that , it would not only save lives but it would save alot of taxpayer 's money.Plus change the DI system to a gas piston system for more reliability.In recent tests conducted by FBI, Secret Service and Marine Corps have concluded 6.8 Spc round beat out the 5.56mm nato everytime.
 
My Stag Rifle in 6.8mm SPC did not have m-4 style feed ramps. I had a problem with 1st and last round fliers from groups. That being the first round into the chamber being manually loaed and the last round also being different in how the bolt works without another round to fire.

SO I made my own.

The M4 style ramps relieved that problem by 90%. It also allowed my to load slightly longer COL using soft points that had been dragging before.
In general it helps keep the soft points from be deformed and thus adds to the accuracy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top