SFs Don't Trust 5.56, Want 6.8mm Uppers ASAP

[4v50 Gary]

Thank you Matt for your ShotShow report.

Wondernine nailed it. The trouble with the 62 grain bullet is it is designed upon the recommendations of the USAMT. They're top notch (OK, the 70 gr is better) for longer range shooting, but "ice picks" don't work as well as the old 55 grain that kind of tumbled around the body. Little wonder that SF are disappointed by it.

I guess we should teach our guys the German "flopper" squad tactic. Last guy administers the coup de grace before passing anyone down.

 

[EchoSixMike]

No, the 62gn M855 was designed when the only standard for performance was penetration of hard targets, like helmets and it was designed for the SAW, and later adopted for the M16A2. The AMU recommends the use of the 77gn Mk262. S/F...Ken M

 

[HBK]

I always wondered about that. When I bought my first AR, when I bought the first 100 rounds I thought that they were pretty small bullets for a battle rifle. I always thought that a bigger caliber would be better, but I am FAR from an expert. In fact, I'm barely a novice...

 

[Jeff White]

I think that some of the problems with M855 are more related to the difficulty in producing it with the airspace between the jacket and core. Edward Ezell made not of the production difficulties they had when they first made the round in The Black Rifle. Dr. Fackler's tests of M855 in the late 80s showed it to have nearly identical terminal effects as M193.

The other problem is that we have collectively lost our knowledge of close combat. Too many people, in the military and law enforcement as well as in the gun culture have unrealistic expectations about what small arms ammo actually does.

I'm certain that I can go through my modest library and find damning examples of those notoriously ineffective minor calibers like M2 .30 ball, 7.92 mm, 45-70, .303, 7.62x51 all failing to incapactitate or quickly kill 170 pound two legged opponents.

echosixmike hit the solution, anchoring shots as you move across the objective. SOP in many units. Has been for decades. SOP for both sides during WWII and Korea, the last wars fought will full caliber weapons. Who knows, maybe if Al Gore had been around to invent the internet then, we'd have posted about the terrible combat inefficiency of .30 caliber M2 ball, and derided the ineffective German 7.92 .

The fact remains that human beings are hard to kill. And comparisons with hunting are useless, because there is a big psychological effect in incapacitation. We need to get rid of the mindset that we can shoot someone once and they instanly drop dead. It doesn't always happen that way, and it has never happened that way. Once again I ask; Why is it that when an American soldier or Marine takes multiple hits from the best the enemy throws at him and continues to function, he's recommended for the MOH, but when an enemy soldier has the absolute nerve not to drop instantly dead after one hit from our weapons, there is something wrong with our small arms and ammunition?

I like the 6.8x43 SPC an unlike most people here, I have seen most of the data on it. I'd like to see the Army make it their main caliber for rifles and SAWs. But it's not going to happen. SOCOM isn't going to adopt it either because of logistics reasons. It's not going to be supportable logistically for SOCOM to go it alone. It's only chance is to sell the big Army on it. How smart is it to send a unit into theather with weapons that required ammo that could not be aquired anywhere else on the battlefield?

Jeff

 

[Gabe]

Are our SpecOps guys using the full auto feature or are they doing double taps? It seems to me the 6.8mm isn't going to be easily controllable at full auto given the recoil forces predicted. Remember the old 308 rifles were not controllable, and the 5.56 was controllable in a lighter gun. The 6.8mm may need a 308 size gun to shoot full automatic.

Assault weapons are supposed to down opponents by spraying them at close range. I think the post Vietnam rapid aimed shots theory may not apply all that well in extreme close range. The 6.8mm seems to fit American training technique better than 5.56.

The easiest solution would be to use a bullup like the Steyr AUG and take advantage of extra velocity. But it seems some people are dead set against bullpups.

 

[atek3]

what is the highest bc bullet you can load in the 6.8 SPC case and still be mag length. (for example 77 gr. SMK for the 223 case).

I ask because I wonder if the cartrige will have a future in match shooting. (or will anyone who is going to put the money into an AR platform with a non-standard cartridge go with something esoteric like .26 grendel, 260 rem, or 6mm-250)

atek3

 

[artherd]

Tony- That's an absolute damn shame, that those two lost their lives. I don't want to detract from that one bit.

However, there have also been accounts where 7.62x51 failed to stop, and 40mm grenades failed to stop...

If someone was lucky enough to take SEVEN hits of Mk262, I doubt much short of 155mm HE would have been effective. And even then, prolly would have had to hit the guy close.

The 6.8SPC is a better terminal cartridge, sure.
Is it even 20% better than 5.56?
I don't know, but that's about what my un-educated bubba-guestimate would be form what little test data I have seen.
Is it even worth trading away 5 rounds of 5.56 (30 round vs 25 round mags) ? I dunno, but I'm not ready to jump up and say "oh yeah!"

One thing is for sure, it does not at this time seem equal to the 7.62x51 even in FMJ.

And the 7.62 is no silver bullet.

 

[Zak Smith]

atek3,

One of my hopes is that 6.8SPC will be able to make IPSC rifle Major (340PF) out of an 18 or 20" barrel. The factory load is within 20.

-z

 

[Onslaught]

(and getting an EOTech put on top of his scope, A.R.M.S makes a great mount for such a purpose, if you have any contact information for him, I can forward you the part numbers.

Doctor Optic! About the same price as EOTech, but less than 1/2 the size... Arizona GunRunners sells them.

As far as durability goes, I'd expect anything that was designed to ride on the slide of a pistol in place of the rear sight would be good enough mounted in a fixed position on a rifle.

The arms rings are nice... Pricey, but NICE!. That's the setup everyone's using on their "SPR" over at ar15.com. (Dr. Optic and ARMS ring rail).

 

[Stinkyshoe]

EchoSixMike,
If you don't mind saying, what is your opinion of the Ar-10? For civilians interested in protecting or families and self, is there a "better" battle gun. what are your thoughts of the Ar15/m16?thank you, Ss

ps Do semiauto rifles lack the ability to be reliable and accurate long range precision guns?

 

[Travis McGee]

Stinkyshoes:
Properly set up, an AR-10 or SR-25 can give a bolt gun a close run for the money, precision accuracy-wise. And for followup shots, there is no comparison.

I have read a report by a Soviet Afgan war sniper who used an accurized Dragonov, sort of the way the SF guy in this story uses his: medium range company support. He said when a bullet snapped past Abdul, his reaction was to freeze for a second before hitting the deck. In that second, the semi-auto follow up shot nailed him, then his buddy, and so on.

Col Jeff Cooper has announced the parameters of a new challenge prize for the first shooter to put 20 rounds in a 20 inch circle in 20 seconds at 1000 yards. If it's ever done, it will be done with a gas gun.

 

[artherd]

ARMS #22 rings.

With ARMS #22TRC upper for the ring.

With a #22TRR rail for the TRC.

Yeilds this:

ps Do semiauto rifles lack the ability to be reliable and accurate long range precision guns?

Absolutely not! Many AR-10s are 1MOA guns, with some with tigher chambers (eg factory AR-10T 'target' version) are 1/2-1/4MOA guns. JP rifles makes the CTR-02 which is 1/4MOA it seems.

 

[Stinkyshoe]

Mr Mcgee
Thank you for the informative reply. I assume that with the Sr25 or AR10 (and the BAR-10) must have match ammo to perform(Like Mr.Plaster,former MARSOC operative says in his book) What is the 'ideal' barrel length?(16,20,24)? It seems like a trend in ARs these days is to have a really heavy barrel. Are the ARs and SRs the same way?
I guess that the tendancy with semi-autos is to blast away. And sometimes I question the usefuness of semi-auto 308s. The 308 has adaquate range and power, and in a semi auto form does it fill a 'sniper'/cqc weapon? But what about a scope for cqc? Is there an 'ultimate' rifle, or is it subjective? What about the consideration of the amount of ammo that can be carried? Is more ammo better?

Are you the author of "Enemies both Foreign and Domestic"? I really enjoyed the first 4 chapters I read.

You're lucky to get to go to SHOT. How do you get in?

"Col Jeff Cooper has announced the parameters of a new challenge prize for the first shooter to put 20 rounds in a 20 inch circle in 20 seconds at 1000 yards. If it's ever done, it will be done with a gas gun."

So what exactly is the existing record if this is the new challenge? That sounds impossible to me.

 

[atek3]

Col Jeff Cooper has announced the parameters of a new challenge prize for the first shooter to put 20 rounds in a 20 inch circle in 20 seconds at 1000 yards. If it's ever done, it will be done with a gas gun.

That would be incredible. If anything could do, I'd put my money on one of scott medesha's custom AR-10's in something like 260 rem.

atek3

PS (i was going to be the first to comment on the major PF ability of the 6.8 SPC, but it was too 'gun gamey' for me, so of course Zak picked it up quickly )

 

[Zak Smith]

A semi-auto .308 need not have a "bull" or heavy barrel to be accurate. My JP AR10 has their 20" lightweight contour .308 barrel and it's somewhere between 0.5 - 0.75MOA. The LW profile looks like an A2 Gov't profile .223, just scaled up slightly under the handguards, but not fully to Hbar.

At least for games, a bolt gun surpasses the semi-auto .308 when you start to sling high-BC (over 0.50) bullets at 3000+ fps at 600+ yards. Typically we're talking a 6.5x284, 7mm Mag, or 300WM. These have the advantage of being more tolerant of errors in ranging and crosswind estimation.

-z

 

[artherd]

I guess that the tendancy with semi-autos is to blast away. And sometimes I question the usefuness of semi-auto 308s.

Uh, noo... Of course, in a semi-auto you do have the option.

The good ones are like bolt guns that let you keep your hands on it all the time. They give up just about nothing to a bolt gun, and add instant follow-up shot as an option.

Is more ammo better?

YES! ALLWAYS! But it's not always the only criteria. You can carry a pant-load of .22LR.

"Col Jeff Cooper has announced the parameters of a new challenge prize for the first shooter to put 20 rounds in a 20 inch circle in 20 seconds at 1000 yards. If it's ever done, it will be done with a gas gun."

Awesome! I'd love to try for it. I'd bet a Barrett with a trained operator could pull it off.

Check that, no 20 round mags. He'd have to be DAMN talented

There's a .338LM AR, I don't know what time back on target would look like, but it's got a big brake.

Maybe one of the specialised caliber AR-10s.

Heck, maybe someone really good with his 'plain' SR-25 or AR-10 (both are .308 AR-15s for all intents and purposes.)

 

[Tony Williams]

The 6.8SPC is a better terminal cartridge, sure. Is it even 20% better than 5.56? I don't know, but that's about what my un-educated bubba-guestimate would be form what little test data I have seen.
Is it even worth trading away 5 rounds of 5.56 (30 round vs 25 round mags) ? I dunno, but I'm not ready to jump up and say "oh yeah!"

One thing is for sure, it does not at this time seem equal to the 7.62x51 even in FMJ. And the 7.62 is no silver bullet.

Artherd, the 115 grain 6.8mm bullet appears to have a similar ballistic coefficient to the 150 grain 7.62mm, and is launched at a similar velocity in barrels of comparable length. So with similar bullet types it should have about 75% of the effectiveness of the 7.62mm. However, the US M80 7.62mm bullet doesn't fragment when it tumbles, whereas the 6.8mm reportedly fragments at least out to 300m, significantly enhancing the wounding potential.

I have not yet seen a full range of comparative tests between the effectiveness of the 6.8mm in comparison with the various 5.56mm loadings, but I would expect it to be considerably more than 20% more effective.

I agree with Jeff that on the basis of information available so far, I would like to see the 6.8mm entirely replace the 5.56mm - in fact, its performance is so close to the 7.62mm that I think it could replace that as well. However, I think that the SF route is its best chance; there are fewer problems in adopting unconventional wapons, and it gives it a chance to prove itself.

With the US Army considering changing to the XM8, and needing to replace the worn-out M249 SAWS, there may never be a better chance to switch calibre.

P.S. I've just spotted a news item on StrategyPage.com concerning the US Army's plans for the XM8. This is an extract:

"Testing will increase, as more M-8s are available, and the plan is that by early 2007, the first of over a million M-8s will begin distribution to all troops in active and reserve army units. One thing that may slow this down is the army research on the use of a new caliber (6.8mm). The new bullet has shown to have better accuracy and stopping power. While troops would be carrying less ammo with the larger round (25 rounds in the current 30 round magazine), they would require fewer shots to take down enemy troops. American troops today are much better trained in the use of their rifles than they were four decades ago. Automatic fire is not often used, with accurate, individual shots being the norm. The M-8 rifle, and possibly a new caliber, are a reflection of that."


Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum

 

[EchoSixMike]

The AR-10 and SR25 are nice guns. They had some breakage problems in the beginning but I believe they have that resolved now. The magazine issue will stop being a problem after the ban sunsets, so the reliability issue will go away IMO.

A good 223 could pull off Cooper challenge, easier than a 308 length gun, simply due to recoil. A 18-20 lb 223 rigged to shoot 80's or heavier VLD's would do it fine, with less reciprocating mass than an AR10 based gun. All you need is good conditions.

The gas guns start sucking compared to the bolt guns when you start using powders and bullet weights outside the area the gun was designed for. And they don't work so well with magnums. And they don't like heat. And the bolt guns will always be more acccurate, in an ultimate sense. Which is why there was a spike in AR10 use in NRA highpower, then everyone went back to bolt guns. Even Tubb designed a bolt gun after winning with an SR25 based gun and went back to it. They are just easier to make work. S/F...Ken M

 

[444]

Being the uneducated fellow that I am, it would seem to me that the problem is in the bullet design or configuration that is the problem. Not the 5.56mm cartridge. The problem, according to this gentelman is that they are getting nothing but "ice pick" holes through the target. Let's think about this a minute. I have taken a number of big game animals with my centerfire rifles and have taken a number of varmints with centerfire rifles. I used a variety of bullets for the task including various softpoints and hollow points. These bullets were further broken down by their configuration: for elk I have used softpoints with a partition etc. I COULD have used a FMJ that would have produced an "ice pick" wound and would have almost certainly resulted in me having a much more difficult time bringing the animal down in a humane and speedy manner. This is universally accepted among hunters to be true. On the other hand, if hunting an animal for it's pelt, a non-expanding bullet is used specifically to produce an "ice pick" type wound so that the pelt is damaged as little as possible. Again, this is common knowledge and is not argued by many. However, when discussing rifle bullets for use on human targets, suddenly all this is considered invalid because that is hunting and this is combat.
Ok, you say that our military is bound by certain international agreements that prohibit the use of the more effective bullet types. Well, since that is the case it doesn't seem to matter what cartridge we are talking about.
Personally I don't see how increasing the bullet diameter by a thousandth of an inch, or increasing the weight of the bullet is going to make things a whole lot better.
The case described by Travis seems to me to be a problem in bullet design rather than a failure of the cartridge itself.

 

[rennaissancemann]

If M855 isn't getting the job done due to lack of cannilure fragmentation, then use M193. Either that or go with a high performance 5.56 loading.

Regards

 

[Tony Williams]

As you might have noticed from earlier posts, even the Mk 262 has not being doing the job and the SF community do not seem to like the 5.56mm, whatever loading is used.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum