User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:05:16 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How, then, did people cope with the Garand? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
270 WSM. Won't ever happen on a service rifle. Any cartridge with that kinda smash will eat barrels and shoulders. The average troop these days has never fired a gun and to toss them a weapon with 270WSM recoil and say have at would be a huge mistake. Advanced and experienced shooters sure but rank and file grunt, sky cop etc. It would be a huge mistake. Army likes their magnified optics... the new service rifle seems unlikely to be much of a lightweight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:06:50 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They have stars and say "make X happen." That makes all the non star people run around until they can find the lowest man on the totem pole. He gets tagged ("you're it") and spends the next 3 years of his tour trying to make X happen. The Army throws millions of dollars at X and gets it to an almost workable solution. Meanwhile, the head starman PCSs/retires, thinking he is going to work for the X company for $300k a year on the BoD. The new starman says "X was retarded, let's do Y." Rinse and repeat. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'd really like to see the credentials of the .mil folks that are supplying the requirements for the endless "M4/M249 replacement" RFP's....... If nothing else, they are smart enough to have figured out how to make a living out of it....... The new starman says "X was retarded, let's do Y." Rinse and repeat. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:07:28 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How, then, did people cope with the Garand? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
270 WSM. Won't ever happen on a service rifle. Any cartridge with that kinda smash will eat barrels and shoulders. The average troop these days has never fired a gun and to toss them a weapon with 270WSM recoil and say have at would be a huge mistake. Advanced and experienced shooters sure but rank and file grunt, sky cop etc. It would be a huge mistake. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:12:52 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If you scale up a .264 diameter bullet to .277 diameter, two thing happen. One, it gets a little heavier. Two, the BC increases. The .277 ogive and boatail are both longer than the .264. This even works in round lead balls from muzzleloaders. If cartridge overall length is dictated by magazine compatibility, the length of the ogive is retricted to a range compatible with the length of the cartridge case and the maximum length that will function through the magazine. An easy example is the AR15. Necking up the 5.56 to 6mm gains all sorts of high BC 6mm bullets, but their longer ogives and overall length make loading them to magazine length a problem. 6.8 bullets for the 6.8 SPC nessisarily have short ogives to fit in the magazine, limiting their ballistic potential. Only one thing stops people from making .277 bullets with BC's equal or better than the various .264 examples. There is little demand. People used .224, 6mm 6.5 and .30 caliber (and more recently 7mm) for target shooting, we get match bullets in those diameters because there is a demand for them. In .277 you have mostly hunting bullets for the .270 Winchester and short stubby bullets for the 6.8. There isn't much else because there isn't the demand. Short of military use, why would you? You would just use the now plentiful .284 long range bullets instead. No reason to reinvent the wheel over .007". |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:19:53 PM EDT
[#5]
Meanwhile in tungsten core 6.5 grendel land...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:22:30 PM EDT
[#6]
ETA:wrong thread.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:27:30 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I understand that adding mass also increases the BC, but we were talking about within a given projectile weight. For whatever amount of material is in a given projectile, that material being located where it makes the projectile longer along the direction of motion (sectional density) is good for BC whereas adding that material in a location where it makes the projectile wider hurts the BC (because it takes away from sectional density and adds to frontal surface area). |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:40:44 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I agree, but the kids these days are soft, almost all of them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:40:46 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Interesting prototypes. I'd like to know more about bullet construction and how it supposedly compromises level IV armor at 600m. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:43:37 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If anything, it should have the performance like a 270 Winchester, not a short mag. ASSuming it's a .308 necked down to .277, that's a few grains less powder than a 270, which is *essentially* a 30-06 necked down to .277 (actually a 30/03 necked down, but muh semantics.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:43:48 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The polymer cased telescopic ammo is for the Textron submission, which is really the 'system to beat' in this contract. This, but in 6.8: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/05/08/lsat-6-5mm-plastic-cased-ammo-armys-next-small-arms-program/wv5uvry/ https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMSaBBZWsAA5M0l.jpg The other strong contender will be General Dynamics, which has paired with True Velocity and their very nicely designed Hybrid Polymer/Steel cases: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/TrueVelocityAmmo.jpg FN is the real mystery, no idea what they are submitting in terms of lightweight cases. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:47:53 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Vendors are supplied with solid copper surrogate bullets. The construction of the actual bullets you can ask about in 2038. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:48:01 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Vendors are supplied with solid copper surrogate bullets. The construction of the actual bullets you can ask about in 2038. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:48:25 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Bullet diameter is not BC. Bullet diameter is a minor factor and it works against smaller diameter bullets. ETA: Ballistic coefficient does not equal higher hit probability in military small arms. What it might do for you is increase penetration at range, which appears to be something in demand. Whether or not this is of actually utility is still in doubt. Velocity is much more important to trajectory than BC over the ranges where small arms are commonly used. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: BC is irrelevant? Please expound. ETA: Ballistic coefficient does not equal higher hit probability in military small arms. What it might do for you is increase penetration at range, which appears to be something in demand. Whether or not this is of actually utility is still in doubt. Velocity is much more important to trajectory than BC over the ranges where small arms are commonly used. I never said bullet diameter was BC. What I did say is some diameters have WAY better BCs than others. 6.8 on the whole sucks. 6.5mm and 7mm on the whole are very good. Diameter is far from a minor factor, most 6.5mm and 7mm bullets have good to excellent BCs. Drag is a function of weight, shape and frontal area. Frontal area = diameter. BC doesn’t equal hit probability. Are you on crack? Mathematically this is a proven fact. Velocity is more important than BC? Again let’s put down the crack pipe. BC is what let’s you hang onto velocity. I have a 22-243, one of the fastest cartridges ever. I have a 40gr. load that comes out the pipe 4,800 FPS. I have a 75gr. load that comes out the pipe at 3,600 FPS. There’s this thing called wind drift. Even at 200 yards the hit probability of the 75gr. bullet is 40% greater, due to the higher BC. Velocity without a meaningful BC is pointless. Been there, done that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:50:07 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Or see pictures of them here when this gets adopted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:53:03 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Or see pictures of them here when this gets adopted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2019 11:57:48 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe the ball rounds. The good rounds will be locked away in a vault and never issued until we're at war with China or another major power. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 12:00:15 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Almost everything in your post is wrong. I never said bullet diameter was BC. What I did say is some diameters have WAY better BCs than others. 6.8 on the whole sucks. 6.5mm and 7mm on the whole are very good. Diameter is far from a minor factor, most 6.5mm and 7mm bullets have good to excellent BCs. Drag is a function of weight, shape and frontal area. Frontal area = diameter. BC doesn't equal hit probability. Are you on crack? Mathematically this is a proven fact. Velocity is more important than BC? Again let's put down the crack pipe. BC is what let's you hang onto velocity. I have a 22-243, one of the fastest cartridges ever. I have a 40gr. load that comes out the pipe 4,800 FPS. I have a 75gr. load that comes out the pipe at 3,600 FPS. There's this thing called wind drift. Even at 200 yards the hit probability of the 75gr. bullet is 40% greater, due to the higher BC. Velocity without a meaningful BC is pointless. Been there, done that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 12:01:43 AM EDT
[#19]
I wonder how many bodies it will go through.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 12:01:50 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It is this time. The NGSW is happening no matter how bad the guns are, this is happening. @GS5414 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Joglee thread M4 isn’t going anywhere @GS5414 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 12:05:22 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is no ammo currently that offers 3,000+ fps from a 16" barrel that uses a 6.8 projo, and also weighs 30% less than 7.62x51. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 12:12:02 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Almost everything in your post is wrong. I never said bullet diameter was BC. What I did say is some diameters have WAY better BCs than others. 6.8 on the whole sucks. 6.5mm and 7mm on the whole are very good. Diameter is far from a minor factor, most 6.5mm and 7mm bullets have good to excellent BCs. Drag is a function of weight, shape and frontal area. Frontal area = diameter. BC doesn’t equal hit probability. Are you on crack? Mathematically this is a proven fact. Velocity is more important than BC? Again let’s put down the crack pipe. BC is what let’s you hang onto velocity. I have a 22-243, one of the fastest cartridges ever. I have a 40gr. load that comes out the pipe 4,800 FPS. I have a 75gr. load that comes out the pipe at 3,600 FPS. There’s this thing called wind drift. Even at 200 yards the hit probability of the 75gr. bullet is 40% greater, due to the higher BC. Velocity without a meaningful BC is pointless. Been there, done that. If you want think that a few thousanths of an inch of bore matters so greatly or that the bullets currently on the market matter when they are designing new ones for this specific use, I don't give a shit. If you think a BC difference of 10% or even 20% makes any difference to hit probability in an infantry weapon you probably aren't worth discussing anything with. The minor variables are overshadowed by the major. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 12:19:40 AM EDT
[#23]
I suspect that going to an all copper bullet may be part of the reason for the move to 6.8mm.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 12:25:12 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Your animosity towards 6.8 projectiles is retarded. When you're starting from scratch you can have a great bc in a .277 projectile. Looks like the army is going with a 130 something grain bullet in 6.8mm. I can tell you the BC compared to even a 120 something grain 6.5mm bullet is going to suck. I don’t like low BC bullets. Why would you want a lower hit probability when you can have a higher one. This whole idea by the army is retarded on so many levels. Soldiers can’t carry enough ammo anyway with .308 based cartridges. Large frame ARs are too heavy for even soldiers in the best shape to carry. CAG even gave up trying to carry all .308 ARs after something like a week. The biggest thing is most people can’t shoot a large frame AR worth a shit. A much more effective idea would be an M855A1 type or monolithic type projectile in 6mm or 6.5mm worked into something like Grendel or other similar type cartridges that will fit in a small frame AR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 12:35:01 AM EDT
[#25]
How did they deal with the Garand?
They were actually "men" back in them days. Said the recoil tickled. On the the shooting range all you heard was gunshots, giggling, and ping. They really wanted to shoot the Garand one handed so they could dual wield them like they were pistols, but that wasn't the "Army way". A shame how bureaucrats trying to fight the last war hamstrung our guys. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 12:39:04 AM EDT
[#26]
joglee needs to add a poll so we can take bets on whether or not this is going to actually happen.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 12:53:38 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How did they deal with the Garand? They were actually "men" back in them days. Said the recoil tickled. On the the shooting range all you heard was gunshots, giggling, and ping. They really wanted to shoot the Garand one handed so they could dual wield them like they were pistols, but that wasn't the "Army way". A shame how bureaucrats trying to fight the last war hamstrung our guys. And a squad of them would get absolutely smoked by a modern infantry squad. Now matter how many manly depression era haybales they bucked. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 7:20:34 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
knights armament is my gal  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Sorry your gal lost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 7:25:32 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When have you ever been right about one these assertions? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: It is this time. The NGSW is happening no matter how bad the guns are, this is happening. @GS5414 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 8:10:59 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sorry you don't like mathematical answers. 6.8mm is the wrong answer. 6.5mm is a better answer. If you dispute this show us mathematically how you arrive at your conclusion. Why would someone want a bullet with a significantly reduced hit probability. BC and hit probability are directly proportional. Everything is irrelevant if you miss the target. This is a .270-08, not a 155mm with air burst. Let's be honest guys, this is a money making / government sponsored welfare case. There is an off the shelf superior option in 6.5 CM or .260, but that will make WAY less money. This is a case and point of the wastefulness greed and stupidity of government. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The “muh 6.5” crowd sees 6.8 and starts foaming at the mouth. The 6.8 appears to be a lead free bullet, so by it’s very nature will a completely different design than the 6.8 SPC and obviously have a higher BC for the same weight as the SPC. With the higher chamber pressures, barrel life becomes a concern as well as overall length for magazines. Not everything is about BC dick measuring contests. 6.8mm is the wrong answer. 6.5mm is a better answer. If you dispute this show us mathematically how you arrive at your conclusion. Why would someone want a bullet with a significantly reduced hit probability. BC and hit probability are directly proportional. Everything is irrelevant if you miss the target. This is a .270-08, not a 155mm with air burst. Let's be honest guys, this is a money making / government sponsored welfare case. There is an off the shelf superior option in 6.5 CM or .260, but that will make WAY less money. This is a case and point of the wastefulness greed and stupidity of government. In all of your exasperation, you have proved my point, you are so fixated on BC that you can’t even comprehend that other constraints such as barrel life, chamber pressure, and reliability in these platforms force the caliber to shift in a direction will meet the desired terminal performance AND function properly. We are not talking bolt guns and semi autos. Get your class 3 license, build your unicorn full auto 6.5CM that meets the requirements of the solicitation, and then we can talk “math”. Otherwise, stop the “6.5 or die” BS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 8:18:04 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is certainly retarded enough to have the kind of legs needed for DOD to burn all sorts of funds on for years before the program implodes. In for the lols. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 10:01:34 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: When have you ever been right about one these assertions? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 10:34:59 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What happened to the cased telescoped round? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 10:40:22 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
Looks like we finally get to see the guns and ammo that will be replacing the M4 and M249. Remember the ammo must achieve Level IV armor penetration at 600M, which explains why it's a 6.8x51 round. The new ammo performs similarly to .270 win short mag. http://soldiersystems.net/2019/05/23/sofic-19-sig-sauer-exhibits-next-gen-squad-weapons/ The M249 replacement is pushing 3,000+ fps out of a 16" barrel. http://soldiersystems.net/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/1E700916-3374-4287-A2E9-4D00755B9C5E-440x150.jpeg The carbine is pushing 2,800+fps out of a 13" barrel. http://soldiersystems.net/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/A042D878-1966-4149-B029-B401C1B55C42-440x150.jpeg Ammo size, 6.8x51. http://soldiersystems.net/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/E4B304B7-9459-41FF-9BC8-60B64842E9F2-440x145.jpeg 8.1lbs (empty) .270 WSM enlarged AR10, piston-operated, 13" barrel carbine is a non-starter for Infantry issue. The volumetric increase in ammo bulk for the SAW is also a non-starter. No matter how light it is, you can't carry enough if it is larger and takes up more space on a limited soldier equipment space metric. Why you would openly state that these are what will replace the M4 and SAW makes no sense, since we haven't seen any of the other submissions, and the premise that any of the submissions will actually be adopted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 10:44:00 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How, then, did people cope with the Garand? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
270 WSM. Won't ever happen on a service rifle. Any cartridge with that kinda smash will eat barrels and shoulders. The average troop these days has never fired a gun and to toss them a weapon with 270WSM recoil and say have at would be a huge mistake. Advanced and experienced shooters sure but rank and file grunt, sky cop etc. It would be a huge mistake. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 10:44:17 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hmmmmm. That's sexy 
I want a nice AR in that caliber. The Army needs to hurry up and adopt/standardize this so it's widely available. Unless you have the unobtanium barrel alloy, throat life will be maybe 200rds if you shoot more than 50rds a range session, and the gas port will take a beating until it erodes rapidly. Muzzle blast on a 13" .270 WSM will be like cranking off a 16" .338 LM with tank brake next to your face. The suppressor required for the muzzle exit pressure will need to be made from some type of aerospace-grade ablative materials and will be unusually heavy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 10:45:37 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
hang in there maybe SIG will buy HK  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: joglee thread and no mention of HK? maybe SIG will buy HK 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 10:59:00 AM EDT
[#38]
Can anyone explain why they didn't just go with already established cartridges like the 6.5 Creedmoor, 260 Remington, 6.5x47, or 7mm-08? Why go to the effort and expense of developing a cartridge that won't have any really appreciable ballistic advantage over established cartridges.
Sure, they would need a suitable bullet, but developing a bullet is 50% easier than developing a bullet AND cartridge. Plus manufacturers are already set up to make any of the 4 cartridges I mentioned in the first paragraph. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:01:20 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They’re finally back to focusing on a peer/near-peer threat. Shooting at haji isn’t as much a worry as someone outfitted with Russian gear. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So basically a MK48 and AR10 shooting a special high velocity AP round. belt fed might have a future but I doubt the M4 is going anywhere. Especially since our current enemies wear sheets instead of body armor. Russian Infantry is heavily motorized or mechanized anyway. Shoulder-fired weapons outside of sniper rifles have an extremely limited role, if any, in a mechanized war. We don't fight mech with mech like we did in DS anywhere near as much, given the growth in air power net-centric warfare. Look at the model of what happened with the Euphrates River incident in Syria between SF/Kurds and a Russian Merc battle group that had 2 armored battalions, artillery batteries, and engineer battalion. They got JDAM Arc-Lighted for 6 hours as soon as they fired the first artillery salvo, and were brutally decimated for sport by B-52H, F-22A, F-15E, USMC Arty with Excalibur PGM rounds. The idea of dismounted infantry closing with and destroying other dismounted infantry is a pipe dream fairy tale, and hasn't been a reality for ages. Artillery has always factored heavily in that type of fight dating back to the Napoleonic era at the latest. The only operations dismounted infantry have a place are: * COIN * Defense for FOBs and air bases in a conventional strategic foothold build and sustain campaign * JRDF for regional smack-downs on dictators or hostage rescue crises (Grenada and Panama) Show me the logical scenario where dismounted infantry have gotten to within small arms range of motorized Russian infantry units. Ukraine? Nope. We see any build-up way in advance and appropriately allocate airpower sorties to deal with that. Estonia? Same thing. North Korea? Empty IOTV copies made from Kordura |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:05:47 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That’s a really good point. What, 4 25rd mags in a shingle instead of 6 30s, at the same weight? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
SIG wasn't the vendor doing cased telescoping ammo, that was another vendor. Each vendor is responsible for coming up with their own solution to the problem of pushing the government specified projectile to the desired velocities while reducing cartridge weight. While it may be necessary, I'm not sure going with a 7.62x51 sized cartridge will work to replace the M4, due to reduced ammunition capacities. Another vendor submission is using a hybrid polymer/metal case that looks awfully like a .270 WSM. Good luck passing off a larger magazine, cartridge, and reduced basic load even compared to 7.62 NATO as a replacement for the M4. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:07:46 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wasn't the velocity supposed to be higher? To do that, you have to exceed 24" barrel .270 WSM by about 200fps for most loads. They wanted to do that from a 16" barrel... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:15:42 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can anyone explain why they didn't just go with already established cartridges like the 6.5 Creedmoor, 260 Remington, 6.5x47, or 7mm-08? Why go to the effort and expense of developing a cartridge that won't have any really appreciable ballistic advantage over established cartridges. Sure, they would need a suitable bullet, but developing a bullet is 50% easier than developing a bullet AND cartridge. Plus manufacturers are already set up to make any of the 4 cartridges I mentioned in the first paragraph. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:19:23 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If this goes anywhere, I can see 6.5 Creedoor becoming a thing of the past. In fact...why didn't they just make a new projectile for 6.5CM? EDIT: I guess this is going to become the new thing for the AR-10? SOCOM adopted 6.5CM for the Sniper Support Rifle and Assault Machine-Gun, smart ideas. The big Army is staring into 26" barreled .270 Weatherby Magnum wannabe performance from a 13" carbine. The main benefits I can see coming from the program are developmental alloys, processes, and the optic. Given the history of other failed Army programs to replace the M16 and M4, we usually end up with one or 2 peripheral things that don't represent the core design of the submissions. Examples include: 6mm SAW Program begat the later SAW Program of the 1970s, which resulted in the FN Minimi being adopted ACR Program of the 1980s resulted in the evolution of the SOPMOD stock, ACOG, and Elcan optics. XM8 resulted in...nothing If history is an indicator, the chances of this program being adopted, much like the SPIW, ACR, HK XM25 dual weapon, or XM8, are very low. What is going to happen is that one or more of the ancillary systems will catch wind, like the optic. I do see a very high chance for the NGSAW to be adopted though if they have an 11.25lb SAW, but the cartridge has an uphill battle to face. It would make a lot more sense to do it in SOCOM's 6.5CM with the already available AP 6.5mm projectiles, with the unobtanium barrel alloy they've been developing. The enlarged AR10 Sig piston carbine will be frowned upon for everyone that's used to an M4 weapon weight/size profile. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:20:02 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
New concept... don't bother changing barrels with an LMG, when the barrel is too hot toss the whole thing in the trash, you're past it's service life.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
But are they made in India? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:22:34 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How, then, did people cope with the Garand? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
270 WSM. Won't ever happen on a service rifle. Any cartridge with that kinda smash will eat barrels and shoulders. The average troop these days has never fired a gun and to toss them a weapon with 270WSM recoil and say have at would be a huge mistake. Advanced and experienced shooters sure but rank and file grunt, sky cop etc. It would be a huge mistake. USMC and US Army units carried a mix of M1 Rifles, M1 Carbines, and Thompson SMGs, along with M1919 GPMGs for support by fire, as well as mortars. The Sturmgewehr was a far superior individual shoulder-fired weapon for riflemen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:25:37 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If a combat arms soldier can't handle it, they can be kicked out or transferred to a soft skills job. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
270 WSM. Won't ever happen on a service rifle. Any cartridge with that kinda smash will eat barrels and shoulders. The average troop these days has never fired a gun and to toss them a weapon with 270WSM recoil and say have at would be a huge mistake. Advanced and experienced shooters sure but rank and file grunt, sky cop etc. It would be a huge mistake. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:35:10 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The “muh 6.5” crowd sees 6.8 and starts foaming at the mouth. The 6.8 appears to be a lead free bullet, so by it’s very nature will a completely different design than the 6.8 SPC and obviously have a higher BC for the same weight as the SPC. With the higher chamber pressures, barrel life becomes a concern as well as overall length for magazines. Not everything is about BC dick measuring contests. The ideas I see pouring into the concept behind the cartridge are one of the dumbest set of assertions and premises I've seen in a small arms program to-date, and I've been eyeball-deep in studying or participating in Army small arms programs most of my life. They really believe they need .277" projectile diameter because 6.5mm can't penetrate the armor they want to penetrate at 600m. That is one of the program assertions and premises... Their metric for achieving 600m penetration is based on a 3400fps mv with a 125gr .277" lead-free M855A1-type projectile with a lower BC than the existing 6.5mm 855A1 projectiles. So they start with a false premise of needing to defeat dismounted Russians wearing body armor with conventional infantry soldiers in an infantry-on-infantry duel. Then they make a false assertion that only .277" diameter can achieve this when fired at 26" barreled .270 Weatherby Magnum +P velocities. Then they spec the carbine to have a 16" barrel. Then they spec the carbine to have a 14" barrel. Now it's a 13" barrel.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:37:19 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If only the army was already able to manage 1000s barrels that needed replaced at less then 1000 rounds... I'm sure big Army with modern high school and college grads will do a bang-up job of whatever carbines and rifles are in inventory going forward, especially with Recruiting's emphasis on applicants from LA and NY. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:38:31 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sorry you don't like mathematical answers. 6.8mm is the wrong answer. 6.5mm is a better answer. If you dispute this show us mathematically how you arrive at your conclusion. Why would someone want a bullet with a significantly reduced hit probability. BC and hit probability are directly proportional. Everything is irrelevant if you miss the target. This is a .270-08, not a 155mm with air burst. Let's be honest guys, this is a money making / government sponsored welfare case. There is an off the shelf superior option in 6.5 CM or .260, but that will make WAY less money. This is a case and point of the wastefulness greed and stupidity of government. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The “muh 6.5” crowd sees 6.8 and starts foaming at the mouth. The 6.8 appears to be a lead free bullet, so by it’s very nature will a completely different design than the 6.8 SPC and obviously have a higher BC for the same weight as the SPC. With the higher chamber pressures, barrel life becomes a concern as well as overall length for magazines. Not everything is about BC dick measuring contests. 6.8mm is the wrong answer. 6.5mm is a better answer. If you dispute this show us mathematically how you arrive at your conclusion. Why would someone want a bullet with a significantly reduced hit probability. BC and hit probability are directly proportional. Everything is irrelevant if you miss the target. This is a .270-08, not a 155mm with air burst. Let's be honest guys, this is a money making / government sponsored welfare case. There is an off the shelf superior option in 6.5 CM or .260, but that will make WAY less money. This is a case and point of the wastefulness greed and stupidity of government. The base was over .500" in diameter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2019 11:42:34 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Replacing barrels on sniper systems has already been a choke-point for a very small fleet of rifles in the Sniper Schools and Scout Sniper/Recon Platoons. I'm sure big Army with modern high school and college grads will do a bang-up job of whatever carbines and rifles are in inventory going forward, especially with Recruiting's emphasis on applicants from LA and NY. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
