.264 USA on TFB

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • JDub
    Bloodstained
    • Sep 2014
    • 53

    .264 USA on TFB

    Saw this on TFB:



    Chime in!

    I think the fact that it would require a new lower would make this a no-go.
  • stanc
    Banned
    • Apr 2011
    • 3430

    #2
    CTTSO Releases Solicitation for .264 USA Rifles, Carbines, PDWs http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...carbines-pdws/
    The specifications for the new weapon are quire ambitious, with a threshold velocity requirement of 2,650 ft/s with a 108gr bullet, and an objective requirement of 2,750 ft/s with the same, both from an 11.5″ barrel!

    Comment

    • mdram
      Warrior
      • Sep 2016
      • 941

      #3
      Originally posted by JDub View Post
      Saw this on TFB:



      Chime in!

      I think the fact that it would require a new lower would make this a no-go.

      couldnt it just use ar10 lowers?
      just some targets for printing
      https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...xQ?usp=sharing

      Comment

      • BluntForceTrauma
        Administrator
        • Feb 2011
        • 3897

        #4
        The one solution I would NOT oppose.

        But still more power than 90% of engagements need.

        6.5 Grendel is still the answer. Still compact, both weapons and ammo. Recoil still at max for newly trained troops. Performance well balanced with all the rest. Only thing against it is Not Invented Here syndrome. Gotta spend a bunch of tax-payer money re-inventing the wheel and chasing our tails.

        Want more velocity from an 11.5 inch barrel? Use a copper slug M855A1 analog in 6.5mm weighing, oh, 95 grains in 6.5 Grendel.
        :: 6.5 GRENDEL Deer and Targets :: 6mmARC Targets and Varmints and Deer :: 22 ARC Varmints and Targets

        :: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::

        Comment

        • stanc
          Banned
          • Apr 2011
          • 3430

          #5
          Originally posted by BluntForceTrauma View Post
          6.5 Grendel is still the answer. Still compact, both weapons and ammo. Recoil still at max for newly trained troops. Performance well balanced with all the rest. Only thing against it is Not Invented Here syndrome.

          Want more velocity from an 11.5 inch barrel? Use a copper slug M855A1 analog in 6.5mm weighing, oh, 95 grains in 6.5 Grendel.
          Yes, you can boost MV by using such an ultra-lightweight bullet, but then BC will go in the crapper and take long range performance down with it.
          While I agree that 6.5 Grendel would be a better choice for carbines, I think .264 USA would be superior to replace 7.62 NATO for machine guns.



          All things considered, it looks to me like they want a "do over" of the one-caliber/one-gun concept that gave us the 7.62 NATO cartridge and M14 rifle.
          Except this time they're going with a cartridge of more reasonable power, and a modular weapon that can be configured as SMG, carbine, and DMR.
          Last edited by stanc; 01-20-2018, 06:58 AM.

          Comment

          Working...
          X