Our military adopting the Grendel?

[bwaites]

an old adage I heard years ago still rings true
"the enemies weapons never jams"

On my earlier statement about redesigning the weapon around the Cartridge. The question comes to mind of the Remington/DPMS answer to the .30 RAR they used a modified Bolt and Barrel extentsion humm I don't hear many compliants from their users as few as they are, Food for thought?

If you strengthen the bolt, the barrel extension becomes the issue. Strengthen the barrel extension, and another point becomes the weak point. Keep that up, and eventually you end up with a 15-20 pound Carbine. The .30 RAR is a hunting rifle, with inferior ballistics. Bigger bolt, but very limited real options as far as bullet options that work from mags.

Bolts are exspendables, and when a bolt goes, there is really very little damage to the rifle. Maybe a mag is damaged, but other than that, no real damage, generally. It acts like a circuit breaker in an electrical system, and prevents further damage.

I know LRRPF52 thinks that improving or increasing bolt size might be helpful, and I certainly recognize his significantly higher level of experience than my own, but it seems like we might be asking the wrong question when it relates to the AR. The AR works, we actually have very few bolt failures at this stage, and those we have are not catastrophic. I'm not sure that is the right move.

[stanc]

This to me is a bit stunning. Not that I don't believe it, just that even M262 ballistics are getting pretty wimpy past 500 yds, much less 750. At 500 yards it's roughly the same as .22 mag muzzle velocity.

I agree. If they really were making 750-yard, first-round incapacitation shots with Mk262, I think it'd have to be due to shot placement, not wounding capability of the 77gr SMK bullet.

IIRC, Mk262 MV is only 2700 fps or so from a 20" barrel. That would translate to ~2500 fps in the M4 carbine's 14.5" barrel. At distances beyond about 300 yards, MatchKings don't fragment in gel tests.

FWIW, Gary Roberts says that at extended ranges, most all military spitzer bullets produce about the same wound profiles, regardless of caliber. It's at 0-300 yards where differences are noticeable.

FYI:

[sgt_murf]

If you strengthen the bolt, the barrel extension becomes the issue. Strengthen the barrel extension, and another point becomes the weak point. Keep that up, and eventually you end up with a 15-20 pound Carbine. The .30 RAR is a hunting rifle, with inferior ballistics. Bigger bolt, but very limited real options as far as bullet options that work from mags.

Bolts are exspendables, and when a bolt goes, there is really very little damage to the rifle. Maybe a mag is damaged, but other than that, no real damage, generally. It acts like a circuit breaker in an electrical system, and prevents further damage.

I know LRRPF52 thinks that improving or increasing bolt size might be helpful, and I certainly recognize his significantly higher level of experience than my own, but it seems like we might be asking the wrong question when it relates to the AR. The AR works, we actually have very few bolt failures at this stage, and those we have are not catastrophic. I'm not sure that is the right move.

Bill you may be correct in your statement I was really just think out loud but to clearify

Actually I not advocating the .30 RAR just the design of the Bolt, the Extentsion, and the mod to the carrier this would (my opinion without any data or supporting docs) provide a basis for the brass of the cartridge to be the weak link versus the Bolt of the AR platform. Which STILL provides the jamming issue that many have brought up. My short easy answer is use a three lug bolt system do away with the current multi lug setup. After all I just attempting fix the massive jamming issue even though 18 months in Iraq SEVERAL mission clearing IEDs, doing route clearance in sand storms in a asture enviroment my weapon never jammed or misfed. Not to mention that year I spent in the Saudi /Iraqi Desert in the 90s and on G day nooooo issues.
which begs the question why did I clean that thing after every mission and run her dry until ready to go, then light lube critical spots???? ohhhhh yeah I remember first sandstorm in 90 after heavy lubing left the action filled with CLP mud that's why. (and I will not carry a Colt marked weapon period.. any other manufactuer is good to go I consider a Colt badd ju ju personal opinion)

[bwaites]

ANY of the small caliber arms, including .308, are going to punch holes at 750 meters, not have explosive bullet expansion or fragmentation.

300 WinMag and 338 Lapua both still do nasty stuff at that range, but you can't load those into AR 15 mags!

Punching holes works pretty well, as even the results of handgun shootings with .22 long rifle will attest. My reading seems to confirm what cops and ER docs have told me, "guys shot with .22's in the torso don't seem to notice it for about 15-20 seconds, then they just fall over dead." At very close ranges, this is not good stopping power, but at 600 yards or more, its effective. All the small arms cartridges will have that same effect at long range, I suspect. The Mk 262, especially.

All the Grendel does at those ranges is give you a better chance to hit torsos, because it has less wind drift!

[bwaites]

I live in the Eastern Washington desert. We have this little issue with volcanoes which blow up and toss silicate powder into the air every 100 years or so. It's so fine that it will sneak by some auto air filters.

I've never had a dust related jam, either. I've made my Grendel jam, but it took a lot of dirty ammo to do so. I ran a "run 'til it fails test" which I posted on the old board. I didn't clean it for something like 800 rounds before I got a FTF.

I don't understand the concerns with jams in todays versions of the AR. Vietnam era systems were compromised by poor ammo, poor cleaning, poor instruction, and lack of proper care. The guys were told they didn't even have to be cleaned, according to some of the Vietnam era vets I've talked to. They weren't even issued cleaning kits in some circumstances! We need to get over that concern, and move on. Decent maintenance and what we have learned over the last 50 years has fixed that issue!

[stanc]

All the Grendel does at those ranges is give you a better chance to hit torsos, because it has less wind drift!

I would expect it to also have better penetration of loaded AK mags (and behind barrier wounding) at long range than 5.56 has.

[bwaites]

I would expect it to also have better penetration of loaded AK mags (and behind barrier wounding) at long range than 5.56 has.

True, but still it equates to punching holes!

Send me AK mags, and I'll add it to the testing regimen!

[stanc]

Send me AK mags, and I'll add it to the testing regimen!

What is your planned testing regimen so far?

What loads do you plan to test?

[bwaites]

What is your planned testing regimen so far?

What loads do you plan to test?

When the FMJ is available, I plan to test it and the 123 SMK (since the SMK's have been approved for military use). I haven't figured out what I will do, but I plan on doing something similar to what I did with steel last year.

It won't happen fast, my youngest gets married in March, so I have to figure out lots of other stuff. But I expect that by late summer I will be doing testing.

It's why I previously suggested you draw up a list of what you would like to see done, and how much you could contribute to that testing.

[stanc]

When the FMJ is available, I plan to test it and the 123 SMK (since the SMK's have been approved for military use).

It's why I previously suggested you draw up a list of what you would like to see done, and how much you could contribute to that testing.

One test I'd like to see is how the Wolf 6.5 FMJ "hard target" penetration compares with 7.62 M80, against a CMU (backed by jugs of water to check post-barrier energy).

I'm willing to pay for the concrete block(s) and the gallon jugs of water (if you don't save emptied milk jugs for that purpose, and have to buy bottled water).

[bwaites]

One test I'd like to see is how the Wolf 6.5 FMJ "hard target" penetration compares with 7.62 M80, against a CMU (backed by jugs of water to check post-barrier energy).

I'm willing to pay for the concrete block(s) and the gallon jugs of water (if you don't save emptied milk jugs for that purpose, and have to buy bottled water).

That's a good test to do, I think! Have you done it with 855?

[stanc]

That's a good test to do, I think! Have you done it with 855?

Yes. 15-20 years ago I did it with 5.56 M855 and 7.62 M80.

M855 penetrated the front, but only cratered slightly the back. M80 punched clear through one block, and through the front of another block behind the first.

[bwaites]

Good test.