Our military adopting the Grendel?

[JASmith]

Perhaps you misunderstood. I didn't say the Grendel case couldn't take bolt-gun pressures. I said the higher pressures would likely have an adverse impact on weapon durability...

I think you misread LR's post. He is not suggesting an AR-15 bolt, but a larger, stronger one designed to handle the pressures.

Yeah? Prove it.

This comment was about the ability to design and manufacture links. We've had this discussion many times. The quoted comment is another instance of trying to make the world think it cannot be done. Please don't hide behind the skirts of "I didn't say it can't be done -- all I said is that it needs to be done." -- The implication and tone of your words tell us you believe it cannot be done.

[stanc]

For testing Cloth could be used instead of metal links ...

For testing, it may be possible to use RPD belts.

http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthread.php?984-Grendel-LMG&p=9998&viewfull=1#post9998

That's what Cris Murray uses to feed the MG42 he converted to 7x46 UIAC. (Another cartridge designed specifically for LMG use, to lighten the 7.62 machine gunner's load.)

But, for use by the US Armed Forces, a disintegrating link would have to be developed, and although Grendel fans hate hearing it, there is no proof that a viable link can actually be designed.

[stanc]

I think you misread LR's post. He is not suggesting an AR-15 bolt, but a larger, stronger one designed to handle the pressures.

No, I read and understood that he was talking about a beefed-up LMG bolt. What I'm saying is that, even in a sturdier weapon, higher pressures are bound to adversely impact durability.

This comment was about the ability to design and manufacture links. We've had this discussion many times. The quoted comment is another instance of trying to make the world think it cannot be done.

No, it isn't. I'm not trying to make the world think anything. That's just your faulty reading comprehension and/or irrational thought processes.

All I seek to do is get people to back up their claims with hard data, instead of unsubstantiated beliefs and wishful thinking.

[sgt_murf]

heck a .30 cal MG could be used for ammo testing and belt development phase barrel is removable so no issue there on rechambering and I'm sure we will not exceed 06 pressures, then to lighten the Pig and go bull pup
Or steal from the RPD basis - redesign- refine- test it in Basic Training by tell Privates to break it, send it to Joe in Stan test it further.

Heck to this day My Dad talks about a developmental 12ga machine gun used to repel attackers at the perimeter, worked great he said, only problem it worked so well that crews would not leave it when being stormed with human wave attack. Mutt might know something about this or comment

[pinzgauer]

That also brings up the point I have made about key leaders and the weapons they carry, since Lieutenants don't engage the enemy at distance. They carry M4's as a last resort PDW for the close-in fight in a worst-case scenario of being overrun.

I hope that's the case. Probably the biggest risk to LT's appears to be IED's, but that's probably true for all. But LT's are certainly being lost in shooting actions. Even USMA grads, we see the names.

In my son's case, he will at least have the capability to shoot if needed. On an off-topic brag on my kid having nothing to do with the subject- he ended up in a three way tie for the best shot in their BEAST (basic) class of 1250 with M4's on both the fixed and popup range. And won the "forrest gump" award for fastest field strip & reassembly of an M4 against other companies. :-) Which made me smile, as encouraging him to build an M4gery during high school and providing lots of ammo had to contribute to that.

Again, apologies for the kid brag, but not many other audiences would appreciate it!

[JASmith]

No, I read and understood that he was talking about a beefed-up LMG bolt. What I'm saying is that, even in a sturdier weapon, higher pressures are bound to adversely impact durability.

Prove it! Otherwise you too are guilty of pushing unsubstantiated beliefs and wishful thinking

[sgt_murf]

Unfortunately, that's a "no go" for the US military. They don't want to use non-disintegrating lniks.

True but Like I stated model
and the reason we went away from cloth and non-disintegrating is to deny the enemy a resource and ability to use our weapons against use. One they already have--- belt's for RPD's that would fit a x39 case anyways

Mama always said "can't never could do nothing"

[sgt_murf]

In my son's case, he will at least have the capability to shoot if needed. On an off-topic brag on my kid having nothing to do with the subject- he ended up in a three way tie for the best shot in their BEAST (basic) class of 1250 with M4's on both the fixed and popup range. And won the "forrest gump" award for fastest field strip & reassembly of an M4 against other companies. :-) Which made me smile, as encouraging him to build an M4gery during high school and providing lots of ammo had to contribute to that.

Again, apologies for the kid brag, but not many other audiences would appreciate it!

Never aplogize for bragging on yer Kids, Sir I am happy to hear the news and report on things like that-- outstanding is my response

[JASmith]

...Again, apologies for the kid brag, but not many other audiences would appreciate it!

None needed -- we enjoy success stories!

Mine learned early the value of good NCO's -- a lesson many fail to learn and heed.

[bwaites]

stanc and JASmith,

Please quit antagonizing each other. Constructive comments are appreciated, but you are beginning to push the envelope past acceptable discourse.

This is a good thread, with plenty of good dialogue from various "been there, done that" guys, differences of opinion are inevitable, and so long as the conversation remains appropriate and mature in nature, those differences of opinion are worthwhile in the discussion. Both of you, however, have made comments that are neither helpful or contributory.

Please correct that in the future.

Thank you!

[pinzgauer]

(Do they really have a "Forrest Gump" award??? )

Not officially, but they do jokingly call the winner that. Not to imply his M4 experience has been spotless, he lost his firing pin cotter for 25 minutes once, delaying the squad. They did PT while he searched for it. Found it between his belt and trousers.

Mine learned early the value of good NCO's -- a lesson many fail to learn and heed.

USMA understands that point and has restructured to reenforce that. Clearly off topic, but freshmen are privates, sophomores (yuks) are corporals, Juniors are SGT's, and seniors compose the officers.

The corporals function as team leaders, 1:1 mentors. SGTs essentially run the platoons & company (PLT SGT & 1st SGT, etc). HR, training, details, problem children, they own it. Officers command the companies, brigades, and regiments.

All are responsible and graded on how their unit responsibility and individuals perform, under the guidance of a Regular Army CPT or MAJ "TAC" and SFC "TAC NCO" per company. The TAC and TAC NCO are focused on making sure the cadet NCO's and officers learn from their mistakes, rarely stepping in up front unless it's a safety issue.

It's not perfect, nor exactly the real world, but cadets do learn the roles and responsibilities of NCO's by performing as one in the garrison and field. And leadership, they have to live it. Lead badly, perform badly, get ranked badly.

The post '98 USMA method does not replace exposure to real NCO's in command. That they get through summer assignments, including one which they will act as fresh LT over a real unit under supervision of a senior NCO. They do leave with a healthy appreciation of respect for NCO's, their experience, and also their roles.

OK, we are far afield from Grendels. M4's & M14's are all they see! (well along with 203's, AT-4's, SAW's, M-240's as well)

[JASmith]

Pinz,

Thanks for the summary of training at USMA -- it isn't as far afield as it may seem. The background on where folks come from and where they might go makes a huge difference in assessing the validity of comments that are necessarily based on judgement rather than analysis or experiment.

A person with tons of experience won't necessarily have it right, but he or she is a lot more likely to understand the issues than those of us who haven't walked in those shoes.

[LRRPF52]

Perhaps you misunderstood. I didn't say the Grendel case couldn't take bolt-gun pressures. I said the higher pressures would likely have an adverse impact on weapon durability.

What pressure is your friend's bolt-gun load? 65,000 psi? Higher? How do you figure that's less pressure?

You were talking about loading the 6.5 Grendel LMG round longer than 5.56 mag length, so how do you figure it'd be any better in regard to OAL than the SPC case?

No further case development is necessary for 6.8 SPC, either.

Yeah? Prove it.

Yes we do need to play with the 6.8 SPC case because it isn't chambered in 6.5mm. Will it seat longer bullets well? Will it deal with pressures in a predictable manner? What powders will be best pushing 6.5 out of the SPC case? etc. etc. We also don't need to load the Grendel longer for LMG's, but if we tried longer pills in the 144gr weight, such as the Lapua FMJ, we might, but the Grendel has 4mm less case length than the SPC already, and I doubt we would need half of that for COAL.

The shorter Grendel case allows more compactness in receiver design, although it is probably negligible. For a belt-fed, you want a case with strong extractor rims that are thick, and a large space between the body and extractor rim edge, where the extractor grabs the case. Every mm of bolt throw will matter in the constant-recoil design, since we don't want impacting operating parts banging into the rear of the receiver, even with a buffer like the M60, M249, and M240. This requirement leans again in favor of the Grendel, although I do openly admit that it may not be that big of an issue with cases in the 39mm-45mm class.

[stanc]

Yes we do need to play with the 6.8 SPC case because it isn't chambered in 6.5mm. Will it seat longer bullets well? Will it deal with pressures in a predictable manner? What powders will be best pushing 6.5 out of the SPC case? etc. etc. We also don't need to load the Grendel longer for LMG's...

The shorter Grendel case allows more compactness in receiver design, although it is probably negligible.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I meant use 6.8 SPC, not 6.5 SPC.

As for loading long bullets, the guys over at 68forums have been doing that with 6.8 SPC for awhile, as has HPI with the 6.5 and 6.35 HPI-SPC.

Regarding the use of the 6.8/6.5/6.35 SPC loaded to longer than 5.56 mag length, I was going by what you wrote in the Grendel LMG thread:

http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthread.php?984-Grendel-LMG&p=14506&viewfull=1#post14506

If you are dropping the idea of loading long, and returning to the 2.25" OAL, then certainly 6.5 Grendel is the better choice.

[stanc]

Back on the subject of carbines, the video below shows what seems typical of how the M4 is actually used in Afghanistan: shooting "bursts" of 4-8 rounds in rapid, semi-auto fire. What impact, if any, would be likely if the weapons were chambered in 6.5 Grendel?