FN .264 LICC SHOT Show 2023

[LRRPF52]

[biodsl]

I like it, which is something I never said about the XM5, or XM7, or whatever they're calling it these days.

[LRRPF52]

[BluntForceTrauma]

[Fess]

I can't remember where I read it, but the use of the .473" case instead of Carcano/Grendel was to reduce the COAL of the cartridge to allow a shorter receiver than an AR10. Their testing showed that shooters were very sensitive to receiver length.
I suspect that the piston action had mainly to do with keeping propellant gasses farther away from the shooter's face when using a suppressor. FN makes DI rifles, so it is notable that they developed a piston for this one. All the NGSW submissions were piston designs too, FWIW.

[Jimla]

Wonder how close it is to Grendel, the spec goals was 2650 fps(T) to 2750 fps(O) with a 108gr bullet in 11.5" barrel. Not sure what (T) and (O) mean.

Any one have typical velocity for a 11.5" barrel with 108gr bullet with a Grendel?

[Fess]

I think that the 2650fps is the Threshold (minimum) velocity whereas the 2750fps is the Optimal.

[LRRPF52]

Wonder how close it is to Grendel, the spec goals was 2650 fps(T) to 2750 fps(O) with a 108gr bullet in 11.5" barrel. Not sure what (T) and (O) mean.

Any one have typical velocity for a 11.5" barrel with 108gr bullet with a Grendel?

T = Threshold (Minimum threshold requirement)
O = Objective (What they’re hoping to achieve)

Based on AA’s 108gr Scenar data from a 24”, an 11.5” Grendel with the same load would be doing 2342-2441fps, or 2391fps avg.

So they’re looking for 200-300fps faster than that.

That would be doable with a high-strength steel case Grendel without having to go up to a .473” case.

The 17.6” and 18” Grendels are already doing 2690fps avg with the new 100gr Hornady ELD-VT at ~48,000psi.

[lazyengineer]

One of the more exciting developments I've seen in quite some time. From what I can tell, they went with a more sane 62,000 psi rating, rather than Sig's absurd 80,000 PSI spec which was just asking for (and having) problems. Nobody seems to actually care or know about this gun and round, which is a shame, because to me, this is the one. Dump your .308's - this is the round of the future for that role - and then some.

As much as I like Grendel - this round and platform looks very exciting to me.

[LR1955]

One of the more exciting developments I've seen in quite some time. From what I can tell, they went with a more sane 62,000 psi rating, rather than Sig's absurd 80,000 PSI spec which was just asking for (and having) problems. Nobody seems to actually care or know about this gun and round, which is a shame, because to me, this is the one. Dump your .308's - this is the round of the future for that role - and then some.

As much as I like Grendel - this round and platform looks very exciting to me.

LE:

The .308 has been obsolete for decades for competitive purposes outside of Palma where it is still required. However, for the military it served its purpose.

Take my word for it, the guy shooting the rifle and humping the ammo probably doesn't care too much about the specifics of either outside of how much they weigh and how reliable they are.

LR-55

[JASmith]

LE:

The .308 has been obsolete for decades for competitive purposes outside of Palma where it is still required. However, for the military it served its purpose.

Take my word for it, the guy shooting the rifle and humping the ammo probably doesn't care too much about the specifics of either outside of how much they weigh and how reliable they are.

LR-55

Excellent insight and advice for those of us dreaming about alternative cartridges and systems.

Main remaining questions deal with how far out the average grunt needs to be able to hit and knock down a bad guy wearing projected standard body armor.

[LR1955]

Excellent insight and advice for those of us dreaming about alternative cartridges and systems.

Main remaining questions deal with how far out the average grunt needs to be able to hit and knock down a bad guy wearing projected standard body armor.

JS:

The limiting factor is always how far away can a Rifleman see an enemy. Am sure it will give a huge advantage at very long ranges over the 7.62 NATO cartridge though. Problem will be seeing the enemy.

I still contend that 300 meters is about it from ground level. After that, terrain and vegetation really play a factor.

LR-55

[JASmith]

JS:

The limiting factor is always how far away can a Rifleman see an enemy. Am sure it will give a huge advantage at very long ranges over the 7.62 NATO cartridge though. Problem will be seeing the enemy.

I still contend that 300 meters is about it from ground level. After that, terrain and vegetation really play a factor.

LR-55

One would guess the 300 meters applies to standing and walking personnel. (meaning troops on the offense)

How much closer would the same reasoning set the distance for troops in defensive positions?

[LR1955]

One would guess the 300 meters applies to standing and walking personnel. (meaning troops on the offense)

How much closer would the same reasoning set the distance for troops in defensive positions?

JS:

If in a decent defensive position, they will have a lot of cover and concealment so the attacker would probably have to be very, very, close. Under a hundred meters minimum and thats if the enemy has a poorly made defensive system.

Built up areas are particularly nasty too since the amount of cover and concealment is monumental.

This cartridge will have one advantage over the 5.56 or a Grendel. Its velocity. If the bullet is made well, it will penetrate a lot more.

LR-55

[JASmith]

Thanks for the excellent summary!