+- 6.5 Grendel Forum (https://65grendel.com)
+-- Forum: 6.5 GRENDEL DISCUSSION FORUMS (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: 6.5 Grendel Military & Law Enforcement (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG (/showthread.php?tid=16175)
Pages:
1
2
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - n9nwo - 05-08-2018
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/05/08/armys-next-squad-weapon-will-fire-a-never-before-seen-ammo-combination/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Socialflow
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - Tex Nomex - 05-08-2018
What?
The 6.8 again?
What year is this?
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - n9nwo - 05-08-2018
Tex Nomex Wrote:What?
The 6.8 again?
What year is this?
But it is not the 6.8 SPC. The 6.5 is more idea which we know.
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - 41bear - 05-08-2018
At the end of the article it states that the snipers will get a new 6.5 caliber barrel to replace what they now have. It appears to me that today's reporters have little or no interest in quality writing, it's all about what sales.
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - BluntForceTrauma - 05-08-2018
Typo?
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - Tex Nomex - 05-08-2018
Probably not a typo, it's for the NGSAR, which as far as I know has no real specs, yet. A short wishlist was included in a color graphic in the Training Manual.
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - BluntForceTrauma - 05-08-2018
TN, thanks for the link. I quote: “The concept for NGSAR is based on the requirement to engage and defeat modern body armor in a close fight out to 1200 meters.”
This effectively rules out the 6.8 SPC as we know it.
Unless we're dealing with complete and total incompetence. A distinct possibility, I suppose.
Bill Alexander witnessed firsthand the corrupted procurement process when the Tri-Service Working Group (TSWG) instructed him to submit an inferior 6.5 Grendel bullet since any Grendel offering was moot at that point, because they'd already decided 6.8 SPC was going to win the competition.
At any rate, any caliber is fine, as long as the bullets themselves have the proper high BC shape.
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - NugginFutz - 05-08-2018
From further into the article.
Quote:[FONT="]Lt. Col. Loyd Beal III, product manager for the Army’s crew served weapons program, said the requirements to lighten the load will mean not just a new projectile for increased lethality, but a new case to carry that bullet.[/FONT]
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - Popeye212 - 05-08-2018
I would be willing to bet it will be 6.8 SPC since Remington is involved in the testing and already producing the round. Not to mention they need money A mistake sure it is but so was not putting guns on an F4
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - Tex Nomex - 05-09-2018
Popeye212 Wrote:I would be willing to bet it will be 6.8 SPC since Remington is involved in the testing and already producing the round. Not to mention they need money A mistake sure it is but so was not putting guns on an F4
Remington dropped the promotion of the 6.8SPC to push their 30AR.
Like many others, I've divested myself of all things 6.8 SPC, except for 12 or so boxes of assorted factory ammo and the LEE carbide dies.
I'm thinking Remington won't be pushing the 6.8 SPC.
I think the 6.8 rumor is based on the (also rumored) existence of an "ultra high velocity" 6.8 Magnum round developed by Dr. James Newill.
Anyone who knows it's more than a rumor, please chime in...
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - stanc - 05-10-2018
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/12/08/us-armys-ngsar-chambered-6-5-6-8mm-magnum-round/
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - LRRPF52 - 05-10-2018
.277 diameter to defeat modern body armor at 1200m?
![[Image: 7110057.jpg]](https://ci.memecdn.com/7110057.jpg)
Gonna need more case capacity than a .270 Winchester for that one. Maybe a 6.8x107mm necked down .50 BMG case would do the trick.
This NGSAR is starting to sound like an even more monstrous abortion than the ICSR. It's like I told my wife after having her watch Idiocracy, then switching over to the news. The movie never ended...we're living it every day.
![[Image: detroit-present-day.jpeg?format=1500w]](https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56eddde762cd9413e151ac92/570cb87b5bd33022b93a0272/570cc0d95bd33022b93b838f/1490712585197/detroit-present-day.jpeg?format=1500w)
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - Tex Nomex - 05-10-2018
I've heard the 6.8 MAGNUM is manufactured by Brawndo. It's got what Operators crave...
[ATTACH=CONFIG]11836[/ATTACH]
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - Popeye212 - 05-10-2018
You still can't match BC's with a 6.5 best I can get with my .270 150gr is .483 in Sierra 123gr 6.5 is .510. That said I found a Hornady load and tried it that pushed it to 3000fps. But wouldn't group under 4". Berger has a 170gr with a G1 of .706 but your gonna have to put some horsepower behind and sacrifice weight and the rounds you can carry and you will notice it when you touch it off.
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - Double Naught Spy - 05-11-2018
You can match the BC, even beat it, but that will depend on how long you want the chamber to be.
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - stanc - 05-12-2018
See page 15: https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2018/science/Singleton.pdf
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - Popeye212 - 05-12-2018
Double Naught Spy Wrote:You can match the BC, even beat it, but that will depend on how long you want the chamber to be.
That was my point which makes the round larger to handle the larger powder charge defeating the intended purpose. Which is what I meant when I said it will need more horsepower. 6.5 will always have a higher sectional density with equal bullet weight. Which will give better penetration with similar bullet types.
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - stanc - 05-12-2018
Popeye212 Wrote:That was my point which makes the round larger to handle the larger powder charge defeating the intended purpose. Which is what I meant when I said it will need more horsepower. 6.5 will always have a higher sectional density with equal bullet weight. Which will give better penetration with similar bullet types.As I understand it, the round doesn't have to be larger to get the same (or better) performance with 6.8mm.
To have the same sectional density and BC, a 6.8 bullet needs to be only slightly heavier (~135gr vs 120gr).
The larger "piston area" of the 6.8 bullet allows it to be pushed to a higher MV, vital for body armor defeat.
The greater weight of the 6.8 projectile enables it to have higher retained energy at long range, also critical.
For the intended goal, 6.8mm is definitely the better caliber.
Whether the goal is realistically achievable is another matter.
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - Popeye212 - 05-12-2018
Negative, with the same bullet weight .277 cannot equal .264. Going heavier to achieve the same BC as a .264 defeats the original intended purpose and therefore give the 6.5 the edge and in downrange retained velocity. Penetration defeats body armour, Piston area ??? That can also be offset with choice of propellant. Incidentally I have both the .270 and the 6.5.
Army Times article on new cartridge for SAW and LMG - stanc - 05-13-2018
Popeye212 Wrote:Negative, with the same bullet weight .277 cannot equal .264.:confused: I didn't say it could.
Popeye212 Wrote:Going heavier to achieve the same BC as a .264 defeats the original intended purpose...Clearly the developers think .277 is better for the intended purpose.
Popeye212 Wrote:Incidentally I have both the .270 and the 6.5.Good for you.