Our military adopting the Grendel?

[stanc]

Making multiple statements that the cartridge won't perform until the tests conclusively prove otherwise are excessive, unnecessary, and hurtful.

You are making a blatantly false statement. I have never once (let alone multiple times) said that the cartridge won't perform.

I said that there is no test data to show that 6.5 Grendel is good enough to replace 7.62 NATO for machine guns, or that it will provide a significant improvement in terminal effects or hit probability at long range when fired from 14.5" barrel carbines.

It may be that 6.5 Grendel is capable of all those things. I don't know if it is or isn't. I just think that those who are making such claims should back them up with hard data.

We all want to see test data to explore the questions that you and the rest of us have posed. We don't have the resources to do that testing on the schedule any of us would like to see.

Do you have the wherewithal, either personally or in connection with colleagues to do that testing? If so, please get on with the show and share with us!

If one already has the necessary guns, it costs very little for most of the tests that I've proposed. Shoot, I used to do such tests, many times. If my personal situation was still as it was 15 years ago, I'd have already done the testing.

But, I no longer have the requisite rifles, and even if I had them, it wouldn't matter. I'm now blind in my shooting eye, and suffer hand tremors so severe I can't hold a rifle steady enough to hit the proverbial barn door. In addition, I've lost over 90% of my muscle strength due to MS, so lifting anything heavier than 5 lbs is extremely taxing.

In the meantime, the rest of us are obliged to exercise some patience.

Uh huh. I started urging tests almost seven years ago. At this rate I'll be dead before tests get done. Then I'll be patient...