Our military adopting the Grendel?

[LRRPF52]

fact is the 6.5 and 6.8 is being used in country for evaluation purposes, the special forces are the very people that came up with the 6.8 spc to replace the 5.56 as it is marginal at best, also it has been tweeked since vietnam we have gone from 55 to 77 gr bullets trying to find something that is a one shot stopper without it being a head shot, this is all because of the complaints from soldiers, one issue is the rounds used are ball and only punches small holes that closes up after passing thru unless it is a close range shot where the velosity is hypersonic to cause the round to fragment, and or give the shock effect on the internal organs, it is a great close quarters weapon, but not a great marksman weapon, the military is looking for both and thats why they are looking at the 6.5 and 6.8, the problem with a change during a war is logistics and politics but if they build it, it will come.

I think it's important to distinguish that basically one guy in 5th Group pushed the development of the 6.8 SPC, with help later from a few guys in AMU, while the majority of guys in that community and another favored, and continue to favor 5.56 NATO. I assisted one of them personally with his 6.8, to a very marginal degree, but well before anyone had heard of the cartridge. The point is that there never was, nor never has been a Special Forces-wide support or impetus for the 6.8, and that connection was thrown around with much exaggeration in the marketing of the 6.8, with a lot of success in the civilian sector.

Running the ballistics side-by-side, with M855 .304 G1 BC against a hypothetical 6.5mm 120gr FMJ with an optimistic .500 BC, at 2600 fps, we see that the Grendel retains all kinds of energy, but doesn't provide that 2600 fps threshold past contact distances for CQB, while the M4 does to 100m, and the M16A2 & SPR keep a 62gr past 2600fps to about 150yds. I suspect we would see a lot of holes punched through people in the distances where 5.56 usually produces hydrostatic blast effects, if a Grendel carbine was used to replace 5.56, with more recoil for less follow-up shot capability where it is crucial: CQB.

However, as an LMG cartridge, it would reduce soldier load significantly if it displaced GPMG's, while increasing the maneuverability and efficiency of not only dismounts, but the entire logistics chain regarding pallets, ammo cans, etc.