Grendel as a Universal Infantry Cartridge

[stanc]

One might get the impression that the continuing repetition of this and the machine gun links assertions are arguments for abandoning interest in the Grendel.

Not at all. They are arguments for getting facts that support the claims of Grendel proponents.

We know that the Grendel will not equal the 7.62X51 NATO in all areas. We need only to equal the performance in some categories as a trade in favor of lighter cartridges and weapons.

Perhaps so. However, where is the proof that 6.5 Grendel can equal 7.62 NATO Ball performance in any area?

As far as machine gun links are concerned, we've had comments from folks with real experience in mechanical design indicating that the design challenge is solvable.

The trouble is, that is only their opinion. While it is to be respected, an opinion -- however educated it may be -- does not carry the same weight as proven fact.

Put these worries into the list of things to check when resources are available.

Those are the two most critical items relevant to 6.5 Grendel's potential for use as a military cartridge, particularly in regard to LRRP's idea of replacing 7.62x51/7.62x54R in machine guns, and you want to ignore them??? It seems to me they should be at the top of the list. All else is of secondary importance.