New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers

[stanc]

...after seven years it's become very clear that nobody else is willing and able to do informal testing. It looks like I'm going to have to come out of retirement and do it myself...

Ya know, I was very seriously planning to do that. It always bothered me that I was unable to include some terminal effects and other testing in my 2005 and 2009 Special Weapons articles comparing 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC for military use.

As a result, for the last week or so I've been looking into buying an M4-type carbine, along with 6.5 and 6.8 uppers, with the intention of doing such tests. I got a bit of a reality check when I saw the (estimated) price tag.

Carbine ---- $1000
6.5 upper --- $800
6.8 upper --- $800
ACOG (2) -- $2500
Perma-Gel -- $700

And as if that wasn't bad enough, I don't even like AR-15s! Owned two of them; sold 'em both. So, why the heck am I considering buying another one (plus two uppers!)? :confused:

My two all-time favorite long guns were my M1 carbine and my M1A rifle w/E2 stock.

Maybe one of those is what I should be looking at buying.

[warped]

Stan, do not just buy a whole rifle, save some money and get the Templar MCWS, you can then only buy an extra bbls, bolt, mags and gas blocks for each caliber change

[stanc]

Thanks for that reminder. I had read the MCWS thread, but I guess its applicability didn't soak in. I was still thinking the conventional route of needing a complete upper half for each caliber change.

[LRRPF52]

I have the MGI tool-less Quick-Barrel Change system, so all I need are the barrel/bolt combos, and mags. It also lets me keep all the other variables the same from test-to-test. I already have the 16" Grendel set-up, with plenty of mags and ammunition components. I can help out if you want, or you can send me a 6.8 barrel/bolt combo. Let's PM. Basically, the only costs you would need to cover for the terminal tests would be the 6.8 items, and I could even ship you what you need. I've seen 6.8 barrel/bolt combos from under $300. PM me if you're seriously planning on doing this.

[stanc]

I was very serious about it. Then I remembered my long dislike for AR-15s. That would still remain, even though the $$$ outlay could be slashed with the MGI and MCWS systems.

There's also the $700 for three Perma-Gel blocks. Since that would allow only one shot each of TSX, SMK and FMJ in both calibers, it could (and would) be rightfully criticized as a not statistically valid sample size, and many would object that ordnance gelatin wasn't used.

Plus, who knows when -- or if -- the Wolf 6.5 FMJ ammo will get here. That's the main item of interest to me, personally. There have been gel tests of TSX and SMK loads posted on the web, and one of 6.8 FMJ factory ammo. The only one missing is a factory 6.5 FMJ. (Well, also John's hoped for T3 load, too. )

I deeply and sincerely appreciate your willingness to help, but I think this is one project I need to abort before it goes further.

[LRRPF52]

Maybe we should start an R&D fund. Gel blocks would become a lot less expensive if we absorbed the costs together.

5 members contributing $25 per month = $750 after a 6 month period.

10 members contributing $25 per month = $750 after a 3 month period

I'm down for it. I know of at least 4 people on the forum who I could trust with the professional management of the funds. I would really like to do this anyway for a polymer magazine project for the Grendel. I just saw the Troy Battle mags, and they look like they might be able to be modified to work with the Grendel. We'll see.

Many of us have been interested in the Gel tests, so I'm betting that we could spare the $25 per month to go to that cause. It could also go towards projectiles and supporting equipment, and several of us would volunteer our time anyways to conducting the tests.

[bwaites]

I'd contribute.

[stanc]

Wow...I go away for a few hours, leave the ball on the one-yard line, only to return and find you guys have moved it 50 yards down the field!

When I was remarking about the cost of Perma-Gel blocks, it wasn't meant to solicit donations. I can afford the money, but it's just that after thinking about it, I don't see that it'd contribute any more knowledge than is already available online.

Gel tests of 6.8 SPC factory ammo with FMJ, TSX and SMK bullets can be seen at: http://68forums.com/forums/showthread.ph...nfo-photos

Gel test of 6.5 Grendel factory TSX load is available at: http://www.alexanderarms.com/item/12/162...nition.htm

Or did you have something else in mind?

BTW, what do gel tests have to do with polymer magazines? :confused:

[bwaites]

Wow...I go away for a few hours, leave the ball on the one-yard line, only to return and find you guys have moved it 50 yards down the field!

When I was remarking about the cost of Perma-Gel blocks, it wasn't meant to solicit donations. I can afford the money, but it's just that after thinking about it, I don't see that it'd contribute any more knowledge than is already available online.

Gel tests of 6.8 SPC factory ammo with FMJ, TSX and SMK bullets can be seen at: http://68forums.com/forums/showthread.ph...nfo-photos

Gel test of 6.5 Grendel factory TSX load is available at: http://www.alexanderarms.com/item/12/162...nition.htm

Or did you have something else in mind?

BTW, what do gel tests have to do with polymer magazines? :confused:

I think he just means that if we had an R&D fund and program there are various projects which we might be able to help with.

I think its an outstanding idea, myself. A forum that actually pushes the envelope as a group of like minded individuals.

We have plenty of weapons to do this kind of project without having to buy more SOLELY to complete it. (Though buying more rifles is never a bad thing!)

I'm betting that we can do lots of projects that any one of us couldn't, using the knowledge of those here to help design, develop, and fund the research!

[LRRPF52]

Most people don't know that the Grumman F-14 Tomcat was taken from a concept to flight within 14 months. Imagine all the engineering, coordination, parts sourcing, human resources management, assembly line construction, and integration that had to come together to put that masterpiece (minus the Pratt & Whitney TF30 engines) into the air.

I figure a few like-minded hobbyists with the information-exchange capacity we have could at least pull off a few minor projects related to some simple fire-stick technologies. Most of the sub-components are available already, when you think about springs, pins, and so forth. CNC machining is a well-honed field of manufacture, as is rapid-prototyping. They just take money that the common individual can't spare, but collectively as a team of mad enthusiasts...well, a team of space-age scientists could get a run for their money.

[stanc]

I think he just means that if we had an R&D fund and program there are various projects which we might be able to help with.

I think its an outstanding idea, myself. A forum that actually pushes the envelope as a group of like minded individuals.

I'm betting that we can do lots of projects that any one of us couldn't, using the knowledge of those here to help design, develop, and fund the research!

It is indeed an intriguing idea, but...who would decide what projects get supported by this R&D fund?

[bwaites]

We'd have to figure out a plan, maybe define a board to hear ideas and another board to determine protocols for the experiment, though some members might be on both boards.

It's workable, but would take some evaluation and planning.

[RangerRick]

Gel test of 6.5 Grendel factory TSX load is available at: http://www.alexanderarms.com/item/12/162...nition.htm

That thing tumbled big time. It looks like a boat propeller going through water.

[JASmith]

...They just take money that the common individual can't spare, but collectively as a team of mad enthusiasts...well, a team of space-age scientists could get a run for their money.

Way too true -- especially if there's a couple of them among the mad enthusiasts!

[JASmith]

We'd have to figure out a plan, maybe define a board to hear ideas and another board to determine protocols for the experiment, though some members might be on both boards.

It's workable, but would take some evaluation and planning.

Bill,

You're on the money with the need to have a board!

The downside is that we might even learn why things take so darned long in today's R&D world!

Cheers!

[LRRPF52]

Bill,

You're on the money with the need to have a board!

The downside is that we might even learn why things take so darned long in today's R&D world!

Cheers!

Roger that. Some ideas that come to mind are appointing a trustee, as well as deciding between pure democratic mobority rules, versus a representative arrangement where certain protocols are adhered to and agreed to by contributors. (To ensure that funds are used for their original intent) Maybe it would be a good idea to start with something small and simple as a proof-of-concept, and see how it develops.

I have observed this concept with some of the organizations I deal with a lot, mainly the Active Military Reserve Finnish Sniper's Guilds. They have annual dues for members, and have accumulated quite a significant amount of funding, to the point where they are making major decisions on range complexes that are currently being built with electronically-programmed steel target systems, possible weapons development, equipment procurement, and so forth. During their meetings, they vote on budgetary decisions together, in addition to planning competitions, organizing regular training events, and so forth.

Back in the 1920's and 1930's, the Women volunteers for the Reserve system would sell coffee and Pulla (a delicious Finnish pastry) to raise money for the re-barreling of M91 Mosin Nagants for the Finnish Civil Guard.

In addition to these home-grown financing techniques, they also had a very active Reserve Training System back then, which largely contributed to the David-vs.-Goliath victories against the Red Army when Stalin invaded Finland in the winter of 1939. After about 3 months, the Finns had totally wiped out 10 Soviet Divisions (250,000+ soldiers killed) in what is known as the Talvisota, or Winter War. The point is there is merit to these ideas that have been proven historically. After WWII, The Soviets demanded that this Finnish Reserve System be totally dismantled and banned, as they realized how instrumental it was in their defeat.

With a good After-Action Review system, a little maturity on our parts, and the mad scientists, I think that we could surprise ourselves. Here are some Grendel-specific components that I have seen come up frequently over the past few years:

* Magazines
* Bolts
* Ammunition & components, mainly brass & Grendel-specific bullets

I would propose tackling these areas with the following goals:

Develop a polymer or metal magazine that is optimized for the Grendel in that:

• More COAL can be achieved with said magazine
  
• Geometry of the magazine body is optimized for the Grendel cartridge working within existing AR15 receivers
  
• Quality control is set to meet certain standards to provide consistency, supporting reliability in the AR15 platform
  
• Capacity goal of 30rds for one of the magazine bodies, while keeping the magazine height as close to or at a standard 5.56 mag height
  

I recently noticed that Magpul has been making Smith & Wesson-specific PMAG's for the M&P series of AR15's, which has the M&P logo on the mag body. That required a whole new set of injection-molding plates, which are not cheap. There are several industry experts already making great products, so even if we are able to finance the prototyping and beta-testing, it will make it much easier to hand off production to those with proven expertise when necessary.

I think the magazine issue is important since CProducts is no longer in business, and there are questions about how the residue of that company will continue. Even though I have not had issues with any of my CProducts mags yet, I think we need to have a Grendel community-backed program with this, so there is more vested interest in ensuring that a quality magazine system is brought to market.

Maybe we could simply call it...[SIZE="6"]The Grendel Guild[/SIZE]

[stanc]

That thing tumbled big time. It looks like a boat propeller going through water.

At the risk of nitpicking, the TSX doesn't tumble. It expands, forming four petals.

Your analogy is quite accurate, though. The petals do behave just like a propeller going through water.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQx2eHpDVnE

[stanc]

Roger that. Some ideas that come to mind are appointing a trustee, as well as deciding between pure democratic mobority rules, versus a representative arrangement where certain protocols are adhered to and agreed to by contributors. (To ensure that funds are used for their original intent) Maybe it would be a good idea to start with something small and simple as a proof-of-concept, and see how it develops.

I'd say that's wise. IMO, establishing a vague "R&D fund" that nobody knows what the $$$ will be used for, is unlikely to attract many backers. Note that so far only two members expressed a willingness to donate money.

From what I've see over the years, fundraising works best when there are clear goals. It also helps if the projects are recognized as achieveable, such as the examples of the Finns contributing money to buy new equipment.

With a good After-Action Review system, a little maturity on our parts, and the mad scientists, I think that we could surprise ourselves. Here are some Grendel-specific components that I have seen come up frequently over the past few years:

* Magazines
* Bolts
* Ammunition & components, mainly brass & Grendel-specific bullets

I'm sure every Grendel shooter would like to have better mags, and from more than one source. But, haven't bolts been pretty much fully developed? And there are three makers of ammo and brass, so what R&D effort would be needed in those areas?

I would propose tackling these areas with the following goals:

Develop a polymer or metal magazine that is optimized for the Grendel...

I think the magazine issue is important since CProducts is no longer in business, and there are questions about how the residue of that company will continue. Even though I have not had issues with any of my CProducts mags yet, I think we need to have a Grendel community-backed program with this, so there is more vested interest in ensuring that a quality magazine system is brought to market.

Maybe I'm wrong, but designing and prototyping a new polymer mag seems like it'd be neither a small project, nor a simple one (let alone low-cost). If it were easy, the polymer mag companies would have already done it.

And how would a new metal mag be any different than what currently exists? The limiting factor is the M16 mag well.

Maybe we could simply call it...The Grendel Guild

Cute. And fittingly, somewhat medieval.

[JASmith]

Reference polymer mags and other things needing prototyping: The field of stereolithography has moved forward a lot since I was first exposed to it 15-20 years ago. Parts can be built to effectively the dimensional tolerances I believe are needed for magazine prototyping for $-100-$200 each. Even less if someone has a machine and is willing to contribute labor and overhead.

[LRRPF52]

I think the polymer mag and AR magwell limitations can be dealt with using a mag body that gets wider outside the magwell, while allowing for higher capacity as well. A metal mag with the same approach could be another solution. Either way, it would be nice to have mags with a body that allowed longer COAL.

As far as brass and bullets go, the new Hornady brass seems to be going through some teething issues when it comes to fitting in certain chambers, and there is probably a little room to develop an optimized line of projectiles for the Grendel.

Stereolithography has come a long way, and is basically in the stages of shifting from just prototyping, to actually manufacturing parts using that technology, which will allow a whole new approach to layering of different materials, to take advantage of the benefits of certain compounds and their inherent properties.