• If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here

The military looks at longer range cartridges

Hi,

The 338NM runs better from belt than the 338LM because that was its' original design and intention from the beginning when Sloan was developing it...he already had the MG design in mind :)

Some tenders allow the manufacturers to supply what they desire as long as it meets the operational parameters but other tenders do NOT allow manufacturers any leadway..such as the new SOCOM sniper rifle. It MUST be switchbarrel and MUST be .308, 300NM and 338NM....no other cartridges allowed to be submitted.

The Tier 1 units have been running 260s, 6.5CM and some 7mm systems for their sniper rifles for several years now.

The new infantry rifle....well I would say think more on the lines of a 6.5CM Scar :)

Sincerely,
THEIS
 
Litehiker said:
7.62 x 51 does not have the lethality range or flat trajectory of, say the 6.5 USA.
Even the 6.5 Grendel runs down the 7.63 x 51 past 300 yards.

Mudrunner, you are likely correct on the Grendel bolt face difference but they WiLL run with 5.56 magazines. Several articles confirmed this.

Eric B.
Click to expand...
Having one personally for 3 years, I can tell you they will NOT run-down the .308 Win after 300 yards, even giving the bullet the ballistic advantage to the 6.5 Grendel. Trust me, I love (and own) both cartridges, but in some cases, there just really is no replacement for displacement. The added velocity of the .308 Win will still hold the advantage, even despite the bullet's significantly lower BC.

6.5 Grendel.png
308 Win.png


As for the magazine debacle... I don't care what the internet says, the 6.5 Grendel will NOT work properly with 5.56 30-round mags, and will only work with straight-body 5 and 10 round mags with a specific 6.5 Grendel spring & follower, or special 6.5 Grendel higher-capacity mags above 10 rounds. The reason is, the fatter case diameter (significantly larger than the 5.56 case diameter), and the case taper of the 6.5 Grendel are not the same as the 5.56, and once you get more than about 5-6 rounds in a 5.56 30-rounder (with the 5.56 spring & follower), the sides start bulging out and they won't feed. I've personally tried this. It doesn't work other than with less than 10 rounds in there, so that means the 30-round magazine is rendered useless. Might as well just buy some proper 6.5 Grendel mags.
 
Last edited:
As far as the grendel, I have tried several different mags - usgi magpul and lancers, and none of the 556 standard mags will work with the grendel. My 762x39 mags fare better, but normally I just stick with the grendel marked mags.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why the military hasn't looked hard at the 6.8 SPC for close quarter combat and general combat use. It is far superior to the 223
and has a much greater general combat range. It outperforms the 762x39 and almost doubles the energy of the 223. It needs a different bolt face but can use the 223 mags. A 20 round 223 mag will hold 10 6.8 cases .

Just saying that the round has proven to be a powerhouse in a small package. Requirement are a different thing and there are many good
cartridges that could be used for that purpose. The 50 cal still stands alone for larger targets.

As I see it, we need a close combat cartridge, a general combat cartridge with an effective range of 6 to 800 yards, and a long range sniper cartridge. how these choices are made are sometimes baffling. example: We have gone from a 30/06 to a 223, and from a 45 cal pistol to a 9mm with the excuse of more capacity.

We need to stop comparing our rifles and cartridges to everyone else in the world and give our servicemen the best for the job so he is not under gunned.

Kill ratios for rounds fired was much better during WW2 compared to Vietnam. We should be decreasing this ratio instead of increasing the number of rounds per kill with all of the improvements that are available today.

J E CUSTOM
 
J E Custom said:
I don't understand why the military hasn't looked hard at the 6.8 SPC for close quarter combat and general combat use. It is far superior to the 223
and has a much greater general combat range. It outperforms the 762x39 and almost doubles the energy of the 223. It needs a different bolt face but can use the 223 mags. A 20 round 223 mag will hold 10 6.8 cases .

Just saying that the round has proven to be a powerhouse in a small package. Requirement are a different thing and there are many good
cartridges that could be used for that purpose. The 50 cal still stands alone for larger targets.

As I see it, we need a close combat cartridge, a general combat cartridge with an effective range of 6 to 800 yards, and a long range sniper cartridge. how these choices are made are sometimes baffling. example: We have gone from a 30/06 to a 223, and from a 45 cal pistol to a 9mm with the excuse of more capacity.

We need to stop comparing our rifles and cartridges to everyone else in the world and give our servicemen the best for the job so he is not under gunned.

Kill ratios for rounds fired was much better during WW2 compared to Vietnam. We should be decreasing this ratio instead of increasing the number of rounds per kill with all of the improvements that are available today.

J E CUSTOM
Click to expand...

Again, I am no expert but the Performance Work Statement (PWS, or similar is the driver) in the solicitation process probably did not state "shall be a 6.8 SPC". Also, unless anybody here was involved, we do not know if there was 6.8 SPC submission. Perhaps there was a submission and just never made it through.

Sometimes, successful bidders win contracts based on existing cartridges. For instance, the USMC just finalize the contract and ordered 15K M27 IAR from H&K ...

>>> https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/u-...-s-marines-order-15000-m27-iars-heckler-koch/
 
Last edited:
FEENIX said:
Again, I am no expert but the Performance Work Statement (PWS, or similar is the driver) in the solicitation process probably did not state "shall be a 6.8 SPC". Also, unless anybody here was involved, we do not know if there was 6.8 SPC submission. Perhaps there was a submission and just never made it through.

Sometimes, successful bidders win contracts based on existing cartridges. For instance, the USMC just finalize the contract and ordered 15K M27 IAR from H&K ...

>>> https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/u-...-s-marines-order-15000-m27-iars-heckler-koch/
Click to expand...

Thanks .
I hear you . I just wish the whole process made more sense and the services had more input into what and why.

I'm not pushing one particular cartridge, but would like to see our money go to an American company, and with an American cartridge.

We have the means, the technology, and experts to do just that. there should be no politics involved in my opinion, Poor decisions can cost the lives of our servicemen. I was trained on the M1 Garand, and can vouch for what it could do in the right hands. It was the right weapon in its time and the cartridge was as good as there was.

Training was the most important thing and the rifle became part of the soldier and he depended on it. With proper training being the most important part.

J E CUSTOM
 
Hi,

Fenix....that is just it :).....there are no official tenders, PWS, solicitations, etc on this "new infantry rifle" project yet. At this point it is still all round table conversations. ****..the last meeting I know if it was not even sure what branches T&E center would be running the future tender.

FBO.gov (last time I checked) has not even put out the RFI publicly yet. The "information" being passed around in this article and that article are just snippets of what was sent direct to hand picked manufacturers being asked to supply their information and comments.

Sincerely,
THEIS
 
THEIS said:
Hi,

Fenix....that is just it :).....there are no official tenders, PWS, solicitations, etc on this "new infantry rifle" project yet. At this point it is still all round table conversations. ****..the last meeting I know if it was not even sure what branches T&E center would be running the future tender.

FBO.gov (last time I checked) has not even put out the RFI publicly yet. The "information" being passed around in this article and that article are just snippets of what was sent direct to hand picked manufacturers being asked to supply their information and comments.

Sincerely,
THEIS
Click to expand...

Interesting! I just got off the phone with my installation contracting/acquisition SME and he said depending on what is being solicited, either a PWS or SOW is required for solicitation, at least at our level. Perhaps there's an exception to the rule at higher levels.
 
Hi,

O there will be PWS and SOW when there becomes a solicitation for sure :)
And it will be amended a dozen times until it rules everyone out except the company they want from the beginning.

Take the integral suppressed uppers that SOCOM was seeking last February...the ONLY one to pass the original PWS was Gemtech..then SOCOM continually amended it until Gemtech was out and another company was in. Then when Gemtech complained SOCOM cancelled the entire solicitation.

When FBO puts out the official RFI we will all have a better understanding of what their intentions and requirements are. And we will really see what their intentions are once the FRQ is put out...will have to see just how different the RFI requirements change from the RFQ requirements.

But as of right now the "new" infantry" weapon is just a whisper in the night.

Sincerely,
Theis
 
Hi,

Just look how many changes the ASR (Advanced Sniper Rifle) has gone through in 6 months lol.

 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

B
longer range 6mm bullet?
Replies
7
Views
3K
bullfrog
B
Ranger Rick
One of the first long range cartridges 😊
2
Replies
25
Views
4K
Lenny Foffa
Lenny Foffa
freebird63
zero at 200 but not shooting the same at longer distances.
Replies
13
Views
3K
freebird63
freebird63
T
Rifle upgrades for longer range
Replies
7
Views
6K
TBuckus
T
MTsmith
Youth Longer Range Hunting Rifle??
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
lancetkenyon
lancetkenyon

Recent Posts

Top