The Accurate Reloading Forums
What do we know about the U.S. military's new 6.8 round?

This topic can be found at:
http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/132105729/m/9971094352

12 August 2019, 20:47
GAHUNTER
What do we know about the U.S. military's new 6.8 round?
I've heard that it's polymar cased, light and packs a wallop on the receiving end.

What else do we know?
13 August 2019, 22:03
Grizzly Adams1
That's what they claimed about the 5.56 when it first came out. Bullet was supposed to tumble on impact and cause massive tissue damage. Big Grin

Grizz


When the horse has been eliminated, human life may be extended an average of five or more years.
James R. Doolitle

I think they've been misunderstood. Timothy Tredwell
04 September 2019, 06:52
Clan_Colla
https://www.freerepublic.com/f...f-chat/3776258/posts
06 September 2019, 09:30
NormanConquest
It sounds like all around that will have good performance capabilities. I have always been a fan of the 6.5 bullets although for years that metric never caught on in this country. The only objection that I can see is the age-old one of giving the troops too many various calibers. I need not elaborate.


Never mistake motion for action.
06 September 2019, 12:26
hogfarmer
quote:
Originally posted by NormanConquest:
It sounds like all around that will have good performance capabilities. I have always been a fan of the 6.5 bullets although for years that metric never caught on in this country. The only objection that I can see is the age-old one of giving the troops too many various calibers. I need not elaborate.

The 6.8 is a .270, not a .264, just for clarification purposes.


When a politician uses the words "common sense ", you'd better keep one hand on your wallet and the other on your firearms.
06 September 2019, 21:58
dpcd
We know that all that is still in the experimental stage, and likely will not come to fruition. Many careless cartridges have been developed; where are they now? My prediction; we will have particle beam weapons before we have a caseless cartridge.
OTOH, we have one for the M256 tank cannon.......
07 September 2019, 01:38
vzerone
quote:
Originally posted by hogfarmer:
quote:
Originally posted by NormanConquest:
It sounds like all around that will have good performance capabilities. I have always been a fan of the 6.5 bullets although for years that metric never caught on in this country. The only objection that I can see is the age-old one of giving the troops too many various calibers. I need not elaborate.

The 6.8 is a .270, not a .264, just for clarification purposes.


What would be better then the 6.8 would be a 6.5 on a 6.8 case!!! Some form of 6.5 cartridge has been used at one time or another by major militaries around the world. They were of course on more full size cartridges that wouldn't fit the M16 platform.
07 September 2019, 08:39
hogfarmer
quote:
Originally posted by vzerone:
quote:
Originally posted by hogfarmer:
quote:
Originally posted by NormanConquest:
It sounds like all around that will have good performance capabilities. I have always been a fan of the 6.5 bullets although for years that metric never caught on in this country. The only objection that I can see is the age-old one of giving the troops too many various calibers. I need not elaborate.

The 6.8 is a .270, not a .264, just for clarification purposes.


What would be better then the 6.8 would be a 6.5 on a 6.8 case!!! Some form of 6.5 cartridge has been used at one time or another by major militaries around the world. They were of course on more full size cartridges that wouldn't fit the M16 platform.

Not going to get into the quagmire that is the discussion of the merits of various calibers. I have seen incredible vitriol espoused over literally less thickness than that of a human hair.

I own rifles from .22 to .45 caliber and each has its own strengths and weakness. Everything is a compromise.


When a politician uses the words "common sense ", you'd better keep one hand on your wallet and the other on your firearms.
07 September 2019, 09:11
NormanConquest
It might be just another round-robin affair. After years of "improvments," the troops in the know have gone back to the 1911 platform for the sidearm of choice + performance.


Never mistake motion for action.
07 September 2019, 19:24
dpcd
Not sure how a regular soldier armed with a 9mm would be able to get ahold of a .45. Privately owned weapons are not allowed on deployment. Special troops can get anything they think they need.
Actually the Army has stayed with the 9mm and is now buying and fielding the Sig Sauer M17.
I have one, and it handles and shoots very well. Even though it is plastic, I like it better than the Beretta. And although I carried M1911s throughout my career, (later Berettas), the 9mm is a better weapon for that use. That is after seeing many hundreds of soldiers qualify with both weapons. They hit better with the 9mm, and a hit with that is worth 100 misses with a .45. Most soldiers do not have the time to learn how to shoot a pistol like AR members do.
10 September 2019, 11:56
NormanConquest
As the old adage says "Practice Makes Perfect". But as we all know that the police just like the military is not providing funds for extracurricular training knowledge of their carry pieces. Mores the pity for all. You are right of course that a 9mm is easier to shoot than a 45ACP. especially women troops (not sexism; reality). True it seems that the 1911 platform is deemed for Spec. Ops. That in itself should say something. I have a range on my property + thus as human nature doles out, I never shoot as much as I should/could. But I am still a student of the Col. in my appreciation of the 45 ACP round. That being said since I did value his opinion so much; when he expounded on the CZ 75 I took heed. It is a great piece. I have never known it to fail. Although I keep 1911 as a carry piece I keep the CZ in the nightstand. As always, your piece is only as good as you are able to use it.


Never mistake motion for action.
15 September 2019, 23:54
vzerone
Actually from the military's point of view that 6.8 bullet is better because of the 6.5's ability for the bullet to go to sleep so well thus penetrating the enemy's body without much damage whereas the 6.8 not being as stable tumbles in the body.
20 June 2021, 23:36
Matt Norman
We must remember that somewhere there is a Major and a small crew on a two-year assignment to do a lot of testing on this caliber/rifle/pistol (along with a bunch of GS-16+ that load magazines). He really wants to make Colonel so he becomes a champion of his project and will say all manner of good things about his darling. And then there is another Major doing the same thing jockeying for position. And they are all schmoozing with the suppliers/contractors in hopes to get a good job after their military careers end.

Very, very few are going to say ' this sucks '
02 July 2021, 16:30
Bill/Oregon
Wow. I wonder where this platform is in the testing phase almost two years after the announcement.


There is hope, even when your brain tells you there isn’t.
– John Green, author