I've heard that it's polymar cased, light and packs a wallop on the receiving end.

What else do we know?

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.

Grizz

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.

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.

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.......

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 '

Wow. I wonder where this platform is in the testing phase almost two years after the announcement.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Wow. I wonder where this platform is in the testing phase almost two years after the announcement.

Hasn't the military let a multi-million dollar contract for new 5.56 weapons in that period.

Don't think the 6.8 is going any place.

quote:

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

Comes down to the 90-7-3 equation. 90 percent of all gun owners users do very little with their firearms.

7 percent care a bit more and practice some what on a regular basics.

3 percent are the gun guys and special troops. They live breath their firearms. Shoot unbelievable amounts of ammo according to the 97 percent.

Point my cousin wanted a "bear defensive Pistol"

He brought a 629 along with it he received two factory 50 round boxes of ammo.

His first statement was now I have enough ammo for the rest of my life. I should have asked him if he was planning on dying in the next hour.

Just have to shoot a few round to make sure it works.

He is a piss poor pistol, rifle, shotgun shot and thinks spending money on practice is a waste of money.

90 percent of firearm owners/users think the same way.

Sad but true.

P dog shooter is correct. Most gun owners and shooters shoot little to none, practice seldom and believe that they will perform well if they need to shoot. Even many who depend on a firearm professionally practice only when demanded by policy. I could never understand this and never will. If you want to be proficient shoot often and train with your firearm. Slim your collection down if needed and spend the cash on ammo for what you use most. The more you shoot the better you will be and you will enjoy it even more.

The properties of a good military rifle cartridge must be a moving target.... Remember when the 30-06 could be improved on...... so here came the 308....
But that wasnt the best, so here comes the 5.56 [223]..... smaller bullets work better, etc etc.

Now we have to have a military cartridge with larger bullets....

All of this is for the benefit of the firearm/munition companies. They would like us to finance the invention of a slightly larger wheel.

ANother example: the insistence that we send people to Mars. This is for the benefit of the aero space companies. We can [and have] send robots much more cheaply.

.250 Savage (6.35 x 50 mm). 3,000 fps with a 100 grain bullet. Look no further. Its been there the whole time. Bridges the gap between the 5.56 and the 7.62 (Mama Bear). Low recoil, controllable, hard hitting, deep penetration.

What ever happen to the 6.8 SPC?
I think they like slimmer case to maximize magazine capacity.

A selection are going to be made January-June 2022 the winner are going to deliver 145000 weapons, about enough for 25% of US forces. It looks like Textron are out of the competition.

The game changer might be the "fire control unit"/sight system.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com...extron-ngsw-program/

Once 6.8 rifle is chosen. Expect the retail market to really pickup with 6.8. It actually makes a good hunting round.

https://thebiggamehuntingblog....-spc-vs-6-5-grendel/


https://www.bellmtcs.com/blog/...sig-fury-comparrison


Once the us military blesses the round it will be everywhere.

I can easily see US retail buying 1/2 mil guns in 1-2 years.

Already plenty of good 6.8 spc guns out there

https://www.americanfirearms.o...-spc-complete-guide/

What is need the magazine to be standardized.

https://www.snipercountry.com/68-spc-magazines/


The new 6.8 will be adopted into the ar platforms by consumers is my guess.

Mike

From what I understand, the new 6.8 is supposed to operate at substantially higher pressure and utilize a binary (steel-polymer) case.

The military has wanted to get away from civilian use of service weapons for a long time.

The ammo will be limited in its availability and expensive. It won’t be reloadable.

If it’s a 70kpsi round, how good a service life will it have?

Then we have the military trying to go to nonlead ammo. How well do you think a copper projectile (light) is going to retain velocity at range?

I think the institutional army wants this badly. Careers need it, and it furthers political objectives.

They will put a lot in it, and find out is not really a improvement and be another replacement project.

Another example of planning to fight the last war…

"From what I understand, the new 6.8 is supposed to operate at substantially higher pressure and utilize a binary (steel-polymer) case."

Its either a steel/polymer or a steel/brass case.

"If it’s a 70kpsi round, how good a service life will it have?Then we have the military trying to go to nonlead ammo."

Dont need what pressure in training ammo. The projectile are already developed from the start.

"They will put a lot in it, and find out is not really a improvement and be another replacement project.Another example of planning to fight the last war…"

The big thing is the sight system and 5,56 are not the right cartridge for what, still light, short, more rounds per volume, 5,56 are staying around for a long time.

I expect sig will win it. Uncle may choose an ammo different than what sig proposes. I just don’t see the us military using a bull pup rifle.

Sig will sell in the commercial markets. The rifle if not the ammo.

There is some very good 5.56 ammo that military has access too that civilians can’t buy. Same for 300 blackout.

There are some damn good 5.56 based guns out there and parts that one can put together a grade guns. I have had built some left handed uppers that are as good as most military stuff. There is a massive consumer base than needs a new toy.

The 6.8 will be adopted into that world. If not the same military ammo then civilian ammo in 6.8 that the military chooses.

Mike

If the military think the velocity they already specified are important its easyer to do with a bullpup without having a crazy high pressure.

quote:

Originally posted by Nordic2:
If the military think the velocity they already specified are important its easyer to do with a bullpup without having a crazy high pressure.

I seriously doubt the us military will go to a bull pup - no one uses a bull pup in the us military. No one has adopted a new bull pup other that the Israelis. All other bull pup users reverting away from it.

It’s a fundamentally flawed design that cannot be shot off both shoulders and sucks around corners.

But I am willing to be surprised.

Mike

It's all about the money. One of the stupidest moves I think is adopting new uniforms and spending dollars that could have been used for repair and maintenance. 250 Savage would be a great round but "not invented here" probably killed that idea. It appears to me that we have a generation of general officers that have no backbone and no common sense who will do anything to get promoted. I am appalled at some of the things they say in public and at some of their decisions,

Around 2005 I built a few AR's in 6.8SPC and after reaming to the SPCII chamber have been rather happy with the round. I'd say almost all here has experienced the magic of a 270. Something about that 270 diameter just works on deer sized game and hogs as well. Accurate as well. My first 2 builds on the AR platform used KoTonics barrels in 18" and 20". Both are under MOA with a few different bullets. You kinda have to reload for the 6.8SPC to fully take advantage of the multiple bullets out there and to ensure you are getting the velocity you should. SSA brass lasts a while.

I did learn that I did not need to go 18 and 20" barrel length. THis little guy does great out of a shorter barrel. I like the cartridge enough I had a bolt action built off a Stiller action, Hart barrel, and McMillian hunter stock.

https://nationalinterest.org/b...army-contract-198113

Uncle Sam already has separated ammo from the gun.

Check out a geissele super duty ar and you will see how damn good a military use ar today is. Mine shoots .5-.6 moa with 223 match ammo.

Whatever gun Uncle Sam gets with have to be better than the geissele.

The next level fire control system.

https://www.popularmechanics.c...y-rifle-smash-scope/

Mike

Mike, they haven’t done anything yet with the ammo.

That lake city would be a place making the ammo (since it’s small arms) makes sense, but until they decide exactly what it is, it’s going to be up in the air.

As to accurate AR’s I have a Baer .308 that Les could shoot in the .20’s consistently. It’s a .5-.7 MOA gun for me. I’m not that good.

The rifle is capable of more than the shooter more often than not.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Mike, they haven’t done anything yet with the ammo.

That lake city would be a place making the ammo (since it’s small arms) makes sense, but until they decide exactly what it is, it’s going to be up in the air.

As to accurate AR’s I have a Baer .308 that Les could shoot in the .20’s consistently. It’s a .5-.7 MOA gun for me. I’m not that good.

The rifle is capable of more than the shooter more often than not.

My gut is Uncle Sam will pick a 6.8 ammo separate from the submissions.

The caseless stuff was not going to work. Someone who works in ammo industry and is a former us special forces guy told me that a year ago. He used to work for a clasel3ss ammo start up. Said caseless just does not work.

I can see uncle Sam picking the sig but choosing another ammo. Definitely gearing up to start producing 6.8 ammo.

Mike

Vortex gets the firecontrol unit contract.

https://www.defensenews.com/ne...ration-squad-weapon/

https://www.sigsauer.com/mcx-spear.html

Mike

6,8TV ammo goes commercial.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com...ilable-commercially/

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by Nordic2:
If the military think the velocity they already specified are important its easyer to do with a bullpup without having a crazy high pressure.

I seriously doubt the us military will go to a bull pup - no one uses a bull pup in the us military. No one has adopted a new bull pup other that the Israelis. All other bull pup users reverting away from it.

It’s a fundamentally flawed design that cannot be shot off both shoulders and sucks around corners.

But I am willing to be surprised.

Mike

Have you looked at the HS VHS 2 aka Springfield Hellion and noted the ejection system in front of the cheek rest and ambidextrous set up?

The only “fundamental flaw” left to fix is trigger linkage but the next wad of cash will be spent on the scope deciding when to pull the trigger not the grunt holding the rifle.

Last I checked we already have the hybrid (sig fury) and polymer ammo (https://www.tvammo.com/ ) being sold to the public as well as the SiG Spear rifle - so much for military exclusivity. Companies obviously want returns on R&D investment

Vortex fcu

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...=VortexNationPodcast

quote:

Originally posted by Nordic2:
Vortex fcu

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...=VortexNationPodcast

Interesting and impressive that vortex an unknown company won it.

But if you listen closely you will see this scope is largely like a pc monitor. The computing power and the software are drivers and I don’t know who down the road will develop next gens of those. It is very modular which is great.

I also like the military approach to battery life - it’s not super focused on this largely civilian and law enforcement approach of having years of battery life.

I have spoken to some serious users of illuminated reticle in the military. They never have issues about scopes with battery dying. If the scope holds zero just swap a new battery at regular intervals - batteries are cheap.

Mike

Yes its interesting with a see through screen. I can buy buy what type of battery in the supermarket here so it would never be a problem to have fresh ones. As updates of the electronic unit can be made separate they dont need to change the scope part.