A new round from Remington which shoots a 115-gr.MatchKing BTHP at 2800 FPS. May be using a modified .30 Remington case. Per Guns and Ammo. Page 84 Jan,04.

I believe you are correct. It is based on an experimental cartridge the military is evaluating: a .277 cal based on the 30 Rem. Why? Who knows. I'd have made a 25 cal on a lengthened PPC case, but no one asked me...... FWIW, Dutch.

WHY!!??

Why the new military round? Because the dumb-a$$ pentagoons are finally wising-up to the fact that the .223 is a peashooter when pointed at two-legged enemy "varmints" further than 150-200 yards from the muzzle! The .223 or 5.56 NATO, is at best a 300 yard cartridge for wounding our enemies - on a good calm day and from a full-length 20" barrel. But the current M4 version of the M16 only uses a 16 inch tube to ensure "killing" velocities.

Yeah, right!

And use the .223 in a desert environment like Iraq, in mountaineous, across-canyon shooting like in Afghanistan, in jungles where folage will deflect 55-62 grain bullets OR STOP THEM COLD!, and you'll begin to see why the "concept gun" .223 isn't up to the task of killing America's enemies.

Our troops have been clamoring for M14's to be sent to them in the battlefields of Afghanistan (for the rugged and effective .308 cartridge), or many captured AKM's have been pressed into service.

Why have the Chinese ALSO recently adopted a brand new military cartridge that's between 6 and 6.5 mm? To better kill 200 pound Americans with? I believe a careful study of the new Chinese round will have similarities to the US requirement for a more effective round to replace the 5.56 NATO.

Alledgedly, the new 6.8mm Special Purpose Cartridge is supposed to fit quite easily into the current M16/AR15 mags with only a mag-follower change. The current magazines are supposed to hold @27 rounds of 6.8mm compared to 30 rounds of 5.56. To convert to the new cartridge, alledgedly the bolt face and barrel are all that're supposed to be changed on current M16 upper assembles.

Many modern military planners believe that most small arms fighting (like 90+ percent of it!) occurs at ranges no further than 300-400 meters, and combine this with the vast amount of support we give out troops, in the form of aircraft, motors, tanks, etc.

I hope the rumors about a new military rifle cartridge aren't just rumors.

[ 12-01-2003, 21:44: Message edited by: Cougar ]

Cougar, I'm not arguing the need for a new cartridge, with a bigger bullet. Just wondering why the 30 rem as the basis for the case. Also wondering about the 277, rather than a 257 or 264. FWIW, Dutch.

I think the .30 Rem was used due to the case size and magazine dimensions.

BTW, no soldier I know (at least none with ANY experience) actually tries to use a magazine with the full 30 rounds. They've never worked right. Normally we loaded 27-28 rounds in the 30s and 20 in the 20s. Perhaps the new follower or springs or both solve this problem in the magazine bodies, but...

The round would be pretty cool... about like a 6.5mm TCU but shorter (bigger case diameter allows shorter case with same capacity).

I've often wondered why they went with the 224 bore. Seems like the 223 case necked to 243 or 257 bore would have been a better choice for knockdown and windbucking, while still preserving high mag capacity and minimal recoil. Go figure...

I doubt you're going to see this in widespread use too soon. In the M16/M4 it would only require changing the boltface and barrel, the SAW is another matter, and the biggest single value of the SAW is ammo commonality with the M16. For this reason alone the round chosen to replace the 5.56 (if that was to happen) should be the 6x45.

Bob

[ 12-02-2003, 05:40: Message edited by: Gunny Bob ]

Would have to be common to NATO who use a whole raft of different weapons to launch said ammunition from some of which might not happily except such modifications.

The control of an M16 on full auto with 115gr would be much harder. In fact I can't believe an M16 could take the additional recoil impulse over prolonged periods.

We tend to get all heated up about the technical aspects. The average soldier wants a reliable light weight weapon that he can hump lots of ammunition for. The average infantry soldier would pay their own money for a 5.56 assault rifle over a 7.62 FAL

So, after 50 yrs, the US military is essentially adopting a version of the Russian 7.62x39? 115 gr at 2800 fps vs. 124 gr at 2400 fps. Bump the weight of the 6.8mm round up to 124 gr, and you're looking at less than 300 fps difference between the two. Obviously the 6.8mm round would have a better BC and SD than the 7.62mm round, but does that make that big a difference at ranges under 250 yds?

I am not an Auto Guy, however, doesn't some of the AR manufacturers such as the ones who make the Bush master, offer AR 15s in calibers based on the 308, such as 243, 260, 7/08 etc?

Seems to me if so, then the action would take a larger bore.

Although the 30 Remington is an old cartridge case, it is very efficient in size when consider military firearms. It loaded with a 6mm to 7mm bullet would make a fine replacement for the 223 in my opinion. I think someone is using their heads for once at the pentagon. Personally I think the 6.5 bore would be the best compromise.

I am really surprised they stay with a 308 as a sniper cartridge when a 7/08 would strike me as a better cartridge or even a 260./

The old 30 Remington, like the 30/30s, make a very efficient cartridge in ratio to how much powder they burn. Hell, even an M 16 in a 30 Remington with a 125 grain bullet or so ( or the Speer 130 gr HP), would make a great combat arm to me.

Or we need to make explosive bullets like the Russians do on their AK 74 loads.

Orion, I know that,

However, I know you are a guy who knows his 'feces' on here. I know the uppers are totally different.

Still I think you can agree, even with the longer bullets, a better cartridge would make sense for the military, than the 223/

However after seeing a Russian 22 caliber 5.56 x 39 mm, if we put a better bullet on the old 223.

I shoot 75 and 80 grain bullets in my bolt 223 and just thinking of one of those with a Barnes X type of bullet in 80 grains, that would increase the terminal performance of that round dramatically. At least if an X design is possible in 80 grain 22 caliber bullets. ( I am not a bullet manufacturer and don't know if they can make it or not). Would really upgrade the hunting potential of the rifle also.

I am aware of a local gun smith around here who made up a Ruger Mini 30 in a 6 BR Remington. That would make a great SWAT rifle.