quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:

quote:

In the end, of cartridges that currently exist, the 6x45 is very well rounded for an intermediate power cartridge, especially with a 95-100gr bullet. It will hit harder and penetrate better than most any 5.56,

No, it won't! I know this because I played around with the 6X45 for a while. The only thing I found that it did better than the 5.56 X 45 was getting around hunting regulations that demanded the use of a 6mm diameter bullet or larger for medium game.

6x45 with a 100gr. bullet? Yup! I loaded those too. But you have to use a round nosed bullet to keep the cartridge to magazine length. And they were slow moving piss-poor performers. A 100gr. spitzer bullet would be impractical because it would have to be seated deep into the case reducing powder capacity even more than the 100gr. round nosed bullets.

And these wouldn't be the great 'hard hitters' and 'penetrators' you think they would be.

Umm, Okay

quote:

Originally posted by TANSTAAFL:

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:

quote:

In the end, of cartridges that currently exist, the 6x45 is very well rounded for an intermediate power cartridge, especially with a 95-100gr bullet. It will hit harder and penetrate better than most any 5.56,

No, it won't! I know this because I played around with the 6X45 for a while. The only thing I found that it did better than the 5.56 X 45 was getting around hunting regulations that demanded the use of a 6mm diameter bullet or larger for medium game.

6x45 with a 100gr. bullet? Yup! I loaded those too. But you have to use a round nosed bullet to keep the cartridge to magazine length. And they were slow moving piss-poor performers. A 100gr. spitzer bullet would be impractical because it would have to be seated deep into the case reducing powder capacity even more than the 100gr. round nosed bullets.

And these wouldn't be the great 'hard hitters' and 'penetrators' you think they would be.

Umm, Okay

That's the best way out, TANSTAAFL!

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:

No, it won't! I know this because I played around with the 6X45 for a while. The only thing I found that it did better than the 5.56 X 45 was getting around hunting regulations that demanded the use of a 6mm diameter bullet or larger for medium game.

6x45 with a 100gr. bullet? Yup! I loaded those too. But you have to use a round nosed bullet to keep the cartridge to magazine length.

Bullshit! HK brought mag length 100gr spitzers to the initial military testing for the XM-8.

quote:

And they were slow moving piss-poor performers.

Define "slow moving" please, the above mentioned rounds HK brought were averaging better than 2700 fps. Define "piss-poor performers" please, we are talking about a bullet with a BC and SD comparable to a 165gr .308 bullet at the same basic velocity.

quote:

A 100gr. spitzer bullet would be impractical because it would have to be seated deep into the case reducing powder capacity even more than the 100gr. round nosed bullets.

Define "impractical" please. A 95 to 100gr projectile in .244 is not going to be significantly longer than a 77gr projectile in in .224, or the M856 tracer projectile so will not reduce powder capacity any more than either of those two projectiles. Also, see the above, even at 100 fps slower we are still talking about average medium game bullet velocities and structure. The only thing we are missing is some diameter, but to keep the balance of downrange and recoil energy within the current envelope we can't really go up too much more in caliber.

You might be a reloader, but you are not the end all-be all of reloaders. I'm also wondering why you failed to post your results on the Firing Line forums? You did post there that the 6x45 was a viable option did you not? I'm going to assume that was the same DaMan that posted there only 15 days before you registered here under the exact same name. I would have to think that the folks over there would have been very interested in the results of your exhaustive testing, especially since they are the opposite of a very respected arms manufacturer.

BTW, are you ever going to answer the PM's I've responded to that you sent?

To everyone else, sorry about the thread being hijacked.
Bob

quote:

Bullshit! HK brought mag length 100gr spitzers to the initial military testing for the XM-8.

If so, they dropped the idea immediately! Didn't they?!!!

quote:

You did post there (FiringLine.com) that the 6x45 was a viable option did you not?

Viable option for what?!!!

TANSTAAFL, I spanked you for suggesting the 6x45 was a good military replacement for the 5.56x45. It is NOT!

Keep digging!

Bob,

You are slowly learning what several of us on here found out long ago...this mountain ain’t worth climbing because there ain’t nothing up there!

Hey, Rick! Match Grade HP's are more accurate than M-855s!

Who would EVER have guessed THAT?!!!

Question that started this thread: “What .223 ammo is working well in Iraq?“ The operative word in that question is “.223.â€

Nothing about what other calibers should be developed was ever asked.

Correct answer provided by HP Shooter:

“To answer the original question, 5.56X45 Mark 262 Mod 1 is what is working best in combat.“

That statement, while not unanimous among all the troops over there, is backed up by allot of guys who have been and are involved in lots of gun fights in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they found the M855 sadly lacking in that endeavor in both accuracy and wounding/killing ability.

Most of the troops in Iraq haven’t had the chance to use anything other than M855 green-tipped rounds...and the major threat to most troops now, with some notable exceptions, involves IED’s and VBIEDS, not gun fights.

For reliably taking out vehicles there are many more weapons in the arsenal that will do a far better and quicker job than any bullet coming out of an M16 will do.

DaMan,
You spanked me where?

When you said that a 6x45 needs to use a 100gr round nose bullet to fit in an M16 magazine?

When you said such a bullet is slow moving?

When you said it would be a poor performer?

Throughout this entire conversation on the 6x45 there has been one huge opening you have failed to take, similarly I GAVE you three other opportunities to get under my argument, I even let you lead the conversation. And yet when it looked like I bought into your twisting of what I said you still failed to follow through. But instead you chose to hang on to your normal tactic of hyperbole, innuendo, and opinion. It's been fun!

Rick,
The air up here is so clear and fresh!

Out,
Bob

TANSTAAFL, the 6 x 45mm would be a loser. It's a failed attempt to gain increased performance using the same case as the current 5.56 x 45. It is a step back in performance!

Even using shorter fatter cases like the .220 Russian or 7.62 x 39 necked down is a better way to go. But they are also piss poor 'solutions' for a non-existant problem!

You still haven't told me what you think the 6x45 does that the 5.56 won't do. How is it an improvement for a military cartridge? Flatter trajectory? Pierces body armor better? Better long range accuracy?

Perhaps I was sleeping, or just not paying much attention...but can someone remind me of the last enemy we faced on a battlefield that wore BODY armor that needed to be penetrated by our small arms ammunition?

The war we never fought against the USSR in Europe doesn’t count obviously!

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 0311:
Perhaps I was sleeping, or just not paying much attention...but can someone remind me of the last enemy we faced on a battlefield that wore BODY armor that needed to be penetrated by our small arms ammunition?

Rick, you are truly a man of vision. Able to see far into the future and see that we will only have a need to shoot brown people who don't have the sense to use body armor!

I wonder where the body armor goes that the Iraqi police 'lose'?!!!

But the body armor question aside..... don't we need ammunition that will penetrate vehicles, floors, walls and other light cover.....? Is the 6x45 good for this?

A question for TANSTAAFL..... Where did you hear that they were testing the 6x45 round in the XM-8? I doubt that happened! Not calling you a liar, but I just wish you could provide some documentation on that.

DaMan,
PM me and I'll let you in how I trolled you on this, and where it would have been EASY to tear apart almost every point I made.

Bob

quote:

Originally posted by TANSTAAFLaMan,
PM me and I'll let you in how I trolled you on this, and where it would have been EASY to tear apart almost every point I made.

Bob

No thanks, Bob! You'll probably just claim that you lured me into responding by intentionally posting stupid stuff. Some others here also use that "trolling" claim when they get called on stupid things they said and get embarrassed.

AhHa!...A marriage made in heaven right here on AR.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 0311:
AhHa!...A marriage made in heaven right here on AR.

Uh? You mean HP 'match bullets' and accurate .223 ammo, Ricki-poo?!!

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan: Black Canyon?

Ah! Black Canyon.. those were the days, I was there when John De Young was the rangemaster.

For the rest of the thread, I got a good laugh about M 193 being better than M 855 ( SS 109).

quote:

Originally posted by M1Tanker:I will say that a lot of the foreign ammo in both types of ammo is not as accurate as the US ammo.

Ed, now be nice and don't rub it in!

I am supprised that you guys spent 4 pages argueing with the dumbest SOB on this website. Dumbass is nothing but a punk troll.

the finns have a cartridge originally designed for benchrestshooting, but it seems like a good choice for combat; 7x39. nothing more than the 7,62 necked down too 7mm . its accurate, good bullets, and will fit in a m-16