View Full Version : 6.8 Dead?
Is the 6.8 SPC now dead for military applications? I've got a round sized non-SF guy telling me how SOF is going to the 6.8 exclusively...
MVP
I hope they do. Good bullet, IMO.
The Reaper
07-11-2011, 17:38
Is the 6.8 SPC now dead for military applications? I've got a round sized non-SF guy telling me how SOF is going to the 6.8 exclusively...
MVP
I think he is dead wrong.
Lots of reasons it isn't going to happen, well documented here.
IMHO, we are going to have a mix of M-4s and SCAR-Hs along with M-249s and M240s. No 6.8 in the future, AFAIK.
May make a decent LE round though.
TR
Angry Mike
07-11-2011, 19:54
GEN Schoomaker plainly said we are not going to have a bullet for SF and a bullet for the rest of the Army.
Then came the .40 for the boys and so on and so forth.
Probably we are going to migrate to the .40, but 6.8? Who knows.
Right now they are trying to figure out how to give Colt shyte-tons of money to re-cofig all the M-4's into gas piston guns.
And we saw how the "new" SF .45 project went down the tubes.
Now, supposedly the idea is back at SF command.
We'll see.
m
GEN Schoomaker plainly said we are not going to have a bullet for SF and a bullet for the rest of the Army.
Then came the .40 for the boys and so on and so forth.
Probably we are going to migrate to the .40, but 6.8? Who knows.
Right now they are trying to figure out how to give Colt shyte-tons of money to re-cofig all the M-4's into gas piston guns.
And we saw how the "new" SF .45 project went down the tubes.
Now, supposedly the idea is back at SF command.
We'll see.
m
Gas piston conversion is a smart move, should of happend years ago. I can put hundreds of rounds thru my M4 and the bolt/carrier are barely dusted with residue and not really hot. Doesn't need to be oiled either (hardly) and we know what dif that makes in the sandbox.
From the reading that I had the chance to be associated with, The 6.8 seems to be the best round to use. I would think that a piston system would be a good selection as well.
With all the different piston systems available, I just can't understand why our military can't decide. Remington ACR looks quite nice with their recent reductions in weight. With SOCCOMs decision not to use the SCAR Lite, obviously, we need to make a decision and stick with it.
We are definitely going to have to re-arm with all the weapons reaching their life span. We need to make a decision... 5.56 is reaching it's end in adjustments or modifications and a decision to move into the 6.8 with a new piston based rifle seems to be the best move.
If anyone knows the right way to go, it's you guys. I sure hope someone is listening.
My M9 still shoots 9mm...
...my M4 still shoots 5.56
If I run out of ammo during a gun fight, I can grab magazines from an afghan commando, or another American, or a Brit, or any one else in ISAF that carries 5.56. So, why would I want a gun that leaves me unarmed once my magazine runs dry? 6.8 is a gadget round. It may be the best single bullet on the planet, but if you cant support the logistics train behind it, why make the change?
Besides, it is my observation that most folks who claim 5.56 simply is not capable of knocking down bad guys have not really been very many deployments...
...or else they think that the dirt kicked up at the feet of bad guys should be killing them as it ricochets past them. I have watched guys unleash automatic weapons fire at a bad guy... pock mark the shit out of a stone wall, and then bitch about how ineffective 5.56 is against bad guys. Well, even an M2 wont kill a guy if you embed the rounds in the wall instead f the bad guy.
...maybe there is a self-aiming version of the 6.8 that I am not aware of.
...just my two cents.
We tested the 6.8 back in 2005. The test targets were steel silhouettes hanging by two wires. When shot with 5.56 they gently swayed. When hit by 6.8 they violently rocked back and forth. The recoil was not very much more than 5.56 and the upper took 28 round mags. We said it was superior to the 5.56, but reccomended against it due to the very logistical reasons you stated.
As far as the lethality of 5.56, I've personally seen a guy shot 5 times in the chest with green tip at 40 meters from a full sized M4, who then dropped his PKC and ran 30 meters away...died while running. It was a disconcerting experience. No drugs were found on him or in his stuff. His buddy went down with one round, which went through the heart and spinal column together.
I'm not going to discuss the 5.56 at length, that's been done elsewhere.
The Reaper
02-05-2012, 09:49
Let's see....
This discussion has been had on many threads here before.
We have a rifle and a carbine that are working and have most of the bugs out of them over the past fifty years or so. We have a SAW that uses the same ammo. We have a heavy rifle, a GPMG and our sniper rifles using another round that is adequate out to almost 1,000 meters. We tested alternate weapons, and the troops preferred the existing rifles in the lighter caliber, and were only marginally in favor of the SCAR-H in the heavier caliber.
The 5.56x45 is a proven round, when used within its effective range. You will not have a sexy little 10.5" seven pound carbine dropping people like a death ray at 500 meters unless you are making head shots. A 20" 5.56 rifle is pretty effective with body shots out to 250 meters or so. Closer is better, though I am not convinced that the 6.8 is a significantly better round at the combat ranges we normally engage at.
We have two established calibers that we sold to our other services, allies, and NATO. We have hundreds of thousands of SMGs, carbines, and rifles with Eugene Stoner's direct impingement gas system. When clean, maintained, and using good mags, they are reliable weapons.
There are probably billions of 5.56 rounds currently in bunkers in the U.S. military ammunition system.
At a time when we are cutting retirement benefits, asking soldiers to pay for their families' health care, and kicking combat proven soldiers out of the military to save money, why in the world would any rational person think that we are going to cut more to pay billions of increasingly rare dollars for a new operating system for more than a million weapons, and buy billions of rounds of a new caliber?
Maybe the people who dreamed this 6.8 scheme up?
I don't see this happening.
TR
longrange1947
02-05-2012, 10:03
Why would I carry a signature round that states definitively that I have been on the objective? Why would I carry a weapon that I cannot get resupplied with ammo for, but from one source. As been stated, we have too many weapons using this round and Special Ops does not need a signature round that just complicates everything.
I have heard all sorts of stories about the 5.56 round not dropping someone, my experience is that it does right readily drop someone. Hell, I have seen some guys hit with 45s and not drop, does this make the 45 round a wimp round? Some guys just have a high tolerance to body trauma and this makes great anecdotal stories, but proves jack. These stories have been around since the late 60s claiming the 5.56 round is a wimp round. I call BS.
You have some people that have invested a lot of money in a round that was predicted to take the world by storm, it did not. Now they must make something off their investment and stirring the pot is the only thing they have.
My 2 cents again. :munchin :D
Dragbag036
02-05-2012, 10:43
Instant death caused by GSW is due to a vital organ (or organs) being hit, usually the heart or parts of the brain. Most other GSW will not cause INSTANT death; however, they may lead to death by blood loss, shock, respiratory failure, or even, over the long term, sepsis. Pain is not a cause of death. As many of you on the site can attest, spending time with multiple GSW's, unless you are in the craft of understanding ballistics and body composition, no one round is better than the next if you can't place a well aimed shot.
DB less than LR1947 .000000002 cents
Brush Okie, Our M16's were lethal. It could be one of those things, some people die real easy, some die real hard.
Our only problem was poor information on maintenance when the M16 was issued, so it picked up a very bad reputation until that FUBAR was fixed. We can argue about ballistic until the cows come home, but IMHO, the most important factor is the person holding the firearm.
tom kelly
02-05-2012, 12:22
SHOT PLACEMENT....Just my .02...TK
mojaveman
02-05-2012, 21:39
The most shocking case was a guy running from the cops on PCP. He ran across a freeway and a semi truck going 55 hit him. He flew 100+ feet, got up and ran a couple of hundred yards on two shattered legs and busted up body before dropping dead in his tracks.
Phencyclidine is some bad stuff that's for sure. A LEO in the county where I live was killed after the suspect he was trying to arrest pryed a service shotgun and it's mount from the dash of the patrol car, chambered a round, and shot the officer. I've heard other stories from friends who are LEOs about suspects under the influence of PCP breaking their hands or wrists while trying to get out of their handcuffs. Failure drill I believe is the best remedie for anyone in that condition and posing that serious of a threat.
Phencyclidine is some bad stuff that's for sure. A LEO in the county where I live was killed after the suspect he was trying to arrest ripped a service shotgun still in it's mount from the dash of the patrol car, chambered a round, and shot the officer. I've heard other stories from friends who are LEOs about suspects under the influence of PCP breaking their arms trying to get out of their handcuffs. Failure drill I believe is the best remedie for anyone in that condition and posing that serious of a threat.
The agency that I was in, we were issued Mod 19 Smiths (.357 Mag). PCP, brought up the concept, hey we should have .41 Mag Smiths.
IIRC, LTG Boykin took a .51 round to the shoulder/torso in Grenada and not only survived but continued on active duty for a couple more decades. Perhaps we should field a .75 caliber service rifle to ensure "one shot-one kill" capability for every soldier.
Not so sure the 6.8 was all it claimed to be anyways. Anyone recall the "oh shit..." moment when a bunch were cut open for ballistic analysis? :eek:
and - to correct a prior post, a heart shot isn't going to drop you DRT (dead right there). You'll still have 25-30 seconds of oxygenated blood in your system with which to wreak havoc on your opponent. That's a life tim ein a gunfight.
longrange1947
02-23-2012, 18:15
Actually there is a vid of a woman shot in the heart still alive after 2 minutes. That was a .357 mag as well. Something to think about. As has been stated, some will fall over and die, and some have a will that lets them live for a while after catastrophic bodily insult.
I stopped listening to "No knock down power" stories long ago.
The Reaper
02-23-2012, 20:27
I'm liking the .300 AAC Blackout right now.
Might need a new upper in that caliber. Only change is a new barrel. Cycles supersonic and subsonic loads without any tinkering or changing anything. Accurate. Inexpensive components and ammo. Light bullets work well with pistol/carbine powders like 2400, H110, W296, etc. Appears to be pretty reliable. Relatively good power up close. Almost as quiet as an MP-5SD with subsonic ammo. Works well from a very short barrel.
Good close to medium range caliber, especially in a shorty with a suppressor.
TR
IIRC, LTG Boykin took a .51 round to the shoulder/torso in Grenada and not only survived but continued on active duty for a couple more decades. Perhaps we should field a .75 caliber service rifle to ensure "one shot-one kill" capability for every soldier.
I think the ideal infantry battle rifle would have the rate of fire of a Vulcan, the impact of a 105 and the weight of a Red Rider BB gun. :D
I'm liking the .300 AAC Blackout right now.
Might need a new upper in that caliber. Only change is a new barrel. Cycles supersonic and subsonic loads without any tinkering or changing anything. Accurate. Inexpensive components and ammo. Light bullets work well with pistol/carbine powders like 2400, H110, W296, etc. Appears to be pretty reliable. Relatively good power up close. Almost as quiet as an MP-5SD with subsonic ammo. Works well from a very short barrel.
Good close to medium range caliber, especially in a shorty with a suppressor.
TR
WOW, I went to the site of that round. The rifle they had was very sexy. Curious have messed with the 6.5 Grendal?
The Reaper
02-24-2012, 16:57
WOW, I went to the site of that round. The rifle they had was very sexy. Curious have messed with the 6.5 Grendal?
I have shot the Grendel and for a time, thought I wanted one.
My gunsmith talked me out of it when he gave me a reality check on the capacity of the case being inadequate to pack enough powder to make the desired velocities. In 6.5, he prefers the .260 Rem or 6.5 Creedmore.
TR
I have shot the Grendel and for a time, thought I wanted one.
My gunsmith talked me out of it when he gave me a reality check on the capacity of the case being inadequate to pack enough powder to make the desired velocities. In 6.5, he prefers the .260 Rem or 6.5 Creedmore.
TR
Thank you. On paper the Grendal looks great. 7mm Ballistic Coefficients is about as good as it gets, but on paper and reality can be two different things.
Peregrino
02-24-2012, 18:34
Thank you. On paper the Grendal looks great. 7mm Ballistic Coefficients is about as good as it gets, but on paper and reality can be two different things.
FWIW - I don't know that the Grendal has ever won a 1000 yd. match. It takes velocity to wring everything available out of a 6.5. The Grendal is more about hype than powder capacity. Me - I'm looking at .260 (want one) and 7mm WSM (got one - as soon as the gunsmith finishes it).
Curious on the 260 Rem, are you going to use a AR 10 platform?
Peregrino
02-24-2012, 19:31
Curious on the 260 Rem, are you going to use a AR 10 platform?
DPMS.
FWIW - I don't know that the Grendal has ever won a 1000 yd. match. It takes velocity to wring everything available out of a 6.5. The Grendal is more about hype than powder capacity. Me - I'm looking at .260 (want one) and 7mm WSM (got one - as soon as the gunsmith finishes it).
GeneEcon has a wealth of info on the 6.5G and seems to like it. It's a capable cartridge. It's not a .260 or 6.5 CM.
To me it's a great hunting round. I have killed lots of deer (mule, white tail), Caribou and a Dall Sheep (just over 525yds). I haven't taken it elk hunting but I have no doubt it would put an elk down easily.
Peregrino
02-24-2012, 19:51
GeneEcon has a wealth of info on the 6.5G and seems to like it. It's a capable cartridge. It's not a .260 or 6.5 CM.
To me it's a great hunting round. I have killed lots of deer (mule, white tail), Caribou and a Dall Sheep (just over 525yds). I haven't taken it elk hunting but I have no doubt it would put an elk down easily.
Concur; I'm glad it meets your requirements. MOO - It's a niche round. Solve all of the issues and you have a decent 600M round that fits in an AR platform. I understand (with the right bullet [what are you using?]) it's a pretty good pig or deer hunting round too. It just doesn't fall within my parameters at the moment. Course neither does the 6.8. But I'm paying attention to TR's ruminations about the 300 AAC, doing my own research, and talking to the gunsmith. Rumor has it the hog hunting on Stewart and Benning are supposed to be well worth the trip; certainly worth another experiment to clutter up the limited space left in my new safe.
Concur; I'm glad it meets your requirements. MOO - It's a niche round. Solve all of the issues and you have a decent 600M round that fits in an AR platform. I understand (with the right bullet [what are you using?]) it's a pretty good pig or deer hunting round too. It just doesn't fall within my parameters at the moment. Course neither does the 6.8. But I'm paying attention to TR's ruminations about the 300 AAC, doing my own research, and talking to the gunsmith. Rumor has it the hog hunting on Stewart and Benning are supposed to be well worth the trip; certainly worth another experiment to clutter up the limited space left in my new safe.
I've used Barnes TTSX 120grs with good success. I'm considering trying the 100gr for white tail. Its a good coyote round as well.
I think the 300AAC is a good round especially for hogs, white tail, etc. I plan on getting an upper in the future.
Gene Econ
02-28-2012, 19:29
GeneEcon has a wealth of info on the 6.5G and seems to like it. It's a capable cartridge. It's not a .260 or 6.5 CM.
To me it's a great hunting round. I have killed lots of deer (mule, white tail), Caribou and a Dall Sheep (just over 525yds). I haven't taken it elk hunting but I have no doubt it would put an elk down easily.
Koz:
I have been shooting a number of uppers chambered for the 6.5 G since it basically came on the market. Although many would disagree, I view it as a decent 600 yard cartridge given you are using an AR-15 frame.
I don't view it as a competitie cartridge in High Power only because the velocities are pretty low but it is a very accurate cartridge and for those who hunt with an AR-15, it does a good job on meedium game.
An advantaqge to the Grendel is a huge variety of 6.5mm bullets to choose from over the entire range of the shooting sports. And it uses an AR-15 frame which many like due to size and weight.
The Grendel had problems but I think most of them have been solved with the exception of a decent magazine. Only one place makes Grendel mags and if you look at the Grendel forum you see many posts about magazines not working properly.
Just understand that the Grendel case holds about 30 grains of powder and that you are restricted by a 5.56 magazine length.
Gene
EchoSixMike
04-04-2012, 05:26
Not to sound preachy but as long as you're limited by the size of the M16 magazine, you're stuck with the limits of physics. This is an engineering issue, thus mathematics. The time to have made a cross the boards switch was before everybody bought buttloads of new rifles, say 2002-2004 or so. USMC was just buying M16A4, Army was still switching to M4's IIRC, SCAR wasn't even started yet, so a switch could have been total. Now with all the new hardware and decent performing 5.56ammo (Mk262, Mk291, Mk318, etc), there really isn't much demand left. Having service specific rifle ammunition went away with the straight pull 6mm Lee rifle and there's no reason to bring it back AFAIK.
At this point, switching the US DOD over to another rifle caliber would simply be a MIC welfare program. Maybe in 10-15 years when we move away from what we've currently got, but by that point maybe the Case Telescoping Ammunition (CTA) thing will be sorted out. At least the Euros are currently paying the way for most of the fielding of that technology. 40mm CTA cannon for their new APC's. Might be the only defense research weight they ever carry:p
The NRA guys shooting spaceguns who are not using 5.56 seem to like a 6mm bullet with the 6.8SPC casing for increased powder capacity but they single load for the prone stuff and so are not limited by OAL. A Grendel casing would be the same thing only slightly moreso, as it has more volume IIRC. 6mm bullets are significantly better ballistically than .224 bullets and you don't give up huge amounts of MV as with high BC 6.5mm bullets. S/F....Ken M
doctom54
12-12-2018, 12:40
Looks like GEN Milley is resurrecting the 6.8 SPC
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/12/10/more-than-a-rifle-how-a-new-68mm-round-advanced-optics-will-make-soldiers-marines-a-lot-deadlier/
Not sure the reasoning that it will defeat body armor holds up.
Combat Diver
12-12-2018, 22:20
Looks like GEN Milley is resurrecting the 6.8 SPC
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/12/10/more-than-a-rifle-how-a-new-68mm-round-advanced-optics-will-make-soldiers-marines-a-lot-deadlier/
Not sure the reasoning that it will defeat body armor holds up.
Reading is fundamental, stated the CALIBER is to be 6.8mm, not necessary 6.8 SPC II. As not all .30 calibers are 7.62x51 NATO or .30 US Springfield Model of 1906. There are many cartridge designs for those calibers. Velocities stated elsewhere are too high for the 6.8 SPC design.
CD
longrange1947
12-12-2018, 22:58
A number of calibers are being considered.