The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
- 428cj
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 297
- Joined: May 19th, 2018, 6:52 am
- Reputation: 3
- Location: West Side
The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
The Army has selected 6.8mm as the new common round for both its Squad Automatic Weapon and M4 replacement
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-arm ... dly-round/
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-arm ... dly-round/
- YNOTAZ
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 1554
- Joined: June 3rd, 2018, 10:01 am
- Reputation: 8
- Location: NW Valley
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
Let's hear it for a ton of MilSurp!
- Steve_In_29
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 921
- Joined: June 7th, 2018, 10:52 am
- Reputation: 2
- Location: St John's, AZ
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
The article is almost a year old and I seem to recall the Army backtracking on this.
-
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 2127
- Joined: May 15th, 2018, 8:36 pm
- Reputation: 12
- Location: Tempe
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
It’s part of the never-ending “search” for the next generation of infantry weapon. Lots of submissions, no winner yet.Steve_In_29 wrote: ↑August 18th, 2019, 8:41 pm The article is almost a year old and I seem to recall the Army backtracking on this.
- Steve_In_29
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 921
- Joined: June 7th, 2018, 10:52 am
- Reputation: 2
- Location: St John's, AZ
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
As a short range heavy hitter the 6.8 makes sense in the M4 but for a distance weapon like the SAW the 6.5G would be more appropriate as it over takes the 6.8 after 100yds.
- delta6
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 945
- Joined: May 21st, 2018, 8:44 am
- Reputation: 12
- Location: phoenix
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
The attraction to the 6.8 is logistics. Scopes, sights and other "stuff" ballistically mirrors the 7.62 NATO round.Steve_In_29 wrote: ↑August 18th, 2019, 9:57 pm As a short range heavy hitter the 6.8 makes sense in the M4 but for a distance weapon like the SAW the 6.5G would be more appropriate as it over takes the 6.8 after 100yds.
- Steve_In_29
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 921
- Joined: June 7th, 2018, 10:52 am
- Reputation: 2
- Location: St John's, AZ
- storage_man
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 409
- Joined: May 19th, 2018, 5:53 am
- Reputation: 4
- Location: Phoenix
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
Agree - All of these alternative rounds, maybe equal to their respective projected replacements, but nowhere are they more superior (I haven't found that proof anywhere).Steve_In_29 wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 7:43 pmThat's not a good enough reason to field a ballistically inferior round though.
- Steve_In_29
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 921
- Joined: June 7th, 2018, 10:52 am
- Reputation: 2
- Location: St John's, AZ
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
Sorry but not sure what you mean.storage_man wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 1:59 pmAgree - All of these alternative rounds, maybe equal to their respective projected replacements, but nowhere are they more superior (I haven't found that proof anywhere).Steve_In_29 wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 7:43 pm That's not a good enough reason to field a ballistically inferior round though.
Both the 6.8 and 6.5G are superior to the 5.56 in every way except weight. Though the new poly cased ammo will alleviate some of that.
The point of my quoted comment was that the 6.5 was a better all around cartridge then the 6.8. The 6.5 retains more energy at longer distances then the 6.8 and gives near .308 performance out of a smaller lighter (as compared to .308) rifle/ammo combo.
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
If this was about anything other than some dod a**hole setting himself up for a retirement job they would change the 55 grain bullet out for a 75-77 grain bullet which makes it longer range or dump the 5.56 and just use the 7.62x51 in new M-16's or whatever they want to call the new rifle as well as in the saw's. Very simple solution. The 55 grain bullet has never been a good choice for the M-16 The AR-10 should have been chosen over the AR-15 based design but someone needed a good job after retirement or a payoff.
Personally I would dump all but the MK262 ammo and order new 1-7 twist barrels and matched optics for the round and call it good. Also stop issuing rifles with shot out barrels. This is all that is really needed as the MK-262 is proven to 600 yards and beyond. It has always been a poor bullet problem with the M-16, not the round just the lousy bullet selection. There is data out there about the MK-262 ammo. There is also a well documented fire fight where there were so many head shots to 600 yards that the FBI was called in to investigate a couple guys that did the shooting. With the right bullet the 5.56 is a lethal round, this is about I want to be the guy who got the military a new round and now I can get me a million dollar a year job in the defense industry.
Plastic cased ammo kills the reloading market for reasonably priced once fired brass where tens of millions of pieces have been sold to shooters, probably one of the reasons they want this to f*** the citizen shooting market with non reloadable crap.
``````
Personally I would dump all but the MK262 ammo and order new 1-7 twist barrels and matched optics for the round and call it good. Also stop issuing rifles with shot out barrels. This is all that is really needed as the MK-262 is proven to 600 yards and beyond. It has always been a poor bullet problem with the M-16, not the round just the lousy bullet selection. There is data out there about the MK-262 ammo. There is also a well documented fire fight where there were so many head shots to 600 yards that the FBI was called in to investigate a couple guys that did the shooting. With the right bullet the 5.56 is a lethal round, this is about I want to be the guy who got the military a new round and now I can get me a million dollar a year job in the defense industry.
Plastic cased ammo kills the reloading market for reasonably priced once fired brass where tens of millions of pieces have been sold to shooters, probably one of the reasons they want this to f*** the citizen shooting market with non reloadable crap.
``````
- Steve_In_29
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 921
- Joined: June 7th, 2018, 10:52 am
- Reputation: 2
- Location: St John's, AZ
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
I would venture it has a LOT more to do with reducing the load our guys have to carry into combat. The military doesn't exist to provide cheap brass for reloaders and if it f*** over the reloaders to provide our military with better equipment then that's just tuff.338lapua wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 8:45 pm If this was about anything other than some dod a**hole setting himself up for a retirement job they would change the 55 grain bullet out for a 75-77 grain bullet which makes it longer range or dump the 5.56 and just use the 7.62x51 in new M-16's or whatever they want to call the new rifle as well as in the saw's. Very simple solution. The 55 grain bullet has never been a good choice for the M-16 The AR-10 should have been chosen over the AR-15 based design but someone needed a good job after retirement or a payoff.
Personally I would dump all but the MK262 ammo and order new 1-7 twist barrels and matched optics for the round and call it good. Also stop issuing rifles with shot out barrels. This is all that is really needed as the MK-262 is proven to 600 yards and beyond. It has always been a poor bullet problem with the M-16, not the round just the lousy bullet selection. There is data out there about the MK-262 ammo. There is also a well documented fire fight where there were so many head shots to 600 yards that the FBI was called in to investigate a couple guys that did the shooting. With the right bullet the 5.56 is a lethal round, this is about I want to be the guy who got the military a new round and now I can get me a million dollar a year job in the defense industry.
Plastic cased ammo kills the reloading market for reasonably priced once fired brass where tens of millions of pieces have been sold to shooters, probably one of the reasons they want this to f*** the citizen shooting market with non reloadable crap.
``````
Even with the SOST rounds the 5.56 is still marginal at distance and packs less punch then the 6.5 would.
Simply going to 7.62x51 across the board would involve replacing every M16 with a bigger/heavier rifle and negating the size/weight savings the SAW offers the squad over the 240G. Thus seriously increasing the load carried into combat.
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
So the 6.8 rounds are lighter then? Or is that only with them made of plastic that they are lighter?
- Steve_In_29
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 921
- Joined: June 7th, 2018, 10:52 am
- Reputation: 2
- Location: St John's, AZ
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
Can't wait to see photos of chambers with melted rounds in them. Plastic made by lowest bidder, what can go wrong. Funny how they have been carrying the weight for years now it needs to be reduced. Looks like it is time to start buying brass auctions again if they are ditching brass as once fired will go up.
Looked into the plastic cased ammo, found no real positive articles but did find reports of a few blown up guns and one that blew up a FAL magazine. Found some test data where it said velocities were lower than brass cased ammo and accuracy was not the same.
Found Mac Ammunition who is now owned by Nammo with some 50 cal ammo that looks interesting but nothing on their 5.56 or 7.62 lines of ammo. Did find info on Mac also looking into ceramic technology for ammunition which makes more sense than plastic as ceramics will soon dominate turbine engine production in place of inconel
True velocity looks interesting and they are firing non stop through mini guns with their ammo.
If this goes beyond military markets it will endanger the reloaders especially if they eliminate brass cases or for a guy like me make a lot of money for me making conventional ammunition components. I really don't want the government able to control ammunition supplies as this is a one firing and done.
Looked into the plastic cased ammo, found no real positive articles but did find reports of a few blown up guns and one that blew up a FAL magazine. Found some test data where it said velocities were lower than brass cased ammo and accuracy was not the same.
Found Mac Ammunition who is now owned by Nammo with some 50 cal ammo that looks interesting but nothing on their 5.56 or 7.62 lines of ammo. Did find info on Mac also looking into ceramic technology for ammunition which makes more sense than plastic as ceramics will soon dominate turbine engine production in place of inconel
True velocity looks interesting and they are firing non stop through mini guns with their ammo.
If this goes beyond military markets it will endanger the reloaders especially if they eliminate brass cases or for a guy like me make a lot of money for me making conventional ammunition components. I really don't want the government able to control ammunition supplies as this is a one firing and done.
Re: The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements;
When I was in we never had 55 FMJ. We had 62 and I believe 72 gr bullets. 55 FMJ I believe is just for the public. Never had them.338lapua wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 8:45 pm If this was about anything other than some dod a**hole setting himself up for a retirement job they would change the 55 grain bullet out for a 75-77 grain bullet which makes it longer range or dump the 5.56 and just use the 7.62x51 in new M-16's or whatever they want to call the new rifle as well as in the saw's. Very simple solution. The 55 grain bullet has never been a good choice for the M-16 The AR-10 should have been chosen over the AR-15 based design but someone needed a good job after retirement or a payoff.
Personally I would dump all but the MK262 ammo and order new 1-7 twist barrels and matched optics for the round and call it good. Also stop issuing rifles with shot out barrels. This is all that is really needed as the MK-262 is proven to 600 yards and beyond. It has always been a poor bullet problem with the M-16, not the round just the lousy bullet selection. There is data out there about the MK-262 ammo. There is also a well documented fire fight where there were so many head shots to 600 yards that the FBI was called in to investigate a couple guys that did the shooting. With the right bullet the 5.56 is a lethal round, this is about I want to be the guy who got the military a new round and now I can get me a million dollar a year job in the defense industry.
Plastic cased ammo kills the reloading market for reasonably priced once fired brass where tens of millions of pieces have been sold to shooters, probably one of the reasons they want this to f*** the citizen shooting market with non reloadable crap.
``````