I dunno, but two are there that probably shouldn't be. The 77gr Elite and 120gr Barnes solids are no longer available.

Plus, it looks like some may have ogives too long for mag-length loads, which inflates the number of true "6.8" bullets.

346ci

Well thats easy!
A 75 gr 5.56mm out of a 16" barrel will be going about 2500-2600 ish. Hornady say 2700FPS with 24 " barrel  Shorter barrel even less.
A 125 gr  out of the 300 Blk 16"  barrel is going  2185 fps !  

Ah which one has more energy at 100 yards
75 gr Horn TAP  about  950 ft/lb at 100 yards 16 " barrel
125 gr  300Blk   1004 ft/lb at 100 yards 16" barrel

Which one will be more effective at distance.
75 gr Tap - frag distance out of  16" barrel  175 yards yaw/tumble 220 yard after that pencil hole.
125 gr 300 Blk  not a frag round  will mushroom all the way out to 300 plus yards!  Past that still a .308" hole vs a .223"

Now lets get back to the task at hand - still waiting for the 130 gr load data for either the 6.5/6.8 inan AR paltform?  

Hot off the press!!
Brand new 6.8 round coming soon.
Check this out!
SSA/140gr Berger
Current claim; 2400fps out of a 16" barrel.

http://www.ssarmory.com/6.8_spc_ammo_140gr_VLD_Berger.aspx

I have a lot of confidence in 5.56x45 out of a 20" barrel. However, 16" and shorter is a no-go for me. I don't know how you are getting a 62 gr projectile traveling at 2800-2900 ft/s to come out of a 14.5" barrel AR.

This video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb_Ok410yuw&list=UUZ-qxagOkAmCEP-Tu6YliUQ&index=98&feature=plcp
shows a guy getting ~3000 ft/s with 55gr projectiles out of 16" barrels (XM193). So I don't know how you got your numbers. I imagine once you throw a 62gr projectile down a 14.5" barrel you will be less than 2700 ft/s easy. Also, you could use a better bullet... or you could use a better round and a better bullet. A better performing cartridge/caliber will always be a better choice. 5.56x45 was designed for 20" barrels and it is hamstrung when you don't shoot it out of one.

Also, as far as recoil... many of these bullets have recoil similar to AK rounds... which is perfectly manageable. We aren't comparing the 5.56 to the 7.62x51.

CNS hits? I can get a CNS hit with a 9mm carbine. The point of a rifle rounds is that you don't have to hit the CNS exactly... you just have to get a solid upper chest shot (and/or head shot of course).

The 135 SMK is too long for mag use, the 105GS and 130 Nosler are the longest that can be used in a PRI mag. The rest shoot fine from the mag.

I don't think SSA will load them to 2400fps . 2400 with handloads sure but SSA has a hard time getting a 115 to 2550 without excess pressure.

1st place 6.8 spc ii

2nd place 7.62x39

That is all.

Not my pic.
I think some of those may be used in bolt action riifles.
Throw out the few fliers, there's still a wide variety of bullets and loads for the 6.8 in the AR platform.
Fast light bullets to heavier subsonics.

I have to put my .02 in.

I think the 6.8 is a great intermediate round.  I have used it for a 515 lb hog, red stag, deer and
numerous exotics.  The round has performed perfectly having them all drop with in 7 yds of being shot.  
Minial recoil.  It is my favorite round to have for my hunting.
It does all that I ask.

I have a 16.5 inch barrel, over the chronograph, I get between 2900 and 3000 for greep tip (SS109 63 gr) surplus ammo. The mil spec velocity for the M$/SS109 combo is between 2800 and 2900 fps if I remeber correctly.  In addition, the Hodgdon reloading data lists reload data for 63 gr Sierra of Varget and H4895 at 2800 fps from a 15 inch barrel. I do not think that the difference between 14.5 and 15 will make too much difference.

I run Sierra 77gr MK at about 2700-2750 fps from my 16.5 inch rifles. I beleive that the mill spec for the 77 gr MK is about 2650 to 2700 fps as well.

A CNS hit is the only way to get  quick/instant incapacitation. Any other wound to the upper torso requires a drop in blood pressure to incapacitate, which requires a variable amount of time.

If he 5.56x45mm is not effective in its all around performance why  has it been essentially copied by both the Russians and Chinese?

http://68forums.com/forums/showthread.php?27533-Long-Range

Post #7 is the beginning - states the velocity. #47 verifies it.

As long as you only use 5-round mags.




Yes, I owned - and sold - a 6830.  I replaced it with a Grendel that I love, but I'd be perfectly happy with a 6.8.
 

As a comparison, an 85gr bullet will be pushed at ~3100fps (SSA Tactical load - not handloads) from a 16" barrel in 6.8.

For the average person I would say 5.45 is the best intermediate round...dollar for dollar by far the best.

Price ... it's one of the cheapest center fire rounds period.
Ballistics...devastating damage that doesn't rely on fragmentation.
Accuracy... Accurate out to 600yards with a decent gun (by decent I don't mean an ak74 that was hobbled together by a retarded child in a cave)

M855 out of the M4/14.5" barrel is 2920fps.  That Lake City brass and the charge they use is no friggin joke, which is why there is zero need for a 20" barrel 5.56 NATO when loaded to US pressures.  Other NATO partners such as England and France have had to load their own light loads so their rifles don't wear out early, like the L85 and FAMAS.  The FAMAS will blow brass-cased ammo apart since it really doesn't have a sufficient locking mechanism.

Anyway, you don't shoot a person just once and see what happens, regardless of what caliber you're using in close-in infantry egagements.  This is why 5.56 NATO is such a great round.  Within 150yds, a 5.56 will produce devastating wound ballistics with M193 and M855, since they have such thin jackets.  You also have more mission endurance with 5.56 NATO, shorter training time for soldiers, and higher hit probability within 200yds, especially for follow-up shots.

I'll wait for it to be released to the public before I believe that.

5.56 is not legal to hunt with here, so that is one thing I can't do with it.



I'm just throwing this out there because I really don't see the point of comparing the two.... I would prefer to have one of each.

The BC on that NOS 125 GR .308 is .366 vs. .510 for the 123 gr SIE 6.5 - a sizable and significant difference.

300 fps is far more important than one might presume for shooting at intermediate and long range. It is the difference between .300 mag and 30/06.

All of those bullets work just fine in this 6.8's and I have several boxes of both the 77gr Elite and 120gr Barnes so they still count for me.

<Comment removed - warning sent - Z>




I chose blackout because of magazine capacity, interchangeability of parts and energy. it can offer alot from a smaller package, which is important for the kind of work I do.
 

<Off-topic comment removed - Z>

For a bolt gun, 270 win (6.8x65) will also fit, and will throw the 130gr 3200fps. I.e. I don't see how bolt guns are relevant, as much as yours honestly does look cool. It would probably be a thread-jack, but I'm interested if you have tried pushing the pressure up in that?

<Off-topic comment removed - Z>




.458 and .50 are not intermediate rounds.  They serve a special purpose only.  They break shit up, punch big holes, and can be suppressed....





.300 AAC loaded supersonic is what I would consider an intermediate (along with any of the .300 iterations).  Loaded subsonic, it's a specialty round.  It can be both, but you would need both types of ammo, which means you are carrying less duty ammo....which I do not like.  I definitely like the parts commonality.  Major bonus for using standard USGI mags/bolts....





762x39 and 545x39 definitely fall in this category (intermediate).  Mags will be the most likely issue, but I think most of the current production ones are worthwhile....





6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel are definitely in the intermediate category.  Either would work well out to 600 yards, IMHO....





5.56 is what we are currently using (duh).  It seems to work pretty well for the most part (when the right damn bullet is used in the right platform)....





.308/762x51 I do not consider intermediate at all.  It was developed to specifically replace the .30-06/762x63.  It does it's job very well in the platforms in current use.
 

I vote for the 25AR (also known as 25-223) wildcat.  Because it use standard 223 brass, mags, bolts, etc.  Only a barrel change is required.  With 100 gr bullets, it provides more muzzle energy, higher BC and thus flatter trajectory, and better sectional density than the 556 or the 762x39 types.  Plus being based off the 223 case, standard mag capacity is there and using standard 223 components (again, other than barrel) it is logistically superior to the 6.8 or Grendel.

That or the 6x45 work very well....

For you, yes, but what about all those people who don't have a stash?

And, if you're going to bring bolt-action rifles into the discussion, there are many chamberings far more capable than 6.8 SPC.

Personally, I like the idea of long-ogive bullets in 6.8 SPC. It's too bad there isn't an "AR-12.5" to shoot 'em.

Loading longer .277 bullets will never get you on-par with 6.5's if high BC and heavier weight is what you seek.  I leanred that the hard way with my .270 Winchester trying to compete with my .260 Rem.  Even with 15-20gr more powder in the Winchester launching Berger 140gr VLD's, I need 250fps more muzzle velocity to match the .260 Rem with 140gr Berger VLD's, and the .260 Rem still beats the .277 for wind deflection at 1000yds.  I thought the significantly higher mv from the .270 would smoke the .260....nope.

If we're talking about the best military intermediate rifle cartridge, 5.56 NATO wins.

If we're talking about best intermediate AR15 cartidge for civilians and hunting, as well as recreational target shooting, the Grendel is the clear winner.  It can do what the .25-223, 6x45, 6.8 SPC, and 7.62x39 can do, and bites the heels quite firmly of the 6.5x55 Swede.

Define "clear winner" please with actual scientific facts and load data (please).  

sywagon
 BC dosen't really matter in the 0-300m range.  Thats more for longer distances.  And a 300 Win mag kicks the crap out of you for those 300 extra fps and doesn't kill any better then a '06.   Been shooting an '06 for many years and I'll bet it kills just as good as any Magnum.   I know it's been killing everything I've shot very well 95% of the time DRT!  Not even a twitch!  This one of the reasons I went with the 300 blk- just somethiong about the .308 caliber -it stops stuff right now- DRT! Same with my 30-30's drops stuff DRT!   Maybe I just a .308 caliber whore!

I think we both agree more than you are seeing, and that is the main thing. Our common ground is if it works for you doing what you want to, then it is perfect. And yes, out past 300yd. is where a 6.5 or 300mag comes into it's own for most things.

BC does matter somewhat though even at short range - I thought that is why they came out with the FTX for 30-30? I thought 30-30 was a 200 yard round in most people's opinion prior to those. It has more to do with more drop = more need for accurate range estimation and hold over than anything else for medium size targets. Yes there are people with extensive experience who can ethically push it farther. My 1892 is .44 mag (20" 240 gr 1900fps for win white box) - it is a fantastic round, and very practical. It is not a distance round. It isn't a Grendel. It will make a very stout hole in stuff out to 150yrds though before dropping like a stone. I load both 30-06 level and full house both for my .300mag. Shooting a med. deer with .300mag is DRT and a bunch of wasted meet. The difference between 30-06 to .300mag is quite near going from 30-30 to .308. Get up on a grizzly that is surprised and I know which I would take. That is when you are really banking on the fact that E=MV^2

Edit - for reference energy in Ft/Lb (for .300 BLK and 6.5 these are just based on the previous post and aren't supposed to represent some gold standard).
.300BLK     1343
6.5 Grendel  1735
30-30           1875
.44Mag rifle  1924
0.308           2675
30-06           3082
.300Mag       3752

Also I apologize that several of these are not intermediate rounds. They serve for comparison only.

I've run ballistic comparisons several times in the variants forum.  I actually believed a lot of the statements about Grendel short barrels not being able to keep up with 6.8 until I chrono'd my 16", and ran the comparisions through a program.  Right now, I'm getting 24" Grendel velocities out of factory ammunition in my 16" Grendel, namely the Precision Firearms 123gr Lapua Moly Scenar load at 2550fps, with zero pressure signs.  I have also loaded the 100gr Nosler Ballistic Tip to over 2700fps from my 16", but I've learned to look at the drop, energy, and wind drift data along with the sectional density of the bullet more importantly than muzzle velocity.

The clarity in the Grendel's ability to cover this broad spectrum of bullet weights for varmint, medium game, large game, and target shooting is evident in its performance so far.  There are untold numbers of people getting DRT results on Coyotes, wild hogs, deer, mule deer, Oryx, Elk, Sheep, Antelope, and Alligators.  Many target guns shoot into the .3 MOA and even the teens, with low extreme spreads.

When you look at retained energy, the 6.5's are the bullet to beat out of any small action.  You have to step up to a 7mm Mag cartridge to beat the 6.5's.  If you take same case capacities, and try to beat the 6.5, it's a losing endeavor.

I respectfully diagree with the statement that BC doesn't matter within the first 300yds.  For every reason that a high sectional density bullet passes through the air so well, they also pass through tissue well.  This is why a 110gr 6.5mm Barnes will beat a 110gr .277 or .300 bullet from the same manufacture and construction, when it comes to penetration, even though the majority of hunters won't see this when shooting ligh-skinned medium game where the penetration advantage can't be realized.  As the game size increases, and the hide thickens, the 6.5mm projectiles start to make more sense, especially within 300yds where most shots will take place.

Another area where BC comes into play is with your wind drift.  Let's say you're lining up a shot for a deer at 250yds.  With a 10mph steady crosswind, you decide to use a reticle hold, since you are within trajectory with your point blank zero.  Almost every comparison I have run with 16" carbines, one in 6.5 G and one in 6.8 SPC leaves the SPC with at least 2" more of drift at that range, even starting out at the muzzle 150fps faster.  Based on my hold, that extra 2" could mean the difference between a heart-lung shot, and a frontal lung or gut shot depedning on animal orientation.

Also note the energy and velocity at 250yds for both cartridges.  If you compare the 6.5mm 120gr NBT to the 6.8mm 110 Partition, they are one of the closest matches I can find, as long as the 6.8 pushes the 110 Partition at 2650fps or faster, with the Grendel only at 2500fps.  Both are using a 200yd zero, which is generally accepted as a great hunting Point Blank Zero.

6.5 Grendel, 120gr Nosler Ballistic Tip, 2500fps, 2.7" scope height, 200yd zero, sea level

.......Range    Velocity    Energy     Trajectory         TOF          Drift

      (yards)     (fps)     (ft-lb)     (inches)         (sec)       (inches)

          0      2500        1665          -2.70         0.0000         0.00

         25      2452        1602          -0.99         0.0303        -0.05

         50      2405        1541           0.36         0.0612        -0.21

         75      2358        1481           1.33         0.0927        -0.47

        100      2311        1423           1.91         0.1248        -0.85

        125      2265        1367           2.09         0.1576        -1.34

        150      2220        1313           1.84         0.1910        -1.95

        175      2175        1261           1.15         0.2251        -2.67

        200      2131        1210           0.00         0.2600        -3.53

        225      2087        1161          -1.63         0.2955        -4.51

        250      2044        1113          -3.75         0.3318        -5.62

        275      2001        1067          -6.40         0.3689        -6.87

        300      1959        1022          -9.58         0.4068        -8.25

        325      1917         979         -13.34         0.4455        -9.79

        350      1876         938         -17.68         0.4850       -11.47

        375      1836         898         -22.64         0.5254       -13.30

        400      1796         859         -28.25         0.5668       -15.29

6.8 SPC II, 110gr Nosler Partition, 2650fps, 2.7" scope height, 200yd zero, sea level

.......Range    Velocity    Energy     Trajectory         TOF          Drift

      (yards)     (fps)     (ft-lb)     (inches)         (sec)       (inches)

          0      2650        1715          -2.70         0.0000         0.00

         25      2589        1637          -1.11         0.0286        -0.06

         50      2528        1561           0.16         0.0580        -0.24

         75      2468        1488           1.08         0.0880        -0.54

        100      2409        1418           1.65         0.1187        -0.98

        125      2351        1350           1.85         0.1502        -1.54

        150      2294        1285           1.65         0.1825        -2.25

        175      2238        1223           1.04         0.2156        -3.09

        200      2182        1163          -0.00         0.2496        -4.09

        225      2127        1105          -1.50         0.2844        -5.23

        250      2073        1050          -3.48         0.3201        -6.54

        275      2020         996          -5.97         0.3567        -8.01

        300      1967         945          -8.98         0.3944        -9.65

        325      1916         896         -12.56         0.4330       -11.47

        350      1865         849         -16.73         0.4727       -13.48

        375      1815         805         -21.53         0.5134       -15.67

        400      1766         762         -26.99         0.5553       -18.06

As you can see, they are very close.  Granted, the partitions are meant for heavier game, and I didn't compare the 125gr Partition available for the Grendel, which can be run at the same velocity as the 120gr NBT.  Most 6.8 loads are either 110gr, but there is a new Hornady 120gr SST with a BC of .400, with Hornady listing a muzzle velocity of 2460fps, which I'm sure could be increased somewhat.  But when you take a bullet with a BC of .4 in the 120gr range at the same velocity as another with a .458 BC, the narrower .458 BC projectile will retain more energy, and penetrate deeper into tissue.  The edge is slight, but it's real, and any edge I can get in retained energy and wind drift I will take.

Combined with ability to launch 85gr bullets at 2900fps+, or 130gr high-BC bullets in the high .5's like the Berger 130gr and Swift Scirrocco 130 (.571 BC), the Grendel is truly and demonstrably the more capable cartridge when it comes to versatility across the application spectrum.  The others demonstrate a niche performance, while the Grendel can step into the shoes of all the intermediate cartridges and go toe-to-toe, even out of short barrels.

That may be true, but loading long, streamlined bullets does enable one to maximize the potential of 6.8 SPC.

There's no denying the advantages of that round, but I'd be more inclined to say 5.45x39 wins.

5.56 is to 5.45 as 6.8 is to 6.5 –– 5.56 and 6.8 load short, stubby bullets @ higher MV, while 5.45 and 6.5 have long, streamlined bullets @ slightly lower MV.

The poll seems to disagree.

BIG BIG difference in a 308 pushing a bullet at 2600+ and a 300blk pushing a lighter  bullet at 2200-2300
There is the big and slow camp and the smaller faster camp. 30 years ago when I shot a  30-30 the 30-30 never dropped animals like the 6.8 does with much lighter and faster bullets.
Agree on one thing the BC does matter much from 0-300 if the bullet with the lesser BC starts out 200fps faster like the 6.8 and 6.5 comparison, they are very close out to 300yds.

If the poll was used as a baseline, then .300 BLK should be an awesome intermediate cartridge, which it is not, and never was meant to be.  The .30 caliber camp are the reason why the US has been handicapped in small arms cartridge selection, at least when it comes to 7.62 NATO.  We literally screwed over NATO by adopting that chambering over the .280 Enfield, and we screwed ourselves over by canning the .276 Pedersen in the 1930's, since the original M1 Garand was smaller, had a 10rd clip loaded with .276 Ppedersen cartridges.

The mentality that has dominated the US military cartridge and chambering since...well even the late 1800's has been one of bigger=better, while ignoring higher efficiency projectiles.  The 5.56 NATO story is an anomoly among this saga of bean counters and non gun guys making decisions waaaay above their mental capacity grade, even when considering the logistics chain aspect, since machineguns and rifles never had ammo issued in the same packaging anyway, and still don't.

That being said, a lot was done to make the 7.62x51 NATO an impressive cartridge in its own right, namely by using a boat tail FMJ bullet design to help retain energy, and using a high-pressure case run to maximum loading for high muzzle velocity.

Since 7.62 NATO is not an intermediate cartridge, and represents maximum pressure loads with a 40-47gr case capacity, a .30 cal built on a 27gr or less case capacity is going to suck ballistically within practical rifle engagement ranges in military settings.

LLRP

I use the 6.8 for hunting and I'm a happy camper. The 85 TSX  an 95 TTSX represent great bullets for the 6.8, and the 95 TTSX has a Taylor made expansion envelope for the 6.8.

The 6.5 110 Barnes bullet, do you know the lower expansion limit?
It?

Your charts rock btw

I've set my 6.8s up for hunting with 3x9 scopes. My Blackouts set up with dots will be for HD when I get and test the Blacktip ammo.

I have a 264 barrel coming ARP. It will wear a 20x scope, I don't know if I'll hunt with it, but it will shoot lots of rocks and steel.

264, 300 BLK, 6.8, all good intermediates for me, I'm glad Im not limited to just one rifle.

For long range the 6mm BR sounds promising with the 108 gr. berger at BC .556, if that can be turned out at the regular 2900 fps. I like 6mm being a fan of the .243....

I'm really not sure why the .243WSSM wouldn't be a candidate as well. That would run it up to 3100fps.

There are lots of nice 6mm bullets.

http://accurateshooter.net/pix/6mmlinex600.jpg

<Off-topic comment removed - Z>




The numbers just are not there, however, hype and marketing is. I'd consider the 300 if I were going to shoot subs suppressed and wanted a 8" barrel. Other than those specs, the 300 is a gimmick. Hell, a heavy 5.56 makes more sense. To each his own, spend your money as you please.
 

What amazes me is all the armchair quarterbacking going on. If the 300 BLK is so lacking then you won't mind standing downrange when it goes off, will you?

However, the reality is 300 Whisper and 300 BLK were designed to put a 30 caliber bullet in a 5.56 case.  It's that simple. Due to that simplicity, you get parts commonality with the AR-15/M-16/M-4 Stoner design on everything but the barrel.

It can do everything that 7.62x39 can, and no one wants to stand in front of that.  Also, no one debates whether or not it's an intermediate cartridge, nor whether it can take game at reasonable distances..

"Best" is in the eyes of the beholder.  As far as I'm concerned, and anyone with a decent amount of experience knows, there is no "best" for anything, only a compromise of what can be done based on the limitations of what you have. Know the advantages, know the limitations, then pick your poison.

This debate is meaningless, full of ignorance, and I even see what I can only describe by a couple of posters as an intentional desire to mislead people.

If you like a 30 caliber bullet in a 5.56 package, then you'll be happy with the Blackout.  If the platform commonality and overwhelming OEM support starting to gush through the floodgates doesn't override the inherent limitations of the cartridge design, then you're not going to be happy with it.

It's that freaking simple.  Move along.  These are not the droids you are looking for.

sywagon
 I can agree with the bullets specifically made for the 30-30 it's pretty much a 200 yard round- but who said it can only be used with round nosed bullets?   I've shot the Speer 130 HP out of mine- yes it limits you to two rounds-  but load these and it becomes a good round out to 250 or better!  I've got some 125 gr TNT's -never shot them before I got my 300 Blk but I think I;m going to give them a go in the 30-30 for shits and giggles!  I'd love to find some good 120 gr soft points bt's!
I've shot some yotes with the 30-30 and the 130 HP they are  a great round at that speed act just like most SP  not explosive like they are at '06 speeds.  So I expect the same results at the 300 Black speeds witch will make them a very good stopper !    Maybe I can get a muley to co-operate and step in front of one!

That is what is called a straw man argument.  I could also say, "You wouldn't want to stand in front of a .357 Magnum, .22 LR, 9mm, etc., would you!?"  I personally don't want to stand in front of anyone's muzzle, as I've been shot and shot at more than I ever care to be ever again.  It still doesn't make .300 BLK a viable intermediate cartridge because you don't want to make an apointment with one.

I could also load a Grendel with the 140gr and 160gr bullets and run them in the low 2000fps range, and they still will have more retained energy, less drop, and better terminal performance.  I've always thought of the .300 Whisper as a great suppressed cartridge for the SBR AR15.  There are far better supersonic cartridges designed as such, whereas the .300 was never intended to be a competitive intermediate rifle cartridge.  Placing the .300 in the mix with modern cartidges that fit in the AR15 action and trying to compare it to them is like getting on your bike and racing with the short bus-it will be close, but I wouldn't mount the trophy for all to see.

If you enjoy taking game or plinking with them, shoot away without regret.  Where I live, we deal with longer than average shooting distances, so it makes more sense for me to look at a caliber that has more reach to it.  I shoot more 5.56 than anything through my carbines, and that will never change.  I don't plan to load for so many chamberings that I become over-diversified, so 5.56, Grendel, & .260 Rem make a lot of sense for me.  I'm wishing that my .270 Winchester Pre-64 was a .264 Win Mag, and not a .270 Win, but it is what it is, and I load for it occasionally.

300 BLK expands to 0.600 at 300 yards from a 9 inch barrel.  And it penetrates 20 inches. That will stop a deer, hog, criminal, etc.

There is no denying it does the job at ranges that matter and beyond.




It has been used to win the nationals in 3-gun - while making Major power factor - so anyone who says it is not capable of power is damaging their own credibility. But since you are an anonymous internment poster, your reputation probably does not matter as you can just get a new screen name at any time.

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/201 ... nationals/

"Why is this cartidge a capable intermediate rifle cartridge?"

"Because someone won the 3-gun Nationals with it!  We even have the ISPC cardboard targets to prove it!"

Correlation does not equal causation, especially here.  What's the trajectory of a 110gr Barnes Vortex at 300yds out of a 9" barrel.   What's the MV out of a 9" barrel?

Uh, did you miss the at the end of my sentence? Look, threads like this are nothing more than mental masturbation for gun nuts. Don't take it so seriously.

Okay, you're rather off topic, but I'm going to respond anyway.

a. Adopting 7.62x51 didn't really screw over NATO. The physical dimensions of the .280 British cartridge would have resulted in rifles and machine guns just as big and heavy as those for 7.62 NATO. Rifle magazine size and weight would likewise have been the same. Ammo weight would've been somewhat less with .280, and controllability somewhat better, but otherwise the British round has the same issues as 7.62x51.

b. Very little was lost by not adopting .276 Pedersen. The .276 T3E2 Garand was only 12 ounces lighter and 1.5 inches shorter than the .30 M1 Garand. As for clip capacities of 10-rd vs 8-rd, I don't see that as having any significant impact on combat effectiveness. In addition, if the .276 Garand had been adopted, the US would've entered WWII with a 3-caliber system: .30-06 machine guns, .276 rifles, and .30 M1 carbines. The Army has always opposed having three calibers.

c. It's just not true that the Army mentality has always been "bigger=better, while ignoring higher efficiency projectiles." They started off with .69 round balls in the late 1700s, then changed to .58 Minie balls in 1855, then reduced caliber to .50 in 1866, followed by .45 in 1873, and .30 in 1892. Army leadership recognized the advantages of reducing caliber and increasing velocity. They just weren't sure that switching to a .22 varmint cartridge was viable. Remember, we have the benefit of hindsight; in the 1950s, the SCHV concept was unproven, but there were years of battlefield experience showing that .30 caliber worked.

.300 BLK offers performance comparable to 7.62x39, and that seems to have done pretty well.

Yeah and you believe everything you read also. When you mortar that round into a deer at 300yds, assuming you actually call your dope right, don't laugh when it runs off wounded. The 300 is out of gas at those distances. I gave it it's due, a 300yd round it is not. For deer sized game, your best bet is going to be within 150-175yds. Unless you like to track and watch deer hobble off into the dark yonder. Not sportsman like.

You guys need to get serious...

I'd like to know as well.  A rainbow arc, with good results.... is still a rainbow arc.  It's not like you will be able to go from a MOUT enviroment and then switch to +400 yards at the drop of a hat.

To each his own.  I'll stick to my Grendel.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

The OP needs to come back to this thread and specify "best for what". Otherwise continued discussion of what is "best" is impossible and the only thing that even makes a little sense as being useful is characterizing the individual merits of the different options independently.





Yeah, I've got nothing against .300BLK or 30-30. They have their uses. The example you give actually illustrates the importance of BC at <300 yards though. In spite of having a variety of superior long range rifle chamberings, I am a huge fan of my 1892 .44mag. In 300gr within range it will drop a big bear or elk in it's spot. For me personally it is a great round because I like causing massive destruction to inanimate objects out to 100yards with a peep sight and I like big holes in paper. I also enjoy shooting tiny groups at >300 yards and long range hunting, hence my personal interest in 6.5 for me, but if I could keep only one it would likely be the .44 because it is just stupidly fun to me. If SHTF I would want BOTH, and a shotgun, and a bunch of other stuff.

6.8spc for me.

Perfect balance for me and what I use mine for.  Hunting.


Cheap ammo is coming but not fast enuff!

Yes, thank you General Zhukov....


My 10.5" 6.8 launches 85 grain pills at 2700 fps (with a suppressor on).  I can get 3100 in my 18" barreled upper.  I haven't shot much else out of the shorty....no need, in my book.  I guess I could try the 95gr TTSX.

At the end of the day, the diversity of list isn't really very impressive for a platform. I can run that many just buying uppers for my Witness. I'm unclear on why anyone would want less options.