Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Page AR-15 » Ammunition
AR Sponsor: bravocompany
Site Notices
Army and the new 6.8mm (Page 1 of 2)
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 3/29/2024 10:33:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: T18B40]
I see where the Army is starting to issue and field a new rifle, XM-7, and a new SAW, the XM-250. Both are chambered in 6.8mm but not the Remington 6.8 SPC developed by some 5th Special Forces Group men about 10-15 years or so ago. Anybody have a good picture of the ammo and what its developed from, and who fit the weapon contracts as well?
Link Posted: 3/29/2024 10:39:58 PM EDT
[#1]
Try looking at the SIG website.
Link Posted: 3/29/2024 10:50:44 PM EDT
[#2]
This has been all over the news for years now. Google NGSW.
Link Posted: 3/30/2024 8:51:43 PM EDT
[#3]
I just noticed that it was adopted. I saw it a few years ago when the trials were started but I didn’t keep up with it. I reckon the millions of $’s spent on M4A1’s will see them put into storage somewhere. Our tax $ just spent like nothing to it. Just my opinion.
Link Posted: 3/31/2024 3:19:49 AM EDT
[#4]
Link Posted: 3/31/2024 7:52:12 AM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By T18B40:
I just noticed that it was adopted. I saw it a few years ago when the trials were started but I didn’t keep up with it. I reckon the millions of $’s spent on M4A1’s will see them put into storage somewhere. Our tax $ just spent like nothing to it. Just my opinion.
View Quote


M4 are only being replaced in Infantry line units.  Other support units, MOSs and other branches will still use the M4/5.56mm
Link Posted: 3/31/2024 7:59:00 PM EDT
[#6]
Originally Posted By T18B40:
I see where the Army is starting to issue and field a new rifle, XM-7, and a new SAW, the XM-250. Both are chambered in 6.8mm but not the Remington 6.8 SPC developed by some 5th Special Forces Group men about 10-15 years or so ago. Anybody have a good picture of the ammo and what its developed from, and who fit the weapon contracts as well?
View Quote


Holy Bat Man!

Seriously as others have said, there are NUMEROUS articles about this..............  google it and read away.
Link Posted: 3/31/2024 8:16:49 PM EDT
[#7]
The "new" 6.8x51 is a sad story. It's a throwback to pissing match between the US Army and the Britts in the early 1950's.

Pretty funny the Army's "new" cartridge/weapon is a resurrection of the thoughts that created the .270/.280 Brittish during the competition for a standardized cartridge for the newly created NATO. Granted the 6.8x51 reaches much higher pressure, the Ø6.8mm projectile was deemed to be the "ideal caliber" for military small arms as early as 1947.
Link Posted: 3/31/2024 9:43:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: T18B40] [#8]
Holy. Bat. Man.

As I stated earlier, I lost track of the progress for a few years as I hadn’t seen anything lately on it until I saw an article on it. I don’t read in this section every time I logon here either, which I’ve been a member at least 20+ years.   I’m just curious as to what the details are.  Google shows it but just curious if anybody has shot any of the ammo that SIG produces. Take a break, lighten up! 🇺🇸
Link Posted: 3/31/2024 9:50:22 PM EDT
[#9]
You would be hard pressed to find a worse caliber than 6.8. Maybe .25.
Link Posted: 3/31/2024 10:37:46 PM EDT
[#10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bfoosh06:
Just want to mention ... the new round has also been "throttled" back from 80K to 70K psi.
View Quote
Is there info for this somewhere? I thought the commercial available hybrid stuff still wasn't up to the 80K psi the combat loads were supposed to be?
Link Posted: 4/1/2024 2:31:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Combat_Diver] [#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Buffman_LT1:
Is there info for this somewhere? I thought the commercial available hybrid stuff still wasn't up to the 80K psi the combat loads were supposed to be?
View Quote


SIG rep mentioned it on a Garand Thumb video couple weeks back.
Link Posted: 4/1/2024 3:03:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Missilegeek] [#12]


https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2020/01/15/sig-sauer-introduce-277-fury/

The US Army’s new Service Rifle - The SIG SPEAR / NGSW XM5


The US Military's New Smart Optic that Aims For You. The XM-157


The US Army's new Belt fed Machine gun. The M250 is replacing the M249


Link Posted: 4/1/2024 4:47:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Combat_Diver] [#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History

Now we actually need the ballistics out of the M7's 13" bbl with actual issued loads.  Historically troops will still be only shooting out to 300m.
Link Posted: 4/1/2024 5:01:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: lazyengineer] [#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History

Except its not.  Now that they dropped the pressure to be 6.8 Creedmoor, it's ballistics will pretty much match 6.5 Creedmoor.  Because it's now just 6.8 Creedmoor.

I'll say this about Sig, they're Marketing and Military Contracts teams are pretty fucking awesome.
Link Posted: 4/1/2024 7:22:56 AM EDT
[#15]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By lazyengineer:
Except its not.  Now that they dropped the pressure to be 6.8 Creedmoor, it's ballistics will pretty much match 6.5 Creedmoor.  Because it's now just 6.8 Creedmoor.

I'll say this about Sig, they're Marketing and Military Contracts teams are pretty fucking awesome.
View Quote
SIG keeps delivering what the Army's asking for -- whether or not it makes sense, it keeps their lights on and pays the bills.
Link Posted: 4/1/2024 10:40:21 AM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2grimjim:  The "new" 6.8x51 is a sad story. It's a throwback to pissing match between the US Army and the Britts in the early 1950's.

Pretty funny the Army's "new" cartridge/weapon is a resurrection of the thoughts that created the .270/.280 Brittish during the competition for a standardized cartridge for the newly created NATO. Granted the 6.8x51 reaches much higher pressure, the Ø6.8mm projectile was deemed to be the "ideal caliber" for military small arms as early as 1947.
View Quote


It's a throwback to the Pattern 13.
Link Posted: 4/1/2024 11:10:56 AM EDT
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By T18B40:
I just noticed that it was adopted. I saw it a few years ago when the trials were started but I didn’t keep up with it. I reckon the millions of $’s spent on M4A1’s will see them put into storage somewhere. Our tax $ just spent like nothing to it. Just my opinion.
View Quote


You don't expect chy-na invaders to use AKs do ya?
Link Posted: 4/1/2024 11:48:42 AM EDT
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver:

Now we actually need the ballistics out of the M7's 13" bbl with actual issued loads.  Historically troops will still be only shooting out to 300m.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver:

Now we actually need the ballistics out of the M7's 13" bbl with actual issued loads.  Historically troops will still be only shooting out to 300m.


What's the source of the report that they're switching to a weaker load?

I don't remember where I read it, but if memory serves, the early plan was going to be different ammo for training vs deployment.

It seems that changing the ammo makes the whole thing pointless, they could have just gone with 7.62 or 6.5 man bun.
Link Posted: 4/1/2024 11:55:41 AM EDT
[#19]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Missilegeek:


What's the source of the report that they're switching to a weaker load?

I don't remember where I read it, but if memory serves, the early plan was going to be different ammo for training vs deployment.

It seems that changing the ammo makes the whole thing pointless, they could have just gone with 7.62 or 6.5 man bun.
View Quote

Mk17 SCAR already proven and could have shot M993 AP and saved all that money.
Link Posted: 4/1/2024 12:14:35 PM EDT
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2grimjim:
The "new" 6.8x51 is a sad story. It's a throwback to pissing match between the US Army and the Britts in the early 1950's.

Pretty funny the Army's "new" cartridge/weapon is a resurrection of the thoughts that created the .270/.280 Brittish during the competition for a standardized cartridge for the newly created NATO. Granted the 6.8x51 reaches much higher pressure, the  6.8mm projectile was deemed to be the "ideal caliber" for military small arms as early as 1947.
View Quote
Good 2nd post.
Link Posted: 4/1/2024 12:46:25 PM EDT
[#21]
Stupid

Link Posted: 4/1/2024 4:56:52 PM EDT
[#22]
I ean Standard m80 in my issued Scar17.  Still wanted to have 5.56 since ironically i also Was calling in airstrikes and leading the teams but I was the A gun next to my m240 and SR25 dudes.
Link Posted: 4/2/2024 12:18:54 AM EDT
[#23]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver:

Mk17 SCAR already proven and could have shot M993 AP and saved all that money.
View Quote
The current issue XM1158 out performs (allegedly) M993 AP. Sig or US army claimed to have a 6.8 load of similar qualifications with that 3000 fps velocity from shorter barrel lengths.
Link Posted: 4/2/2024 12:54:08 AM EDT
[#24]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Buffman_LT1:


The current issue XM1158 out performs (allegedly) M993 AP. Sig or US army claimed to have a 6.8 load of similar qualifications with that 3000 fps velocity from shorter barrel lengths.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Buffman_LT1:
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver:  Mk17 SCAR already proven and could have shot M993 AP and saved all that money.


The current issue XM1158 out performs (allegedly) M993 AP. Sig or US army claimed to have a 6.8 load of similar qualifications with that 3000 fps velocity from shorter barrel lengths.


Do we really think we're going to defeat ceramic armor in the long run with small arms?  We're gonna crack Russian plates, so they'll thicken their plate & come up w/ something to crack our XSAPIs, so we'll thicken our XSAPIs...  This is how you get to power armor.  This is the same thought process that led to the Pattern 13, which was a fool's errand - they had a perfectly good rifle that lasted them through two world wars, they never needed the Pattern 13.
Link Posted: 4/2/2024 1:04:05 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Combat_Diver] [#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By backbencher:


Do we really think we're going to defeat ceramic armor in the long run with small arms?  We're gonna crack Russian plates, so they'll thicken their plate & come up w/ something to crack our XSAPIs, so we'll thicken our XSAPIs...  This is how you get to power armor.  This is the same thought process that led to the Pattern 13, which was a fool's errand - they had a perfectly good rifle that lasted them through two world wars, they never needed the Pattern 13.
View Quote


The Brits hadn't fought 2 world wars yet, only the Boer war and the Enfield was lacking then.  Remember the MLE didn't have a charger system (not till very late 1890s) and had long range accuracy issues which the Pattern 13 corrected.
Link Posted: 4/2/2024 1:08:19 AM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver:


The Brits hadn't fought 2 world wars yet, only the Boer war and the Enfield was lacking then.  Remember the MLE didn't have a charger system (not till very late 1890s) and had long range accuracy issues which the Pattern 13 corrected.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver:
Originally Posted By backbencher:  Do we really think we're going to defeat ceramic armor in the long run with small arms?  We're gonna crack Russian plates, so they'll thicken their plate & come up w/ something to crack our XSAPIs, so we'll thicken our XSAPIs...  This is how you get to power armor.  This is the same thought process that led to the Pattern 13, which was a fool's errand - they had a perfectly good rifle that lasted them through two world wars, they never needed the Pattern 13.


The Brits hadn't fought 2 world wars yet, only the Boer war and the Enfield was lacking then.  Remember the MLE didn't have a charger system (not till very late 1890s) and had long range accuracy issues which the Pattern 13 corrected.


And then light & heavy machineguns, and the modern mortar, which ended the range issues.
Link Posted: 4/2/2024 7:08:01 AM EDT
[#27]
I can't believe we are actually going to field these firearms. I think the ammo choice was stupid.
Link Posted: 4/2/2024 7:44:37 AM EDT
[#28]
I liked The new gpmg concept replace all m249s and m240s with this to a degree.  Just when we have a nato proxy war, another war about to start and others that might start I think it’s a bad time to replace the m4.  Also with the new stupid requirements for the Army these soy boys and limp girls cannot lift this gun.
Link Posted: 4/2/2024 8:09:04 AM EDT
[#29]
Yeah the GPMG is pretty cool but I still think they should have kept the 7.62 cal. Replacing the M4 was just stupid to me. It works and we know it. Maybe I'm just old.
Link Posted: 4/2/2024 10:20:38 AM EDT
[#30]
SIG must have really great

HOOKERS & BLOW

Link Posted: 4/2/2024 3:24:53 PM EDT
[#31]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Colt653:
SIG must have really great

HOOKERS & BLOW

View Quote


Or maybe the other companies that submitted rifles didn't meet the requirements, or the troops testing the other rifles, just liked the SIG better.
Link Posted: 4/2/2024 3:34:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: lazyengineer] [#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 1-75Ranger:


Or maybe the other companies that submitted rifles didn't meet the requirements, or the troops testing the other rifles, just liked the SIG better.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 1-75Ranger:
Originally Posted By Colt653:
SIG must have really great

HOOKERS & BLOW



Or maybe the other companies that submitted rifles didn't meet the requirements, or the troops testing the other rifles, just liked the SIG better.

Eh - some truth.  It was a child's fantasy spec when DARPA/Army wrote it - and Sig were the ones who gave it the best try.  That part is actually kind of true.
Link Posted: 4/3/2024 11:41:52 PM EDT
[#33]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By backbencher:


Do we really think we're going to defeat ceramic armor in the long run with small arms?  We're gonna crack Russian plates, so they'll thicken their plate & come up w/ something to crack our XSAPIs, so we'll thicken our XSAPIs...  This is how you get to power armor.  This is the same thought process that led to the Pattern 13, which was a fool's errand - they had a perfectly good rifle that lasted them through two world wars, they never needed the Pattern 13.
View Quote
Well we don't even field XSAPI's. I'm sure Russia will make some new fangled bullet, but I'm still very curious on M1158's performance over M993. I can defeat Level IV ceramics from sometimes as short as a 13" barrel.  More velocity from the 6.8 at the muzzle with a similar bullet is going to extend the range at which opposing forces could be compromised in single hits.
Link Posted: 4/4/2024 1:10:45 PM EDT
[#34]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Buffman_LT1:


Well we don't even field XSAPI's. I'm sure Russia will make some new fangled bullet, but I'm still very curious on M1158's performance over M993. I can defeat Level IV ceramics from sometimes as short as a 13" barrel.  More velocity from the 6.8 at the muzzle with a similar bullet is going to extend the range at which opposing forces could be compromised in single hits.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Buffman_LT1:
Originally Posted By backbencher:  Do we really think we're going to defeat ceramic armor in the long run with small arms?  We're gonna crack Russian plates, so they'll thicken their plate & come up w/ something to crack our XSAPIs, so we'll thicken our XSAPIs...  This is how you get to power armor.  This is the same thought process that led to the Pattern 13, which was a fool's errand - they had a perfectly good rifle that lasted them through two world wars, they never needed the Pattern 13.


Well we don't even field XSAPI's. I'm sure Russia will make some new fangled bullet, but I'm still very curious on M1158's performance over M993. I can defeat Level IV ceramics from sometimes as short as a 13" barrel.  More velocity from the 6.8 at the muzzle with a similar bullet is going to extend the range at which opposing forces could be compromised in single hits.


 Of course we field XSAPIs.
Link Posted: 4/4/2024 1:18:26 PM EDT
[#35]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SteveOak:
You would be hard pressed to find a worse caliber than 6.8. Maybe .25.
View Quote


That’s not true at all. Bullet design is everything, not caliber.
Link Posted: 4/4/2024 1:25:03 PM EDT
[#36]
The round was one of the initiatives of Mark Miley when he was the chief of staff of the Army.
Link Posted: 4/4/2024 3:08:36 PM EDT
[#37]
Are people getting confused between the 6.8x51 with the steel case head at the 80,000 psi level and the 277 Fury with a standard all brass case at 65,000 psi SIG is getting approved as a commercial cartridge via SAAMI?
Army is simply repeating the same mistake they made with the M14. Yes, they need a cartridge with a heavier bullet for more knockdown power than the 5.56, but it needs to be less powerful than the 308 and with a lighter bullet to reduce recoil. The 7mm the British came up with back in the 50's wouldn't be the worst choice, but I think that it could be improved with today's powders and technology.
And who doesn't like the 25 caliber, it's almost uniquely American. 25-20, 25-35. 250 Savage, 257 Roberts, 25-06, 257 Weatherby; just a lot of great cartridges were made in this caliber for everything from shooting varmints raiding the hen house to deer to elk and African antelope.
Link Posted: 4/4/2024 6:00:41 PM EDT
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By engineer61:  Are people getting confused between the 6.8x51 with the steel case head at the 80,000 psi level and the 277 Fury with a standard all brass case at 65,000 psi SIG is getting approved as a commercial cartridge via SAAMI?
Army is simply repeating the same mistake they made with the M14. Yes, they need a cartridge with a heavier bullet for more knockdown power than the 5.56, but it needs to be less powerful than the 308 and with a lighter bullet to reduce recoil. The 7mm the British came up with back in the 50's wouldn't be the worst choice, but I think that it could be improved with today's powders and technology.
And who doesn't like the 25 caliber, it's almost uniquely American. 25-20, 25-35. 250 Savage, 257 Roberts, 25-06, 257 Weatherby; just a lot of great cartridges were made in this caliber for everything from shooting varmints raiding the hen house to deer to elk and African antelope.
View Quote


The Army, b/c they can't fit enough tracer compound in it to max range.
Link Posted: 4/4/2024 6:26:53 PM EDT
[#39]
Link Posted: 4/5/2024 12:10:40 AM EDT
[#40]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By backbencher:


 Of course we field XSAPIs.
View Quote
The interwebz says roughly 120K XSAPI's were procured and they're all sitting in storage.
Link Posted: 4/8/2024 1:35:15 PM EDT
[#41]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Buffman_LT1:


The interwebz says roughly 120K XSAPI's were procured and they're all sitting in storage.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Buffman_LT1:
Originally Posted By backbencher:    Of course we field XSAPIs.


The interwebz says roughly 120K XSAPI's were procured and they're all sitting in storage.


I was issued front & back XSAPIs in 2010 & turned em in when I reentered Kuwait in late 2011.
Link Posted: 4/8/2024 4:04:08 PM EDT
[#42]
338 GPMGs
Carl Gs
Switchblade 300 or similar drone
And a shoulder fired HP 40mm (like the chicoms have)

All would give infantry platoons lethality at 1k+
Link Posted: 4/9/2024 10:13:22 PM EDT
[#43]
New facilities coming to Lake City:  

https://www.thetacticalwire.com/releases/09f4b6c3-a818-4ceb-91f3-43952f383842
Link Posted: 4/18/2024 8:12:48 AM EDT
[#44]
I still think the secret reason for this gun is to be an anti-drone weapon that can be quickly mounted onto our own UGVs/UAVs. And all this stuff about Russian armor is just a publicly published pretense, in the back doors they're designing this thing for robots.
Link Posted: 4/18/2024 12:29:26 PM EDT
[#45]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By backbencher:


I was issued front & back XSAPIs in 2010 & turned em in when I reentered Kuwait in late 2011.
View Quote
Got it. To my knowledge no one is currently fielded those XSAPI's
Link Posted: 4/27/2024 11:43:56 PM EDT
[#46]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By T18B40:
I just noticed that it was adopted. I saw it a few years ago when the trials were started but I didn’t keep up with it. I reckon the millions of $’s spent on M4A1’s will see them put into storage somewhere. Our tax $ just spent like nothing to it. Just my opinion.
View Quote


Last I remembered reading, the new weapons are only going to be issued combat arms troops.
Link Posted: 5/21/2024 4:50:48 PM EDT
[#47]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Buffman_LT1:
Got it. To my knowledge no one is currently fielded those XSAPI's
View Quote


I think he is confused with the green ESAPI. 2011-12 we had the ESAPI and in Kuwait they were replacing all old black SAPI with new green E ones.
I had green ESAPI 2011-12 in Afghanistan
Link Posted: 5/21/2024 9:14:50 PM EDT
[#48]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By scottrh2:


I think he is confused with the green ESAPI. 2011-12 we had the ESAPI and in Kuwait they were replacing all old black SAPI with new green E ones.
I had green ESAPI 2011-12 in Afghanistan
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By scottrh2:
Originally Posted By Buffman_LT1:
Got it. To my knowledge no one is currently fielded those XSAPI's


I think he is confused with the green ESAPI. 2011-12 we had the ESAPI and in Kuwait they were replacing all old black SAPI with new green E ones.
I had green ESAPI 2011-12 in Afghanistan


No sir.  Issued ESAPI at our MOB platform in Nov/Dec 2010, traded in the chest & back plates for XSAPI in Kuwait in Dec 2010 before we went to Iraq.
Link Posted: 5/22/2024 10:30:16 PM EDT
[#49]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By R0N:
The round was one of the initiatives of Mark Miley when he was the chief of staff of the Army.
View Quote

No shit?

I guess that tells me everything.

Big Army should have spent all that money on buying tons of actual tungsten AP ammo. Or on marksmanship training.

Watching the fighting in Ukraine, I dont see or hear a lot about obsession with AP performance. 90% are killed by HE from arty and now drones. The rest are shot multiple times. 3 hits to the legs and arms beats some 87K pressure super load from a 20lb rifle that may or may not penetrate Chicom ceramics.

Link Posted: 5/22/2024 10:32:22 PM EDT
[#50]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By dedreckon:
338 GPMGs
Carl Gs
Switchblade 300 or similar drone
And a shoulder fired HP 40mm (like the chicoms have)

All would give infantry platoons lethality at 1k+
View Quote

Agreed. The future is HE delivery.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Army and the new 6.8mm (Page 1 of 2)
Page AR-15 » Ammunition
AR Sponsor: bravocompany
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top