Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 9/22/2004 8:36:05 PM EST
I am asking for opinions on the new 6.8 mm cartridge versus 5.56 / 2.23 ? The new cartridge promises much better damage on target, at least matching accuraccy, and most importantly STOPPING POWER closer to the standard AK 7.62 mm. I have heard accounts from people who have used the 5.56 calibre in combat, and with the exception of accuraccy most weren't favorable. From what I hear it is not uncommon for targets to be hit multiple times and continue to fight at least breifly. I personally don't like this wounding rather than killing concept. I have also been told it is quite easy to distinguish who was hit with AK fire and who was hit with a M-16/AR-15. Also I read in a shotgun news article that the U.S. military was seriously looking into the 6.8 calibre to replace the standard 5.56 but manufacturers would not move forward with it for the military if the ban stayed in place, severley limiting civilian sales and making military development impractical. I have not heard any new info on military development but I know the H&K XM8 is to be issued next year in 5.56 in several variants as far as to my knowledge not in 6.8? I will soon aqquire an AK in 5.45 I think it will give a better balance of accuraccy and power but I know I will eventually break down and buy an AR.

info an opinions appreciated,

Matt
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:18:43 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/22/2004 9:20:20 PM EST by Sharkman629]
IMHO, shot placement is the most important factor for self-defense. I don't know much about the 6.8mm round so I won't comment about its performance. A larger diameter bullet will improve your chances of severing major blood vessels and cause more permanent damage to tissue and organs. Notice I said permanent damage, and not temporary. Many higher velocity bullets produce a large temporary cavity that expands the affected area. This tissue is not destroyed, only temporary shoved aside.

The more damage you permanently destroy, the more effective the round. Bottom line, shot placement is the most important factor. A .22 LR to the cerebral cortex will be much more effective than a .30 cal to the foot.

The 5.56x45 is a great round because it is easily placed on target and many more rounds can be carried because of the cartridge's profile and lighter weight. The downside is the bullet's small size and light weight. This is offset however, because of the round's ability to be placed well and placed well when the shooter is under stress, making it very manageable.

When considering a round you should choose on the largest bullet, both diameter and weight, that is the most manageable for you. If possible, you should shoot both before you decide. But then again, why not buy both?

Edited for typographical errors.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:57:39 PM EST
i read somewhere that the 6.8 beat the 5.56, 5.45, and the 7.64x39 in stopping power
115grs at 26oofps out of a 16in bbl
its trajectory is similar to the 7.62x51

shot placement IS everything, but a bigger or better caliber could not hurt either!
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 10:25:45 PM EST
Of course placement is paramount and most important, that goes without saying. If I put any bullet in someone's brain, heart, lungs, or occipital lobe ( base of the skull/top 7 vertebrae controling motor functions of the body) they drop permanantly. But in combat you have a large amount of limb stomach and other non-instantaneous wounds. Statisticly speaking I have read and heard most K.I.A. and W.I.A. are shot in the back. What I am most interested in is maximum potential for incapacitation weather dead or wounded. Put simply putting the mother f!!ker down that is why if I were in combat I would want an AK every time not even raising the question of reliability. I respect and appreciate your opinion though. Another thought just popped into my head how about Somalia, the Somalis generally did not care for their wounded in combat I'm sure this is not an isolated behavior (China, N.Korea, Russia to a minor degree)

To the other replier, snipers are generally about the only troops in combat that get to choose when, where, and what with they make their shots with. That said distribution problems aside I'm fairly sure some 6.8 has made it to combat whether issued or personal weapon. I am in total agreement most of the stats are probably bulls??t and it not might be rational but add the human factor (lack of other options, general stupidity, motivated distributers, or shear chance) and wouldn't be totally impossible it was used a few times. again the feedback is greatly appreciated.

look forward to more replies
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 10:31:02 PM EST
What is your thesis?

Have you actually read all that is available re: terminal ballistics, and 6.8?

If not, you are just wasting time and stumbling around in the dark.

5.45 and 7.62x39 terminal ballistics are poor.
M855 and M193 are ok when impact velocity is high.
Mk262 (77gr) 5.56 is better than M855 and M193 at any distance, from the same length barrel.
6.8SPC is superior to Mk262.
308 OTM rounds will be superior to 6.8SPC, but need a larger platform.



Link Posted: 9/22/2004 10:39:12 PM EST
Appreciate the point in the other direction I was not aware that was their, as I spend the overwhelming amount my time on this site in the AK and handgun area.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 11:05:48 PM EST
I think the single wounded man takes 2 other healthy soldiers out of combat theory is bulls!?t. In WWII the Japanese shot medics just as if they were any soldier even making them priority targets and as far as I know so do most other armies. I think everyone hear knows the sniper tactic of wounding with the first shot to draw out other targets. The larger weapon system is almost always better in killing your target (.308) but as you pointed out controlability becomes a problem. I am simply looking for resources and opinions to do my own research and formulate my opinion. Again I greatly appreciate the exchange.

Thanks,

Matt
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 3:04:33 AM EST
FYI the 7.62x39 is not known to be a steller man stopper either. The 5.56 might actually have an edge due to the fact that the 7.62x39 just makes clean 7.62mm hole and doesn't fragment. Now the .308 and 30-06 are man stoppers.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 3:30:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By StewartTR:
FYI the 7.62x39 is not known to be a steller man stopper either. The 5.56 might actually have an edge due to the fact that the 7.62x39 just makes clean 7.62mm hole and doesn't fragment. Now the .308 and 30-06 are man stoppers.



+1


Put simply putting the mother f!!ker down that is why if I were in combat I would want an AK every time


FN-FAL or M14 would probably be best for that, in the battle rifle context. Plus, AK's jam too, ya know. Just get a good quality, accurate, reliable piece, and you can't go wrong.
Top Top