Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/5/2003 3:06:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/6/2003 7:33:48 AM EDT by mach6]
Can anyone help me out? I'll email them to you if you'll post them. Thanks.
Link Posted: 10/5/2003 3:11:43 PM EDT
Email them to vseven@cox.net
Link Posted: 10/5/2003 10:22:51 PM EDT
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid83/p049418182c8902b2ff1785c031e4cfea/fae62d05.jpg[/img] There they are [:D]
Link Posted: 10/5/2003 10:53:25 PM EDT
Those are AMax on the right, nasty little bugger.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 12:54:37 AM EDT
Ohhhhh, purdy. Anybody elaborate on the ballistics or where where to get 6.8mm bullets (.270?) Best regards, J
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 12:50:27 PM EDT
BTT
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 1:13:18 PM EDT
Cool! thanks for the pics. I thought they would maybe have a little more case taper than 5.56 or do they?
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 2:49:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/6/2003 3:02:49 PM EDT by wyv3rn]
Originally Posted By G-CODE: Cool! thanks for the pics. I thought they would maybe have a little more case taper than 5.56 or do they?
View Quote
I don't think they'd fit in the magazine or feed properly if they did. The biggest question on my mind about the 6.8mm X 43mm that I haven't found an answer for yet is: Does it fragment?
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 4:40:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By wyv3rn: The biggest question on my mind about the 6.8mm X 43mm that I haven't found an answer for yet is: Does it fragment?
View Quote
I seen some very impressive soft tissue damage in some pictures that was going around. definitely a good stopper.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 5:07:41 PM EDT
Originally Posted By wyv3rn:
Originally Posted By G-CODE: Cool! thanks for the pics. I thought they would maybe have a little more case taper than 5.56 or do they?
View Quote
I don't think they'd fit in the magazine or feed properly if they did. The biggest question on my mind about the 6.8mm X 43mm that I haven't found an answer for yet is: Does it fragment?
View Quote
Hahaha! He asks if the round developed with the Doc's inputs fragments! Thats hialrious! [LOL]
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 5:52:04 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DevL:
Originally Posted By wyv3rn:
Originally Posted By G-CODE: Cool! thanks for the pics. I thought they would maybe have a little more case taper than 5.56 or do they?
View Quote
I don't think they'd fit in the magazine or feed properly if they did. The biggest question on my mind about the 6.8mm X 43mm that I haven't found an answer for yet is: Does it fragment?
View Quote
Hahaha! He asks if the round developed with the Doc's inputs fragments! Thats hialrious! [LOL]
View Quote
[b]HAR HAR HAR![/b] Yep, that's a kneeslapper! What an idiot! Of course I believed that it fragmented, but there's another thing called not assuming, try it sometime.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 6:02:13 PM EDT
Theres a write up about the 6.5mm Grendel by Alexander Arms in the Oct. 6th edition of Shotgun News.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 6:10:35 PM EDT
I'm not sure the Doc's input has anything to do with whether the bullet fragments. I believe that bullet construction has a major influence on whether a bullet fragments, or tumbles for that matter. The bullet manufacturer could be a source of that information,...Hornady?
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 6:24:02 PM EDT
6.5 was the orginial round spec'ed. but it is nowhere like the Grendel. The 6.5 was changed in favor of the 6.8.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 6:26:27 PM EDT
Only bullets exhibiting the best terminal performance were going to be selected. I am sure several different bullets were tested before those final loaded rounds made the cut. To me its like asking if a car designed by a race car driver, purpose built to win road races, handles good and is fast. Anyway Dr Roberts has been stating quite often recently that a prpoer combat cartridge should be controllable in full auto, have a mag hold 25 rounds or more and have effectve terminal performance out to 600m. I dont think he would even help bring a round to the table that didnt have at least 200m of fragmenting range. I would be willing to bet the 6.8 ballistic tip will fragment out to 600m and would not be supprised if it penetrated 14" at that range too. Since I am a dick I will be quiet now and sit in the corner.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 6:34:22 PM EDT
Still need something for it to come out of.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 7:03:53 PM EDT
Or, just maybe, it's like asking if a space shuttle designed by a pilot/engineer, purpose built to go into space and return, handles good and returns. Whole. Just a question and comment. And why would you go into your corner? I didn't note any personal attack. This is supposed to be informative and fun...we're all on the same side. Relax.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 7:18:28 PM EDT
Heck, If I remember right the Japanese military used a 6.5mm. in WWII and it fragmented big time.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 7:40:11 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Horik: Heck, If I remember right the Japanese military used a 6.5mm. in WWII and it fragmented big time.
View Quote
Sometimes, if the Japs were lucky, in the target. :)
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 9:22:24 PM EDT
As near as I can tell, there have only been two rifle cartridges with a 0.276 bullet diameter: 6.8mm x 33R Tesching; and 6.8mm x 42R Resching. Does anybody know anything about these cartridges? I have also heard of a 6.8mm Chinese Mausers, but I am not sure if they fired these cartridges of whether they actually used 0.276 bullets. I guess you could also add the Pederson, but of course it was never produced. Are there any other true 0.276 cartridges out there?
Link Posted: 10/7/2003 7:10:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/7/2003 7:16:10 PM EDT by TX65]
Link Posted: 10/7/2003 7:25:23 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/7/2003 7:37:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By imposter: Are there any other true 0.276 cartridges out there?
View Quote
276 Pederson
Link Posted: 10/7/2003 11:19:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By imposter: As near as I can tell, there have only been two rifle cartridges with a 0.276 bullet diameter: 6.8mm x 33R Tesching; and 6.8mm x 42R Resching. Does anybody know anything about these cartridges? I have also heard of a 6.8mm Chinese Mausers, but I am not sure if they fired these cartridges of whether they actually used 0.276 bullets. I guess you could also add the Pederson, but of course it was never produced. Are there any other true 0.276 cartridges out there?
View Quote
Well, it depends if you mean bullet or land diameter. The .270 Winchester fires .277 bullets, but AFAIK those cartridges labelled .276 are usually 7mms, firing .284 bullets. Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition [URL=http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk]website[/URL] and discussion [URL=http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/] forum[/URL]
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 2:15:07 AM EDT
Originally Posted By mikepenn33: Still need something for it to come out of.
View Quote
How about this? [img]http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/docgkr/myhomepage/6.8mm_Barrett.jpg[/img] Or one of these.. [img]http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/docgkr/myhomepage/6.8mm_PRI.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 2:24:49 AM EDT
cool stuff. but I love my 5.56
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 4:37:46 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 5:03:19 AM EDT
Hmmm, that Barrett upper looks exactly like the Troy Industries upper.
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 5:31:20 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 6:22:11 AM EDT
Do you need a bigger ejection port, and therefore different upper reciever?
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 7:12:09 AM EDT
Here's a trajectory comparison vs. some other standard rounds from various barrels:
_BC_ _MV_ 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 | YARDS 0.243 3250 > -3.43 0.75 0.65 -5.23 -18.72 -43.00 -81.66 | > 20" ACOG STD TA01 0.218 3185 > -2.54 1.46 0.82 -6.29 -22.31 -51.56 -99.08 | > SMK 52gr 18" GUESS 0.218 3250 > -2.54 1.34 0.78 -5.97 -21.21 -49.02 -94.22 | > SMK 52gr 20" 0.305 2746 > -2.52 2.14 1.03 -7.48 -25.28 -55.57 -101.35 | > SMK 69gr 18" GUESS 0.305 2800 > -2.52 1.99 0.98 -7.13 -24.12 -53.03 -96.72 | > SMK 69gr 20" 0.355 2746 > -2.52 2.01 0.98 -6.98 -23.27 -50.32 -90.20 | > Hor 68gr 18" GUESS 0.355 2800 > -2.53 1.87 0.93 -6.65 -22.21 -48.05 -86.12 | > Hor 68gr 20" 0.362 2688 > -2.52 2.15 1.02 -7.29 -24.24 -52.32 -93.60 | > SMK 77gr 18" GUESS 0.362 2725 > -2.52 2.05 0.99 -7.05 -23.47 -50.66 -90.62 | > SMK 77gr 20" 0.395 2688 > -2.52 2.09 0.99 -7.05 -23.27 -49.83 -88.41 | > Hor 75gr 18" GUESS 0.395 2725 > -2.52 1.99 0.96 -6.82 -22.53 -48.26 -85.61 | > Hor 75gr 20" 0.365 2650 > -2.52 2.25 1.06 -7.52 -24.97 -53.84 -96.25 | > Hor 6.8mm 16.5" 0.353 2958 > -2.53 1.52 0.80 -5.82 -19.52 -42.30 -75.84 | > IMI M855 62gr - measured 16" 0.243 3049 > -2.53 1.62 0.87 -6.54 -22.80 -51.74 -97.52 | > SA M193 55gr - measured 16" 0.265 2914 > -2.53 1.84 0.94 -6.96 -23.96 -53.64 -99.73 | > 60gr TAP - measured 16" 0.395 2616 > -2.52 2.29 1.07 -7.52 -24.81 -53.11 -94.21 | > 75gr TAP / Bushmaster 16"
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 12:13:26 PM EDT
Oh I know this is a stupid question, but what are the disadvantages of the 6.8? Yup, only 28 will fit into a 30 rounder (probably some smart company will make a nice 30 rounder for it tho) and it's a tad heavier than the 5.56, but is there anything "bad" "bad"... it kind of sounds like the perfect round to me, but there must be a downside, no? :)
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 12:16:12 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 12:33:58 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 12:37:11 PM EDT
[rolleyes]
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 1:20:28 PM EDT
Dr. Roberts posted these pictures on tacticalforums.com and said that these uppers were publicly unveiled at the AUSA meeting.
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 1:27:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2003 1:28:28 PM EDT by AR223]
Originally Posted By MSTN: WHAT IT WILL TAKE TO CONVERT AN AR-15/M-4A1 TO 6.8 X 43 SPC: BARREL INTERMEDIATE LENGTH GAS SYSTEM BOLT MAGAZINE/S FLASH SUPPRESSOR/MUZZLE BRAKE AND OF COURSE...AMMO!
View Quote
Ahhh, so not a problem to convert an SPR upper by changing the barrel out! [devil] Gotta keep up with the latest (and greatest?)!
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 1:51:15 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 2:20:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2003 8:37:45 PM EDT by DocGKR]
TX65, Ronnie Barrett himself revealed this information publicly at AUSA. The person you spoke to at Barrett was in error; you might contact Chris Barrett directly, as he is at the factory today and is very aware of the public release of this information.
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 2:35:08 PM EDT
It's interesting to see the new trend toward stainless steel barrels. I wonder if this is done in order to meet the new accuracy/ zero retention objective(s). How much does stainless steel compare to 4150 in terms of durability? (especially during periods of moderate automatic fire)
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 2:41:33 PM EDT
Killing ability is a bi-product of what the intent was in the 6.8 development for greater range and accuracy do to the longer ranges in Afgahnistan, not the other way around. More accuracy and at greater distance, plus less affect by climate conditions and deflection from foliage etc., can cause more hits wouldn't ya say. Our troops have been asking for something better since NAM, and now they have it, and about time. No one else I know of has these at this time in the pipe line from what sources I have, no matter what some others might like you to believe. Very good shootin, Jack
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 2:49:30 PM EDT
I'm no ballistics expert, but I feel like the 6mmBS (6mmBitchSlap :)) round that I'm developing would do more things for more folks. I guess I've missed the boat, but who cares it would still be fun to make. I'm still working on the details on paper but am very close to ordering custom dies to make brass and getting a custom chamber reamer to build a barrel. Right now, I'm looking at a 90-95gr projectile around 3000-3200fps, depending on what the actual case volume ends up as. I feel like this round would be easier to use for the regular infantry since it is flat shooting, but still provide approximately twice the energy of M855 at 200yds. It should approximate heavy 6mmPPC ballisitcs and still fit in an AR15/M16 rifle. Wes
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 2:56:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 3rdtk: Killing ability is a bi-product of what the intent was in the 6.8 development for greater range and accuracy do to the longer ranges in Afgahnistan, not the other way around. More accuracy and at greater distance, plus less affect by climate conditions and deflection from foliage etc., can cause more hits wouldn't ya say. Our troops have been asking for something better since NAM, and now they have it, and about time. No one else I know of has these at this time in the pipe line from what sources I have, no matter what some others might like you to believe. Very good shootin, Jack
View Quote
It would seem that the Chinese were heading in the right direction with their development of the 5.8 cartridge, but for some odd reason they elected to load it with a very light weight projectile (that has a steel insert). Apparently, their desire for better anti-material capability was the motivation for the new caliber. If they loaded this cartridge with a heavier bullet it would seem likely that it would have better terminal effect. For the time being it would seem that we are the only ones who are headed in the right direction, in regard to small arms evolution.
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 4:00:53 PM EDT
Originally Posted By TX65: Downsides - blah blah blah
View Quote
Careful...your ignorance is showing.
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 4:29:54 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 3rdtk: Killing ability is a bi-product of what the intent was in the 6.8 development for greater range and accuracy do to the longer ranges in Afgahnistan, not the other way around.
View Quote
That's very interesting - Let me ask an honest question to the many people here with a lot of information - Dr. Roberts has mentioned the unsatifactory performance of green tip at short distances in terms of 'killing ability'- Would you say that the 75 and 77 grain rounds now in service 'solve' this problem at _short_ distances? I understand that 6.8 SPC beats both greentip and 75/77 in terminal effects at longer distances, but at short ranges where all the rounds mentioned are fragmenting, does 75/77 gr. "do the job" that M855 cannot or is it still not what one would want in terms of terminal performance? Is 6.8mm "better" than 77 at these short distances or are they comparable? Thanks for any replies
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 4:43:28 PM EDT
The round/weapon of the future in 2004/2005. Please let the ban GO AWAY AND DIE! Got Mags? Just .02 worth Samuel
Link Posted: 10/9/2003 5:27:56 PM EDT
Certainly an interesting thread to date. Now, who else has developed 6.8mm technology demonstrators and how have their approaches differed in execution and design philosophy. Thank you, all.
Link Posted: 10/9/2003 9:57:04 PM EDT
Its certainly an interesting development.. About how much extra weight are we talking for frontline troops ? Also is there any word of some kind of Minimi (SAW) conversion for the 6.8 mm ?
Link Posted: 10/9/2003 10:29:41 PM EDT
I can think of two negatives off the top of my head. More recoil. Heavier ammo. Small price to pay. I suspect it would be unsuitable for LE use in urban area as it would penetrate more too. Could be 100% wrong though, especially with the ballistic tipped version. This ammo will be superior to 75 77 grain ammo at close range and have better intermediate barrier penetration than 75/77 grain ammo. How much does this puppy kick Doc? Is it like a 7.62x39?
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 9:45:23 AM EDT
WHOLLY SHNIIIIKEES. It's very exciting. Thank you guys for the info and pics. Now when do we get to buy it? Hopefully not never!!!!!
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 4:56:54 PM EDT
While you guys were doing this, why did you not specify a thicker case rim for more positive extraction? The thin case rim on the 5.56 has always been its weakest point.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top