AR Sponsor
Posted: 5/15/2004 7:36:17 PM EDT
|
If the Army adopts the XM-8, do you think they will switch over to the 77gr MK262 as our standard service round? I ask this because the 12.5" bbl will certainly cause stopping-power problems due to it having insufficient velocity to fragment reliably with 62gr M855 ammo. SF appears to be the only ones using 5.56mm barrels shorter than 14.5" in large numbers and (from what I understand) they have mostly switched over to MK 262. The main obstacle I see is cost of production, although this would be reduced considerably if volume went up. The only logistical problem would be with those countries that use rifles with 1 in 9" twist rifles (like the Steyr AUG). However, I don't see this as a factor critical enough to exclude the idea by it self. Does anyone else have opinions/knowledge about this? |
.
The original concept didn't include high fragment. They only learned about that after the fact. |
Y'mean like 7.62 NATO? |
|
The point is that existing 5.56 guns can be rebarreled, have the bolt changed, and use new mags, and BOOM, they're 6.8mm SPC. Unlike most caliber changes, this one wouldn't invalidate a country's entire investment in the platform. And, they could roll it out in stages, or however it works best for them. -Troy |
Uhh the Mk262 fragments MORE than the M855 & M193 - much better terminal ballistics (especially when they use the 77gr Nosler instead of the SMK). FYI the 'fragmentation effect' wasn't discovered to the 1980s - about 20 years after the adoption of M193. |
How the hell can the US (and other NATO allies) shoot M193 for 20 years and not notice the terminal balistics (fragmentation)? I suspect that the terminal performance of 5.56 NATO was known but not widely understood (by those outside the battle field) until the 1980's. What I am interested in is actual field reports on the 6.8 SPR. Will it live up to the goal? Or should we go back to the full size 7.62 NATO (.308) round in a full battle rifle. Our military has become fond of hanging a lot of stuff on their weapons and a full size 308 battle rifle would end up weighing 12-15 pounds. I just hope that the "half-step" 6.8 SPR is a big enough half step up in power for our brave men in battle. |
| What were the range results for the accuracy of the BH 77gr Noslers? If these barrel lengths do drop to 12.5", the neck of those 77gr SMK are going to be a lot deeper and less fragmentation. They'ed be better off with the Noslers if the accuracy isn't that much of a drop off. |
| Bill, why does it have to be an all or nothing proposition? If it does adopt the 6.8 every soldier wont get it right away. I could be wrong but logistically it just doesn't make horse sense. Should all the soldiers have either a 9mm or a .45? We are now seeing both. In WWII we had rifles in .45's, .30 carbines, and .30-06. We had pistols in .38 special, .32 auto, .22 (high standard), .45 auto and possibly, .380. I'm not sure about that one. What would be so terrible with 5.56, 6.8 spc, .308 and .50. And whatever else I don't know about. Heck, throw in some .270's for snipers for all I care (now that we're using the same bullet.) I know the military doesn't want to go overboard with calibers, or NATO. But it's just another tool in the kit. If they do adopt it, I hope the people that need the extra power get it first. But regardless, I don't understand why people would oppose it. It performs better under scientific experiments, so there's a darn good chance it will in real life too. |
Very true. |
You are confusing 'knowing the effects' and 'knowing how the effects were produced'. The effects were known since Vietnam - however nobody really studied it till Dr Fackler came along. There were theories of all sorts "tumbling', "Bullet bouncing around inside", "Hydrostatic shock", and other such wild theories. Until Fackler discovered HOW the .223 rounds caused the wounds they did you could not design nor select a round that took advantage of 'fragmentatnion'.
Of course it was known - what was not known was HOW it was accomplished
Go back to a round that has a smaller wound profile than the 5.56 M193? |
AR Sponsor