User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/5/2003 3:11:43 PM EDT
[#1]
Email them to [email protected]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2003 10:22:51 PM EDT
[#2]
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid83/p049418182c8902b2ff1785c031e4cfea/fae62d05.jpg[/img]
There they are [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2003 10:53:25 PM EDT
[#3]
Those are AMax on the right, nasty little bugger.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 12:54:37 AM EDT
[#4]
Ohhhhh, purdy.
Anybody elaborate on the ballistics or where where to get 6.8mm bullets (.270?) Best regards, J |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 12:50:27 PM EDT
[#5]
BTT
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 1:13:18 PM EDT
[#6]
Cool! thanks for the pics. I thought they would maybe have a little more case taper than 5.56 or do they?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 2:49:02 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: Cool! thanks for the pics. I thought they would maybe have a little more case taper than 5.56 or do they? 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? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 4:40:32 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: 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? I seen some very impressive soft tissue damage in some pictures that was going around. definitely a good stopper. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 5:07:41 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: Quoted: Cool! thanks for the pics. I thought they would maybe have a little more case taper than 5.56 or do they? 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? Hahaha! He asks if the round developed with the Doc's inputs fragments! Thats hialrious! [LOL] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 5:52:04 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Cool! thanks for the pics. I thought they would maybe have a little more case taper than 5.56 or do they? 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? Hahaha! He asks if the round developed with the Doc's inputs fragments! Thats hialrious! [LOL] [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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 6:02:13 PM EDT
[#11]
Theres a write up about the 6.5mm Grendel by Alexander Arms in the Oct. 6th edition of Shotgun News.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 6:10:35 PM EDT
[#12]
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?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 6:24:02 PM EDT
[#13]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 6:26:27 PM EDT
[#14]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 6:34:22 PM EDT
[#15]
Still need something for it to come out of.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 7:03:53 PM EDT
[#16]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 7:18:28 PM EDT
[#17]
Heck, If I remember right the Japanese military used a 6.5mm. in WWII and it fragmented big time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 7:40:11 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted: Heck, If I remember right the Japanese military used a 6.5mm. in WWII and it fragmented big time. Sometimes, if the Japs were lucky, in the target. :) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2003 9:22:24 PM EDT
[#19]
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? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 7:10:52 PM EDT
[#20]
Rounds in Photo of 6.8RemSPC
Bullet #2 Hornady 115 grain HPBT - .352 BC Bullet #3 Hornady 110 grain VMAX - .365 BC For comparison: In the .223 Remington .224 Sierra 77 MK - .362 BC In the 6.5 Grendel 6.5mm Lapua 123 grain Scenar - .547 BC |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 7:25:23 PM EDT
[#21]
TO QUOTE PAT ROGERS:
"WE LIVE IN A 300 METER WORLD." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 7:37:57 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: Are there any other true 0.276 cartridges out there? 276 Pederson |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 11:19:02 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: 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? 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] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 2:15:07 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Still need something for it to come out of. 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] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 2:24:49 AM EDT
[#25]
cool stuff. but I love my 5.56
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 4:37:46 AM EDT
[#26]
COOL PIC!
NOW, WHERE HAVE I SEEN SOMETHING LIKE THAT BEFORE ??? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 5:03:19 AM EDT
[#27]
Hmmm, that Barrett upper looks exactly like the Troy Industries upper.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 5:31:20 AM EDT
[#28]
WRONG. NOTHING "TROY INDSTRIES" ABOUT IT, OTHER THAN THE USE OF AN ARMS SIR AND PRI FLIP UP FRONT, AND UNCOATED STAINLESS BARREL.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 6:22:11 AM EDT
[#29]
Do you need a bigger ejection port, and therefore different upper reciever?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 7:12:09 AM EDT
[#30]
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" |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 12:13:26 PM EDT
[#31]
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?
:) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 12:16:12 PM EDT
[#32]
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! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 12:33:58 PM EDT
[#33]
Just got off the phone with Barrett. They asked me to post the following:
" Barrett is working on a project involving the 6.5mmRemSPC, but that they have no information for public release at this time and when or if it does become available, it will be posted at http://www.barrettrifles.com" They also said that release of the sheet posted here was unauthorized and should not have been done by whomever came into possession of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 12:37:11 PM EDT
[#34]
[rolleyes]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 1:20:28 PM EDT
[#35]
Dr. Roberts posted these pictures on tacticalforums.com and said that these uppers were publicly unveiled at the AUSA meeting.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 1:27:50 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted: 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! Ahhh, so not a problem to convert an SPR upper by changing the barrel out! [devil] Gotta keep up with the latest (and greatest?)! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 1:51:15 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: Dr. Roberts posted these pictures on tacticalforums.com and said that these uppers were publicly unveiled at the AUSA meeting. Just conveying what Barret themselves asked me to post when I called to learn more about it. Whatever the source of the information, they did not intend it for publication in the civilian community at this time. Feel free to call them yourself. They were very nice, just surprised that had been published on the internet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 2:20:13 PM EDT
[#38]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 2:35:08 PM EDT
[#39]
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) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 2:41:33 PM EDT
[#40]
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 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 2:49:30 PM EDT
[#41]
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 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 2:56:44 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted: 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 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 4:00:53 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: Downsides - blah blah blah Careful...your ignorance is showing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 4:29:54 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: 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. 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 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 4:43:28 PM EDT
[#45]
The round/weapon of the future in 2004/2005.
Please let the ban GO AWAY AND DIE! Got Mags? Just .02 worth Samuel |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 5:27:56 PM EDT
[#46]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 9:57:04 PM EDT
[#47]
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 ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 10:29:41 PM EDT
[#48]
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? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/10/2003 9:45:23 AM EDT
[#49]
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!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2003 4:56:54 PM EDT
[#50]
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.
|
|
|
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.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
