User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 2:52:05 PM EDT
[#1]
If you really beleive that 6.8 will become very popular in about a year, I'd wait until then to buy - because then more manufacturers will pick it up, and the ammo will get much cheaper. Being an early adopter is almost always much more expensive, and you have to be the "beta tester" and deal with teething problems of the new technology. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 3:02:00 PM EDT
[#2]
FWIW, Ammo is now readily available: www.silverstatearmory.com/68%20ammo.htm
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 5:05:56 PM EDT
[#3]
Oh yes-it will take off alright-just like the .41 mag, .357 SiG, and the Glock GAP .45. Stick with .223.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 5:29:04 PM EDT
[#4]
I owld have to say that a 5.56 upper is a must. The 6.8 is an extra.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 5:57:40 PM EDT
[#5]
I like to shoot and with Ammo that is reasonbly priced with good availability.
As to the Terminal Ballistics, No Argurement, but their are other rounds out their as well that are terminally better then 5.56. No magic bullet, no one shot death ray. Guys of been killin bad guys for 35 years with it, I suspect we'll kill a few more before it ends it's reign. Get some MK262 or TAP if you worried about the terminal Ballistics. me personally, I think the above poster 's anology is pretty good. I think the 6.8 is gonna die and go away, just my $.02 And if I'm wrong and it takes off, then great, once it's established, then maybe I'll get one.(Established in my book is me finding it at all the Places I go to now to buy ammo) |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 7:29:43 PM EDT
[#6]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 7:33:05 PM EDT
[#7]
I guess I just never saw a need for the 6.8 that isn't better fulfilled with an existing round in a different firearm.
I say stick with the .223 in ARs |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 7:45:14 PM EDT
[#8]
I look at this way:
If I shoot someone with my rifle more than 25 ft. away, even inside my home, I am going to have a hard time explaining that to the DA. If I shoot someone inside a car, same story. If it is a SHTF situation, I am not going to be able to realize it soon enough to grab all the supplies I'll need anyway. I'd rather just be competent with a decent rifle at reasonable ranges. The 5.56 should do that. That said, I have a 6.8 SPC upper in a box, in case ammo prices come down as it is a superior round, but at a higher cost. G PS - no, you may not borrow my stapler you lazy motherfuckers. Go to the range office and check one out for your lane |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 7:59:53 PM EDT
[#9]
When the french do finally show up in our neighborhoods under the powder-blue flag of the UN and start raping our women and taking our guns like they have done in Africa and other places, you had better have available weapons in common calibers. Not concept calibers that sound pretty.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 8:57:23 PM EDT
[#10]
My "concept caliber" upper shoots as well or better than my "common caliber" uppers do. It's funny, because it makes larger, non-conceptual holes in things too. Plus, recent research demonstrates, that a "concept caliber" upper can be swapped out for a "common caliber" upper in a matter of seconds. Or, I can just grab one of my complete "common caliber" guns. The 6.X rounds are much more real than any imaginary UN force that will come take our guns away. They aren't dirt cheap to shoot, but neither are a lot of rounds out there, which doesn't make any of them any less "real." |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 9:05:04 PM EDT
[#11]
I didn't say your concept rifle is unreliable. I was speaking to the availability of ammo. I hope you have enough. No flame intended.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2005 9:55:13 PM EDT
[#12]
Yes, the ammo thing was kinda tricky until SSA stepped up. I have over 600 rounds of 6.8 now, but would like to have more. I don't know if I will ever have enough, but that's more a function of what I want, not a function of what's available. ;) I've got lots of 5.56 too- since that's what I shoot more of anyway. I would recommend that anyone in the market for an AR begin with a 5.56 gun. Since it is the standard, it just makes more sense to get accustomed to the normal gun before venturing off into other calibers. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 7:11:02 AM EDT
[#13]
Readily Available != Cheap. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 7:12:19 AM EDT
[#14]
We can go back and forth on this subject forever, with no certainty whatsoever. Only time will tell what happens to the 6's.
I'm building a 6.8 because I want one. Not to replace my 5.56 weapons. Just cause I want one. I don't see the ammo ever getting down to 5.56 prices - unless it gets picked up by the military. I like to keep an extra 2k of ammo around for my primary long guns (ARs, AKs, M1A/FALs). Right now, I don't think my 6.8 will be one of my 'primary' weapons. So, if I had to choose (which is the basis of this thread) I'd go with the 5.56. Get the 6.8 when you have the extra $$$. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 1:14:11 PM EDT
[#16]
Market hall Gunshow in Dallas this weekend. Four or five vendors had 6.8 ammo in case quanities. Two types from Remington, OTC and Match, and some FMJ from SilverBear. It's getting out there.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 2:54:51 PM EDT
[#17]
Hornandy is now producing 6.8 ammo also. I've got 1500 rounds for testing. So far so good.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 3:04:40 PM EDT
[#18]
Blanket statements like that are usually false. Next time you pull into the lot at the SuperWallyWorld to grab some bread and a six pack on your way back from the range, look at the far side of the lot and imagine a traffic stop.....and the officer pinned down behind his car by a guy with a shotgun. Thats 200-300 meters. Is it likely? No. Statistically speaking few of us will be the victims of violent crime. But we don't rely on statistics, do we? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 3:07:53 PM EDT
[#19]
I'd like to have a 6.8SPC upper in the future. I'll wait for ammo to become more available though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 3:39:34 PM EDT
[#20]
i thought they were heading in the right direction with the 6.8 spc but what the hell do i know?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 3:50:10 PM EDT
[#21]
And I'm gonna pull out my AR and start capping rds across the parking lot???? Not me, Maybe you have a 4or 6X scope on yours and you can use it to complety understand the situation and identify good guys and bad guys before another unit rolls up on you as the "active Shooter" Sorry, but that's a little to far fetched for me. I believe G23's scenarios is a litle bit more grounded in reality if someone actually does use their AR in a self defense mode. Could it happen?? sure.. but I could get struck by lightning on my way to collect my lottery winnings as well....... 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 3:52:29 PM EDT
[#22]
And I'm gonna pull out my AR and start capping rds across the parking lot???? Not me, Maybe you have a 4or 6X scope on yours and you can use it to complety understand the situation and identify good guys and bad guys before another unit rolls up on you as the "active Shooter" Sorry, but that's a little to far fetched for me. I believe G23's scenarios is a litle bit more grounded in reality if someone actually does use their AR in a self defense mode. Could it happen?? sure.. but I could get struck by lightning on my way to collect my lottery winnings as well.......
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 4:50:59 PM EDT
[#23]
Say what? WIZZO |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 5:09:21 PM EDT
[#24]
Here's what you do lil' fella: start with the 5.56. And then in a month or two grab yourself a .458 SOCOM upper from RRA.
Then you can really throw down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 5:10:52 PM EDT
[#25]
Hey, it was the first thing that came to mind. Other things are more plausible. Just so long as the guy isn't standing there "when the flag flies" trying to figure out if the guy is 25 feet away or 26 feet. FWIW, I am hard pressed to think of ANY scenario where a civilian is in danger and must return fire at more than 100 meters (1 city block or so) or face death. Much more likely is that someone else is in danger. Ah, how about UT-Austin, August of 1966? From the tower to the farthest victims was roughly 400 yards, if published accounts are to be believed. Citizens returned fire, but made no hits (the guys who entered the tower excluded). |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 5:29:52 PM EDT
[#26]
I just wish someone would make cheap 77 grain 5.56NATO rounds.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 5:30:57 PM EDT
[#27]
I am waiting to see how well the rifle holds up with the reinforced lower and FCG...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 5:40:18 PM EDT
[#28]
I'm sure that everyone has read the 6.8mm SPC FAQ load data topics form, and maybe even read why it was developed by U.S. Spec-ops. its the same old problem! Back in the day, we here getting tired of what ever we hit, getting the F%#K up and running away! I don't wont to hear about shot placement. When your toed up face to face with a AK 47, so close that you can feel the heat coming of of it! you wont it to stop and NOW!not a half a mag later.
I was hoping that the Military would adopt the 6.8, are just anything for are boys in the fight today, but the bureaucrats just couldn't find.... anyway to make a buck off of it, so know were back to the, paper cutting beer can plinker 5.56! I'm sorry guys, just venting. Yes I do own an AR15 in 5.56 its great on Squirrel and Varmints around the place, this year I picket up a 6.8 SPC 16" upper and I'm never going to look back, I tagged a nice little buck with it last weekend , dropped it like a rock! With 3 times the knock down power, I would say... The Jury is out! Ritch |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 6:38:10 PM EDT
[#29]
Capn_Crunch reports purchasing some al Wal-Mart. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2005 9:36:24 PM EDT
[#30]
People really seem to get lost on the concept of the 6.8x43 SPC. Its not a wonder cartridge....
Its not even as good as the other 6.something *6.5 Grendel* It just happens to be the biggest/ most 7.62 like round that will fit in a standard 5.56 mag well. Thats it. Thats all it has going for it. As a civilian round, at least now, its pointless. Militarily, the 6.8 SPC is dead. It was nothing more than a "knee jerk" reaction in response to incidents of poor lethality from M855 and M4 carbines. Mk262 is a much more reasonable solution than adopting a third standard rifle cartridge. Using the Mk262 gives you the advantage of increased lethality and use of standard weapons components. The 6.8 SPC is inferior to 7.62x51 NATO in almost every way. While its not quite as heavy, its close...atleast its heavier than 5.56x45. The weight increase between 7.62 and 6.8 is minimal and the difference is notable compared to 5.56. Also, magazines, weapons and ammo are readily availible in many forms for 7.62 and will be for some time. The 6.8 SPC has peaked, it will not be adopted as the 5.56's replacement. It will never be adopted in great numbers. Soldiers carrying the Mk12 are realizing there isn't much difference between the Recce and a light combat load with a Mk11 or M25. The only thing the Mk12 offers is reduced lethality and capability compared to 7.62 counterparts with a negligible savings of weight. If you are bent on 6.8 wait and see if it catches on as a sporting round....it wont, but you never know or start to reload. Paying a fortune and stockpiliing 100 rounds at a time just isn't practical, especially when the round really isn't that great. If you don't want 7.62 NATO then get 6.5 Grendel superior in every way to 6.8 except when used in beltfed MG's. Just like people say, "Remember the 6mm SAW?" in a few years from now they will say "Remember the 6.8 SPC, what ever happend to that round?" Don't waste thousands of hard earned dollars on a dead idea. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 6:43:00 AM EDT
[#31]
I'll agree that weight is a disadvantage of the 6.#'s. But NOT when comparing 7.62NATO ammo!
While both 6's weigh about 28% more than 5.56NATO, the 7.62 weighs between 53-66% more (depending on bullet). Plus (correct me if I'm wrong), I don't think there is a battle-proven 7.62 rifle platform in the same weight category as the AR-type. So, the gun is heavier too. Now, you might make a good argument that the Grendel (with 144gr. bullet) could be a good replacement for the 7.62 - with the possible complication of potential feeding issues. I wouldn't argue that point too much. It's long-range performance is outstanding. But if long-range performance were the most important criteria, we'd still be issuing only M16s (or M14s). I believe short to mid-range terminal ballistics was the most important criteria. In that arena, the 6.8 takes a back seat to none of the above. But, let's be honest. The 6.8 not being adopted by the mil was not based on any performance criteria. It was $$$ (or the lack thereof in the right hands). |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 6:52:08 AM EDT
[#32]
That's good info - 28% weight penalty is significant. That means one or two less magazines. Plus the magazines themselves are heavier. As for light 7.62 rifles no one would want to shoot it very often. The 9-10 lbs. kick enough as it is. I guess you could get used to it but if you start to flinch you are just punching air anyway. G |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 7:19:44 AM EDT
[#33]
In real life, the 6.8 mag holds only 28 rounds. So, the actual weight difference between the 5.56 30-rounders and the 6.8 28-rounders is about 20% (plus the 2 round difference). IIRC the weight of a loaded 20-round FAL magazine is also about 20% heavier than the 5.56 mag (with a 10 round deficit).
DISCLAIMER: Most of my figures are from memory of comparisons I've seen, but my memory may be off somewhat. I do believe I'm in the right ballpark, however. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 7:29:06 AM EDT
[#34]
More  . Silly comment with zero backup data.It may be superior if you are a paper puncher, but I don't think that is what we are discussing. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 7:54:54 AM EDT
[#35]
Forest wrote: "It may be superior if you are a paper puncher, but I don't think that is what we are discussing."
OK, fine, you're basically admitting, as is plain fact, that the 6.5 Grendel has superior external ballistics. Now I have a question (and I promise I'm not going to get into another 6.5G vs 6.8 SPC thread here — maybe after SHOT Show 2006 . . . ).  Here's one simple question for you, Forest: What would it take, in your mind, for you to hold that the 6.5 Grendel is a superior combat cartridge to the 6.8 SPC? Exactly what would it have to do, what performance specification would it have to meet — compared to the 6.8 SPC — to earn that title, as far as you're concerned? John |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 8:59:21 AM EDT
[#36]
Do you want to hear about fragmentation?  As far as I can tell, the ONLY real benefit of the AK over the AR is a slight edge in reliablity and maintenance (offset by a slight disadvantage in accuracy and sights). Both rounds have strengths and weaknesses, and there is no particular advantage of the 7.62x39. People who imagine that being hit with an M16 would allow a people to "get up and run away" but being hit in the same place with an AK would die are completely out of touch with reality. If you get hit in an extremity with EITHER round, of course you can "run away" - but if you get hit in a vital area with either round, you are NOT getting up.
Knock down power?  Is that a technical ballistics term? How do you measure that? If the 6.8 is SO MUCH BETTER than 5.56, how exactly do you explain that the military has no interest in it? The military leadership wants soldiers to die? The Bush administration doesn't want to win the war on terrorism? Big conspiracy among traditional ammo makers? Not trying to flame - just trying to understand why all the decision-makers in the military don't seem to understand what is to obvious to you. ETA: Just to clarify - I don't really have a dog in this fight. I'm seriously thinking about getting a 6.8 upper for one of my builds. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 9:08:21 AM EDT
[#37]
I have several AR10s in 308 and AR15s in 223. Does 6.8mm do anything for me that the AR10s and AR15s won't cover? I guess I could build a deer rifle that is a little bit lighter than the AR10s and with more punch than the AR15s.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 11:19:47 AM EDT
[#38]
I picked up 2 boxes of the Rem 6.8 FMJ that I found on the shelves at a local WalMart. Admittedly, this was ammo I requested from that particular store over a year ago...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 11:37:20 AM EDT
[#39]
AFAIK, the 6.5G hasn't really shown much in the terminal ballistics area. And before anyone says that humans aren't made of ballistics gel, let's all agree that (while not perfect) it is the best indicator of real world performance. Professional, side by side testing will show who's the winner in wound infliction. I'll already give the Grendel the nod in long-range accuracy and ballistics. We'll just have to see how the rest of the comparisons come out.
I say, let's wait and see what happens. Alot of Grendel fans hope that SHOT will take care of the biggest complaint against the G - limited sourcing. I hope so too. I can now buy all the 6.8 ammo I want. I hope soon to be able to build my own Grendel upper. If that becomes an option, I'll do it. We're just not there yet. In the time-honored tradition of AR15.COM - buy both! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 11:53:46 AM EDT
[#40]
Basic stuff. A published report using standard IWBA testing methodologies showing the effects of the round on 10% calibrated gelatin with the standard cloth layers; with details to include depth to yaw, size of tempory cavity, size of permanent cavity, % fragmentation, max depth achieved. Also showing ranges at which the round will still fragment would be nice. I'll leave the penetration tests (auto glass, sheet metal, drywall) as optional - but again they would be nice. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 12:08:50 PM EDT
[#41]
Remington is the biggest reason the 6.8 SPC has gone no where to this day because of the lack of ammo. As far as SSA production of 6.8 they are using Remington brass if I remember correctly. So the way it is right now the 6.8 never was really alive to begin with, and is just a wildcat that happened to have some factory ammo made.
Joe |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 12:32:15 PM EDT
[#42]
Theirs no real need for them. If you want longer range get an AR10, if you want better stopping power pick up some MK262
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 12:45:45 PM EDT
[#43]
i really thought that they were heading in the right direction with this round but i remember correctly when the m16 was first built and designed by armilite there were no .223 or 5.56. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 12:50:59 PM EDT
[#44]
there we go! pick up a .308 again, that is not what was needed what was needed is an intermediate cartidge. for assult weapons and light machine guns. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 1:07:49 PM EDT
[#45]
Forest: OK, so we'd have to find a bullet in the 6.5 Grendel that "meets or exceeds" the 10% gelatin performance of the 6.8 SPC, if we assume, for the sake of discussion, that the 6.8 SPC exhibits "optimal" specifications in gelatin for this class of cartridge.
Given that, which 6.8 SPC test results would we be using for comparison? The original preproduction loadings showing the 115gr Hornady OTM at 2697 fps from a 16" barrel, or the actual final production versions, which are somewhat downloaded? To sum up: If the 6.5 Grendel simply exceeds the gelatin performance of the 6.8 SPC, you'd declare it a better combat cartridge than the 6.8? John |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 1:25:48 PM EDT
[#46]
Not another 6.5 Grendel verses the 6.8 SPC thread.
IBTL Joe |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 1:36:31 PM EDT
[#47]
Take it easy, there, Joe. I said I'm not taking it there. I'm not going to argue; I'm just seeing where Forest is really coming from.
And even if it were a 6.5 vs 6.8 debate, I can't imagine why it would ever be locked, so don't worry. John |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 2:06:56 PM EDT
[#48]
No problem "carry on" Joe |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 3:02:25 PM EDT
[#49]
I'd add to that some reliability testing. The 6.5 is going to hog out even more of the bolt face than 6.8 does. Also the mags that I have seen for the 6.5 have done away with the 2nd corrigation or fold in the mag body. To my mind this fold does two things. It stiffens the mag and allows dirt and sand in the mag to fall free instead of binding aganst the brass cases. Also the shape of the 6.5 cartrige does not look like it would lend itself to feeding as well as the shape of the 6.8. These are just some thoughts without any proof either way. But I'd like to see that 6.5s can run as reliably as 6.8s. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2005 3:07:17 PM EDT
[#50]
how well would the grendel work in a belt fed mg?
|
|
|
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.
