Posted on 01/04/2006 11:14:38 PM PST by ghostcat
I'm hardly a typical rifle company PFC, nor an armchair commando. I served six years on a Special Forces A-Team as a weapons and demolitions expert.
So am I. The M-16/.223/6.5mm was nothing more than a tragic sick joke. A varmint round and a cheap rifle all dressed up in OD , Mil. Spec. and sent to war.
"6.8 mm rifles weigh the same as their 5.56 mm counterparts. 28 rounds of 6.8 mm fit in magazines the same size as 30 rd 5.56 mm mags. Ammunition weights are obviously different, as the following comparison illustrates: 30 rounds of 5.56 mm M855 weigh about 0.8 lbs, while both 28 rounds of 6.8 mm and 20 rounds of 7.62 mm M80 weigh roughly 1 lbs. Personally, I would gladly give up 2 rounds and 0.2 lbs per magazine compared to 5.56 mm for the significantly superior terminal performance of the 6.8 mm.
"The folks who conceived, designed, and tested this system are HARD shooters, VERY experienced in special warfare combat, as well as world-class match shooting. They wanted something more effective in combat than the 5.56 mm they had been using for years. They looked at all the options, tested them, and chose what worked best. End result--the 6.8 mm is significantly more effective for combat applications than any 5.56 mm. This is a FACT, not speculation."
"The 6.8 x 43 mm SPC is what it is because this configuration offered the BEST PERFORMANCE FOR THE INTENDED MISSION: CQB to medium range engagements, using an M4 size weapon and allowing use of existing components, such as receivers, web gear, and SOPMOD accessories. The caliber is 6.8 mm, because that demonstrated the best combination of accuracy, reliability, intermediate barrier penetration, and terminal performance compared to SPC variants tested using other caliber bullets, such as 6 mm, 6.5 mm, 7 mm, and 7.62 mm. The 6.8 mm SPC uses a 43 mm case because that worked better than other case lengths, including 45 mm. The landwarfare legal 115 gr OTM bullets offered the optimal performance for the intended military combat role compared to the other 90 to 140 gr bullets that were tested (Note--for other uses such as LE or hunting, 6.8 mm polymer tip and bonded JSP bullets offer outstanding performance). The 6.8 mm does not work with existing bolts, because testing proved that that option was not as reliable. Likewise, the SPC is not based on a PPC cartridge, because that route, while very accurate for target shooting, did not prove as effective for COMBAT applications."
anyone interested in further information on this might like to go to: http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000512
some of the gentlemen involved in that discussion appear to be very knowledgeable.
The end result was like a groundhog hunt in Soth Dakota firing from benchrest positions out to as far as 800 meters.
The story is posted here in the archives.
I'll have to hunt it up. Thanks for the tip!
i hunt with that very caliber. i have a remington 7mm -08.
great gun! first kill with it was a shot across a gulley in Wyoming - 350 yards and dropped where he stood, nice little 3x3 muley.
anyway, i love that caliber.
A Cartridge of Superior Caliber
With regard to the selection of a new cartridge for use by the US Armed Forces, one issue often not addressed is the current capacity (or lack there of) to manufacture small arms ammunition. Currently several nations are involved in the manufacture of ammunition as the US lacks the capacity to manufacture sufficient small arms ammunition for it’s own use, even for the current low intensity conflict. Adoption of any “new as yet to be proven cartridge” would only increase the difficulties faced by US Forces in the foreseeable future.
It appears that a majority of people at all levels agree the 556 or 223cal used by the current M16 is a poor performing cartridge especially since the use of optical sights has enhanced the accuracy of US Forces and the nature of current conflicts require a more rapidly disabling, longer legged overall more effective round than the current 223. The 308cal or 762 NATO is really the best choice for many reasons. The 762 is already in US and (less importantly) NATO inventories. The expanded use of the 762/308 would allow our soldiers to use one cartridge for all small arms. In Tanks (The Coaxial Machine Gun is a 762 usually the MG240), Many of our Helicopters use the M60 in 762 for door gunners. Vehicles like the Humvee unless equipped with the M2, or M85 (50 cal) use the M60 in 762. The M60 has served as a squad weapon since Vietnam and the "Pig" at the party is proven and does an excellent job. To have one ammunition caliber (762/308) (besides pistol) from the Squad Level up would create a tremendous logistical advantage. Units running low on ammunition could use 762 linked ammo simply by breaking it down and loading it into their 308/762 M16s. Tank Crews whom routinely carry 10s of thousands of 762/308 ammunition along with others could easily distribute linked 762 ammunition to units pressed or running low. The same is true for all tracked and wheeled vehicles in US inventory. Simply by changing some of the dimensions of the M16 the 762/308 round is easily accommodated. Further the 762/308 M16 has already had years of refinement and proofing in the AR10 or Armilite version. This version has been produced for the General Citizenry of the United States for many, many years. Their will be little transition time required for US Forces as functioning/assembly and disassembly of a 308 M16 is virtually identical to the M16. The 308/762 M16 will also be more reliable due to the larger dimensions of the cartridge allowing for greater overall tolerances than with the current smaller 556 or 223 round. The 308 or 762 round in match grade (most precisely metered powder charge and bullet weight/dimensions) is our most common sniper round being employed in Match Grade M14 (M21) and Custom 700 Remington Sniper Rifles world wide.
There has been much made of the ineffectiveness of the 223 round. When organized armies faced each other, causing casualties but not killing ones enemy was preferable. Casualty care requires great logistical efforts, failure to care often results in a reluctance to fight and reduced effectiveness. The oft quoted requirement of 10 men to care for one wounded does not apply to stateless terrorists. Their people are not likely to be on the battlefield attending their wounded along with the required logistical issues. US Forces or our allies wind up caring for our stateless enemies. Killing them is far preferable to wounding in nearly all circumstances for many reasons not the least of which is the apparent tendency even when treated humanely to return to the conflict attempting again to Kill Americans or our Allies at the next opportunity. The 308 is a proven killer easily lethal at 1000 meters. In close quarter battle (CQB) the 308 rapidly incapacitates. The 308 can be produced in sufficient numbers to maintain our stocks. The 308 is consistent with our current inventories. The 308 allows 10s of thousands of existing weapons in US inventory to remain viable in fact adopting the 308 enhances their effectiveness and the overall effectiveness of US Small Arms and Units. The 308 has proven lethality and range, is not reinventing the wheel and has many advantages as discussed here.
W.
Thank you for your service to our country.
yeah, that .223 caliber really doesn't seem, in hunting rifle version anyway, more than what we call a "varmint rifle", more accurate than the old 22 rimfire, but I wouldn't try to shoot anything other than a small dog or fawn with one of those and expect it to drop where it stood. there's a LOT to be said for knockdown power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.