[68skylark]

This is interesting. But I believe the date that this was published needs to be corrected -- the article was posted at Defense Review on November 30, 2003. Is that correct?

[n230099]

Looks to be sticking around. Not sure why this is a "press release". Most gun mags were on to this in late 04 early 05.

[Hugin]

According to one of DefRev's sources (as of about 8 months ago--that's right, we sat on the info), the 6.8x43mm enjoys roughly the same trajectory as 7.62x51mm out to 600 yards. The 6.8x43mm round weighs 115gr. and has a velocity of 2750 to 2850 fps.

Not bad specs for a deer rifle either. The round should have a good civilian market as well. Someone will start putting it into lightweight, short-action bolt rifles.

[Lazamataz]

May I see a picture of the round?

[taxed2death]

338 Lapua

[SENTINEL]

Barret is producing the uppers, huh ?

If the pricing on the barret .50's is any indication, they will cost 4 times what they are worth.

[Radio_Silence]

Great round on paper. I'm currently in the process of building one and look forward to testing it out..

However, I doubt we will ever see adoption on a large scale by the military due to the logistics and politics involved. It's a shame as I feel it strikes just the right balance between 7.62x51 and 5.56x45. It's light enough to allow a soldier to carry numerous rounds and packs a great deal more power at closer range than the 5.56.

[rellimpank]

--the latest update of the 6mm Lee-Navy--sort of on the order of the Browning .22 that is a rimless .22 Hornet lite--

[GoldCountryRedneck]

Impressive specs, but.....

....what becomes of the .308? I've always thought of the 5.56 as a varmint round provided nothing was in the way.

My 'long range iron is in a 30-06 keeping in mind the widespread ammo availability.

I'd considered getting something in .308 due to the seeming military standardization, but this muddies the water.

What's the new strategy???

[rellimpank]

--here's a link to some people apparently making the ammo--


--http://www.ssarmory.com/

[saganite]

I found this article on the new round. It's good to see the old venerable .270 getting the military treatment after all these years but I don't believe the round will make any inroads into the hunting community since the performance looks almost identical to my .270 Win Savage.

[gcruse]

"short...distance sniping"

Sounds like no-fat pizza.

[Greystoke]

This cartridge should definitely be adopted and the new XM-8 should be chambered in it.

[wrench]

And after we spend hundreds of millions of dollars adopting this round, someone will come along and do a study that shows the 7.62NATO round is far superior than either the 5.56 varmint or 6.8 improved-varmint.

Government S.O.P., if it isn't broke, fix it till it is.

[thinkthenpost]

I believe the 6.8 would be great, but I believe the Army Logistics folks have killed it, buried it and danced on it's grave. I do not know the rounds fate concerning the SOCOM folks but assume it is the same. This really is a shame for the boots on the ground if you ask me.

[ßuddaßudd]

Adding this to my wish list.

[Jack Black]

The other alternative to the 6.8 Rem SPC doesn't have as big a company behind it but may be a better round. That is the 6.5mm Grendel, developed by Alexander Arms who also designed the Beowolf .50.

Here is a blog with a write up on it: Airbone Combat Engineer's Blog write up of Grendel 6.5mm

Here is another one from Defense Review.com

They say in part: Interestingly, the 6.5 Grendel (6.5mm)/.26 Grendel is itself reportedly garnering a fair amount of positive attention from U.S. Special Operations forces, at the moment. From everything DefenseReview has seen, it's a very impressive cartridge. The 6.5 Grendel has a superior ballistic coefficient and thus superior long-range trajectory characterstics to the 6.8x43mm SPC/6.8mm SPC, past 500 meters. The 6.5 Grendel (6.5mm)/.26 Grendel bullet should also work quite well at CQB (Close Quarters Battle) range (if not quite as well as the 6.8mm SPC), especially if designed with an air pocket towards the tip like on the Russian 5.45x39mm bullet. Hopefully, an armor-piercing/armor-penetrating (AP) version of the 6.5 Grendel featuring a tungsten or tungsten carbide core will also be developed. DefenseReview is interested to know the amount of felt recoil that the 6.5 Grendel generates. For CQB applications, weapon controllability on full-auto is of primary importance--right up there with weapon reliability. While engaged in dynamic CQB in urban environments, our operators have to be able to get hits on hostile moving targets, fast.

Here is the manufacturers link: Alexander Arms grendel home page

The short squat one is the Grendel. The more traditional shaped one is the 6.8 SPC.

[ctdonath2]

The 6.8x43mm Special Purpose Cartridge (SPC) ... a much better answer for urban warfare and CQB (Close Quarters Battle) than the 62gr 5.56x45mm NATO round, and a much better short and intermediate distance sniping round than the 77 gr. 5.56mm round

So how does it compare to the 77gr for CQB? Seems the author is picking & choosing his comparisons. If just switching to 77gr solves the CQB problem (relative to the 6.8) then the urgency for a new caliber diminishes.

Just want a fair comparison of numbers.