Posted on 05/20/2017 9:07:10 AM PDT by Elderberry
The United State Army made waves a couple months ago when they finally chose the Sig Sauer P320 as a replacement for the long-serving Beretta M9. Many have mused at why the military chose the Sig over the other entrants. If the M9 is out, could the M16 and M4 be next? According to recent reports, the famed Eugene Stoner rifle could be going the way of the M14, M1 Garand, and 1903 Springfield.
The M16 was adopted into service in 1964 after extensive testing. The army was searching for a smaller projectile and lighter gun that could easily be fired in semi-automatic and fully automatic modes. They found that in the M16. Of course, the original adaption of the Armalite Rifle had some issues, but over the years the M16 adapted to meet the needs and use modern materials. These adaptions led to the M16A1, A2, A3 A4 and then the M4 and M4A1, all of which have been the selected service rifle of the U.S. Military at one time or another.
Those days may soon be gone. A recent report from the Army Times broke the news that the military is looking to replace the 5.56x45mm NATO cartridge, and thus, the AR platform. The report details how the military is looking for a larger caliber bullet, something in the 6.5mm to 7mm range, that can reach out further with more lethality than the light .22 caliber 5.56mm.
Reports from Afghanistan and Iraq have shown that at least half of the engagement distances are over 300 meters, where the 5.56mm can lose lethality, especially against armored combatants. The Army still wants something light, so not back up to the 7.62mm class, but something with better ballistics than the .223 Remington. (Perhaps the 6.5 Creedmoor?) As most of our enemies are shooting 7.62mm-based firearms such as former Soviet or Iraqi AKs, SKSs, Druganovs, and PKMs, they actually have a deadlier reach than our troops’.
Being outmatched on the battlefield is not the American way, and in order to keep our warfighters safe, it may be time to hang up the Stoner-designed rifles. With modern technology, materials, and ballistics, perhaps the next generation of service rifles will capture the hearts of Americans like the M16 did. And hopefully we’ll see an influx of surplus .223 Remington/5.56mm NATO ammunition hit the market!
The Army’s search for a new round and rifle combination has been going on since 2014 but is expected to wrap up in the next few months. Eventually, parts of the military’s study will be made available to civilians, though much of it may stay classified. We’ll just have to wait until we find out more!
Grendel carbines and DMR rifles actually weigh a few ounces less than 5.56mm guns because the bore is bigger and there is less barrel steel to tote up the hill.
What would it take to convert millions and millions of M4 and M16 rifles to 6.5 Grendel? In theory, just a barrel, a bolt, and a magazine. The cartridge produces more recoil than the 5.56, but not so much more that it requires a new buffer or scope/accessory mounts.
6.5 is a great caliber and has the sectional density. Its “stacked”.
Used in silhouette for long range.
Cut to the chase. Go back to 30 caliber.
Cut the weight with modern stock design and smart action engineering.
The old .308 was pretty good. The OLD 30-06 is still a very lethal long range cartridge.
The newer rounds like the 6.5G shoot a lot like the 7.62 with better recoil.
I hunt with .257 Weatherby (listed in the 6.5 category). Can’t say enough about 6.5mm. It’s time has come.
Maybe the current experts can average out all the world's battle rifle cartridges, in which case we will have something perfect for the next average war fought against average enemies in an average environment.
Mr. niteowl77
If the bad guys are much more than 300 meters out they should be killed with something else. Because they are tough to see, if for no other reason.
Closer in, you’ll want all the ammo you can carry. So why use heavier ammo?
I’d rather put my money (but with less weight penalty) on better sights; which is exactly what has been happening slowly but surely to our boy’s equipment since Gulf war 1.
C.W.
NO! The .308 was never the ideal round even when we adopted it and it is even less ideal today. The 6.5 Creedmoor or the .260 Remington is where it’s at.
I don’t know what the US military will end up with but I will be getting a Smith and Wesson M&P10 in 6.5 Creedmoor.
I’m not a purist, it is still very hard to beat a 30-06
Unless it is 50BMG
smile.
What is the 6.5 ammo weight? That was a huge issue with the M-14 if you wanted a decent amount with you.
The Stoner design needs to find itself assigned to the history books. No battle rifle should be in use for more than 50 years by the best military in the world.
While the design has been improved for reliability and accuracy, it is holding our troops back.
The 6.5mm is capable of great long-range accuracy, lethality and compactness......depending on which cartridge it is loaded into.
With a variety of bullet weights, it can work in close quarters or at longer distances.
The Stoner rifles are needless heavy by today’s standards and can be lightened with modern materials.
I look forward to a new cartridge and a new rifle.
Do you feel the same way about heavy machine guns? Because Ma Deuce is almost 100 years old.
Well, you do have to admit that old Ma Deuce is not a battle rifle though ...
That's why I made it a point to ask if he feels the same way about heavy machine guns.
6.5 Grendel
I measured 274.8 grains for a round with a 130gr bullet.
I measured 271.8 gr for a round with a 123 gr bullet.
I didn't have any 223 to compare it to.
Meet every argument dead center ...... 260 Remington. Logistically a single caliber for GPMG’s and Battle Rifle . Planners seem to forget past wars mistakes. Short range CQB Stopping power, long range hits / terminal velocities , human wave aggressors , replenishment, resupply common caliber.... above all else reliable , tested, proven designs to use the .260 Rem.
My choice...
Heck, I still feel that there’s a role for the old 75mm howitzer .. or the old 57mm recoilless rifle for combat in built-up areas.
Never shot that caliber. Cannot be much different from 270 which is well know and very common.
Very good deer rifle caliber.
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.