A gooood replacement for M-16 Rifle...

[wulfie]

Originally posted by Toad
I'm not sure we're talking about the same 6.8. The 6.8 ARC is still a relatively unknown wildcat idea. I don't know if anyone has even built one as yet.

6.8mm 'M4s' have been used in the field already. Take a normal M4, and swap the upper and the barrel with the 6.8mm weapon. I used one for about 4 months. It was part of a field test program. I was not a 'rare' or 'special' case mind you - they went to several different units and issued several weapons to each unit.

[Fishu]

Originally posted by wulfie
6.8mm 'M4s' have been used in the field already. Take a normal M4, and swap the upper and the barrel with the 6.8mm weapon. I used one for about 4 months.

So, how did you like it?

New barrel/upper. And the 6.8 hits hard. The 5.56 is no slouch (many guys who complain of stopping power are *****ing when they wing a guy in the elbow at 300m at the corner of a building, and the guy staggers away - not a reasonable ***** IMHO - true, blowing his arm off with an M14 would be nice, but that doesn't mean the 5.56 is 'too weak'), but there is a noticable difference.

The only thing is that when dealing with those suicidal terrorists, I would rather be sure the enemy is incapacitated or dead than suddenly turn out to be able to blow up half a squad with a nade, when they come to check out the area. It doesn't look good on the news if you pop wounded terrorists in the head from point blank range just to be sure.

[~Caligula~]

Originally posted by Fishu





The only thing is that when dealing with those suicidal terrorists, I would rather be sure the enemy is incapacitated or dead than suddenly turn out to be able to blow up half a squad with a nade, when they come to check out the area. It doesn't look good on the news if you pop wounded terrorists in the head from point blank range just to be sure.

exactly what the problem is.

[Edbert1]

Originally posted by Toad
If I read the article I linked correctly, they said the changeover only required a new barrel and possibly a stronger spring in the magazines.

The 5.56 is used in many other weapons, the M249 primarilly but certainly not exclusively, there's a decided cost and maintenance/supply advantage of having the entire armed forces using only four catridges (5.56/7.62/.50/9mm).

There's the manufacturing costs of the barrels and upper assemblies as well as the ammunition then the labor costs of retrofitting millions of firearms.

I know a lot of enthusiasts who are running the 6.8 on personal weapons, there for a while it was a concern that nobody was going to manufacture the ammo, right now it looks like the 6.8 will survive after all. But I doubt the military will adopt it soon.

[Toad]

Originally posted by wulfie
6.8mm 'M4s' have been used in the field already. Take a normal M4, and swap the upper and the barrel with the 6.8mm weapon. I used one for about 4 months. It was part of a field test program. I was not a 'rare' or 'special' case mind you - they went to several different units and issued several weapons to each unit.

6.8 ARC or 6.8 SPC (6.8x43mm)?

The 6.8 ARC is a necked-up .223 case. Only difference is the bullet, essentially. That's why it only needs a new barrel.

The 6.8 SPC is a .30 Remington, shortened to fit the AR15 magazine OAL.[PNC] This is slightly larger in diameter than .223, so a new bolt is required. That's why you'd need a new upper.

If I'm wrong, that's fine. I just thought the 6.8 ARC didn't need an upper.

[Edbert1]

You've got a point Toad. But it is the SPC which has the biggest advantage over the 5.56NATO. Check out this thread (whole freaking site really), these guys know as much detail about such matters as many here know about the DB-605 variants used in the Bf109 series

http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=282708

[Bingo73]

I carry an AR-15 everyday at work. I shoot a couple thousand rounds through it every year. The AR-15/ M-16 is a good weapon..but it's reliability is somewhat hit and miss. Main problems are double feeds and failure of the bolt to seat caused by carbon fouling. AR's MUST be kept clean or they WILL jam..no question about it. But for a service rifle stripping it down every couple hundred rounds just isn't always feasible...hence the bad reputation the rifle has gotten over the years. Many improvements have been made..but the old M-14 is probably still the best rifle we ever had in service.
But for what it was designed for...a high capacity rifle with a lighter weight and made shorter for ease in close quarters fighting it is an excellent weapon. I actually think it's better than the MP5 for close quarters with the collapsible stock option because you get a higher velocity bullet with better penetration. Most bullet resistant vests will stop the 9mm round...the 5.56 will cut through kevlar like butter if the trauma plates aren't in there.
We took one of our old vests and shot it with the 9 mm and the 5.56. The 9mm round didn't pierce it..the 5.56 went through the vest and took a big chunk out of the RR ties that were behind it about another 50 feet.

[Maverick]

Frankly I think the Mini 14 with a composite stock is a better rifle than the M-16 or it's variants. The chambering is another issue. While I am a fan of lightweight I also understand that penetration is a good thing too. I think a round that has a heavier bullet, like the 270 or even 243 in a case just slightly larger than the current 5.56 round would be optimal. You'd still have a decent lightweight round for more ammo for the infantry to carry and better ballistics and penetration. The mini14 slightly scaled up would do nicely in that regard. No matter what, there will be resistance from other NATO members, as they may not want to change weapons systems to make it a more universal round.

I don't like the bullpup configuration for standard infantry use. I am old school enough to think there are times when some bayonet work would be useful. The bullpup would be outstanding for more casual use like for armor crewmen instead of the old M3 grease gun or a cut down but still awkward M-4. If it used the same round and magazine that's a great plus for logistics.