BrianBM

6.5 Creedmoor ? for JimP or Fishweewee

Rate this topic

41 posts in this topic

I read, on the Task & Purpose blog, that the 6.5 mm. Creedmoor (NOT the Grendel) is being considered by SOCOM as a generic replacement for the 5.56 mm.  Is it so?

 

As a separate question, the Army is evaluating several different weapons for a squad automatic weapon, which will doubtless generate an M-4 replacement. Textron has the most technically ambitious weapon, a 6.5 telescoped round in a polymer case. Question is this: assuming you have a competition for a weapon X and one of the contenders is notably more ambitious, but offers more potential than the others, does Army procurement practice allow for a bigger purchase of the high-risk, high-gain prototypes, for more extensive testing, than the others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 6.5 Creedmoor round may be a better substitute for the 7.62 but not is not a replacement for the 5.56 round.  
 

The 6.5 has better ballistics than the 7.62 for long range applications but the average troop does fine with the 5.56. 
 

This is just my opinion, I have no insight on what they’re doing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reread the article I was misquoting, and it is indeed the 7.62 which may be displaced by the 6.5.

 

On a longer term basis, the Army is running a competition to replace the Squad Automatic Weapon (5.56) with a new gun firing a new round, also in 6.5. There are half a dozen competitors, with Textron having the most radical weapon, encasing the 6.5 bullet within a polymer case.  Prior attempts to replace brass have foundered, often because ejected brass can carry a lot of heat away with it, serving to keep the weapon cooler. If Textron can actually make this work, they'll have achieved a remarkable first in firearms design.

 

I can't see the Army adding a new cartridge for a SAW replacement, and not ultimately replacing the 5.56 completely. Unspecified "peer opponents" have body armor that can defeat the 5.56 at anything but short range; the Army wants enhanced lethality at range.

 

We now have a relatively small force of infantry. Gunsights do a hell of a lot more than they once did. I don't know how much the limited rifle skills of draftees, in years past, compare to ordinary infantry now  ...  anyone know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BrianBM said:

in years past, compare to ordinary infantry now  ...  anyone know?

 

I grew up on a Dairy farm N Indiana.  We regularly carried a 22 Short to the dump, dispatched crows and (if we didn't get caught) took out farm corn while backing up.

 

I went in the Army in 85 and qualified Expert at Basic in Knox.  Quite a few others did as well and there was a thread to it.  Prior to joining, not one us that did well could have picked out an M-16 in a line up but it didn't matter.  It wasn't so much that anyone had expertise, many of us were just comfortable using a firearm...a tool right?

 

Skip to today and many of my friends (we're your basic Joe Plumber types) don't "despise" guns but they have zero comfort level with them either.  BTW, they're comfortable with that and no amount of talking would convince them different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6.5 CM is very accurate but lacks the downrange punch of .300 WinMag.

 

Direct quote from a retired ST6 sniper I train with.

 

I dunno.  Whatever the military adopts is good for civilian adoption, especially for longer range sport shooters.

 

Whatever civilian adoption is good for the military due to increase in commercial aftermarket support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another mistake on my part. The replacement for the SAW is to be a 6.8 mm. cartridge, and for Big Army, I assume that will lead to a rifle as well. I suppose SOCOM is teasing itself with a 6.5 as an interim cartridge. And Marine SOCOM is trying out a .338 machine gun as a replacement for the .50 BMG?

 

Going to a bullet completely enclosed in a polymer case would be quite a change. I wonder if Big Army is feeling that ambitious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, fishweewee said:

6.5 CM is very accurate but lacks the downrange punch of .300 WinMag.

 

Direct quote from a retired ST6 sniper I train with.

 

I dunno.  Whatever the military adopts is good for civilian adoption, especially for longer range sport shooters.

 

Whatever civilian adoption is good for the military due to increase in commercial aftermarket support.

I got a feeling they'd carry and shoulder fire a 50bmg if they were allowed.  Lol. 

The whole "moderation is for coward's" thing and all.  Lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BrianBM said:

Another mistake on my part. The replacement for the SAW is to be a 6.8 mm. cartridge, and for Big Army, I assume that will lead to a rifle as well. I suppose SOCOM is teasing itself with a 6.5 as an interim cartridge. And Marine SOCOM is trying out a .338 machine gun as a replacement for the .50 BMG?

 

Going to a bullet completely enclosed in a polymer case would be quite a change. I wonder if Big Army is feeling that ambitious.

Couldn't agree or disagree but it's seems doubtful too me. 

We're talking about a gun firing a 250-300 grain bullet versus a gun that fires a 600-700 grain bullet. With that said I'm assuming we're talking about weapons that are mounted to vehicles. 

The 338 is more so in the "sniper" category in a bolt gun not a "machine" gun.  

As for the polymer cases it sounds good im theory but in extreme heat and or cold I see nothing problems. 

Any gun fight more than 10 minutes and the barrels are red hot. Literally. 

The 5.56/.223 round is the perfect balance between power, accuracy, weight, cost.  

Big difference in weight when carrying 20 mags of 5.56 versus 20 mags of 7.62. Guys are already carrying 80-120lb. Another 10-15lb is huge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

1 hour ago, LBI SurfRat said:

As for the polymer cases it sounds good im theory but in extreme heat and or cold I see nothing problems. 

Any gun fight more than 10 minutes and the barrels are red hot. Literally. 

 

There was an excellent and extensive article on this not to long ago...thinking G&A.  I'll try to dig it up.  The composite cases are significantly better at disbursing heat than their brass equal.  I was genuinely surprised.

 

Edit: I'm not going to do a link because I can't recall how to do away with the links BUT the Google is easy.  Type in "guns and ammo polymer case ammo" and it's the first result.  It's an easy and informative read.

Edited by mako20ft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LBI SurfRat said:

Couldn't agree or disagree but it's seems doubtful too me. 

We're talking about a gun firing a 250-300 grain bullet versus a gun that fires a 600-700 grain bullet. With that said I'm assuming we're talking about weapons that are mounted to vehicles. 

The 338 is more so in the "sniper" category in a bolt gun not a "machine" gun.  

As for the polymer cases it sounds good im theory but in extreme heat and or cold I see nothing problems. 

Any gun fight more than 10 minutes and the barrels are red hot. Literally. 

The 5.56/.223 round is the perfect balance between power, accuracy, weight, cost.  

Big difference in weight when carrying 20 mags of 5.56 versus 20 mags of 7.62. Guys are already carrying 80-120lb. Another 10-15lb is huge. 

The Marine SOCOM is looking at a .338 MH because the .50 BMG is too heavy for dismounted use. Weight limits the M-2 to a pintle mount on a vehicle. They're looking for something a lot more man-portable, but with improved range and armor penetration. I assume that the M-2 will stay on vehicles.

 

Umpteen years ago, when the F-15 was initially under development, the gun it carried was to be a 25mm. using a composite case. Back then, the state of the art in ammo manufacture didn't stand up to the need for heat transfer or environmental durability, so the AF stuck with a 20mm Gatling gun.

 

I'm going to look up the article mentioned by Mako in the post above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys ever try to lug around a .50 BMG with all the other stuff that has to be humped, never mind the ammo?

 

I feel like I'm doing deadlifts pulling the Barett out of the safe.

 

.50 BMG is more like, anti-materiel and super duper long range engagements (greater than 1,000 yards).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

2 hours ago, NonTypical said:

They are going with a 6.8 SPC. That’s going to be my next AR build. 

That's awesome.

The 6.8 bullets are already readily available - they're .270 cal bullets.

You're gonna love it.

 

qq1lnpv.jpg

qbB0ybd.jpg

 

Am06pvB.jpg

 

kUOyy1a.jpg

 

x5M4Tjt.jpg

Edited by fishweewee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 SF Group used the 6.8 SPC (technically the 6.8 SPC II) for hits in Iraq.  

They stopped using it after the enemy started connecting the spent cases to a particular unit.

(Kinda the same reason why Delta stopped using .40 S&W - only Delta was using it).

 

With wider adoption, this will be a Good Thing for military and civilians alike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 mins ago, fishweewee said:

You guys ever try to lug around a .50 BMG with all the other stuff that has to be humped, never mind the ammo?

 

Pfttt...  We used to throw an M2 over the shoulder and climb a ladder up to the motar deck in rough seas.  Just prayed we didn't drop it...  Had to use a davit to lift the 20mm up to it's mount though.

3 mins ago, fishweewee said:

Am06pvB.jpg

 

Love the Starretts...:theman:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.