Army Chief Offers New Details on 6.8mm Next-Gen Squad Weapons

If the US finally adopt a firearm using 6.8spc caliber, it might be the beginning of something. But they have been talking of this for more than a decade now.

7.62x51 is the way to go if you want to keep your supply and interoperability with other NATO allies. I wouldn't want to be a 6.8 SAW Gunner running low on ammo.
 
Yeah, as much as some people have complained about the 5.56mm being too under powered, it certainly is a major benefit having its use inter operable with the M16/C7 series of rifles, and perhaps an even bigger benefit having all your friends use the same cartridge. If the US is going to need to convince its allies to replace all their weapon systems, that may be an uphill battle with Trump sitting in the White House, being such an agitator and so unfriendly with the USA's allies.
 
"It's a very sophisticated weapon, a very capable weapon. It's got an integrated sight system to it, and it also integrates into the soldier's gear and other equipment that we are fielding," Milley said.
Click to expand...
Lesson not learned here... Nobody likes integrated sights that don't start with the word "iron".
 
DT741 said:
If the US finally adopt a firearm using 6.8spc caliber, it might be the beginning of something. But they have been talking of this for more than a decade now.

7.62x51 is the way to go if you want to keep your supply and interoperability with other NATO allies. I wouldn't want to be a 6.8 SAW Gunner running low on ammo.
Click to expand...

Do you think that NATO might upscale from 5.56 to 6.8? Seems to make sense to me!
 
Thomas D'Arcy McGee said:
Do you think that NATO might upscale from 5.56 to 6.8? Seems to make sense to me!
Click to expand...

Not a chance !

Canada is a small army and we have more weapon system using the 5.56 than actual soldiers (qualified or not) to use it. It would be a massive and costly overhaul to dump the well established 5.56x45 for 6.8spc. And we're just talking hardware here.

We're not talking about training, training material, maintenance/mainteners and building ammo stocks for this.

One easy solution until major progress is made ammo wise: 7.62x51

But 5.56x45 is a good round for its purposes, whatever keyboard warriors will say, it took great care of the Afghan 2 legged critters within effective range ;)
 
6.8 SPC is dead, other than in some banana republic out in the middle east where looking different is probably more important than anything else.

The armour penetration part is a bit of an eye-wash. There is only so much "steel" and "speed" you can cramp into a cartridge, whether it is 6.5 or 300 cal. The AP talk is only getting relevant when M80A1 or the new BAC round is being shot out of a 24" C6 barrel at close to 3000 fps. I am sure 6.5 can get the same result, if they can make a 100gr steel tip version - but realistically how much faster it can go in a short barrel?

6.5 or 300 cal, I don't think could make something to defeat ceramic plate in a format as short as a M4 carbine, on the cheap. There is already a 5.56 solution called M995AP, but it is an expensive round to give it to anyone for unlimited use.

I think a 6.5 MG/LMG, or even a DMR will make sense in case telescopic format or even in conventional format, but not sure it is a good idea in a "carbine". The rotating chamber for case telescopic ammo makes sense in a MG, but it is too big for a close quarter weapon like carbine for closing in and destroying.
 
They don't actually mention the specific cartridge in this article... Is this the telescoping round that they've been working on? If it isn't, then my guess would be this is dead in the water. Another brass cased cartridge with slightly better performance isn't going to convince anyone to change.
 
As usual, the US will unilaterally pick a make-do solution which will eventually become a standard NATO cartridge.
In the 1950s, US forced the standardisation of optimized 30-06, 7.62 NATO.
In the 1960s, US unilaterally moved to 5.56x45 with the M16 when the M14 was found to be ineffective in Vietnam.
In the 1980s, NATO standardized 5.56 NATO.
In the 2010s, US unilaterally moves to 6.5-6.8 MAGA!
in the 2020s, NATO standardizes 6.5-6.8 NATO.

Any hunter knows that 223 Rem is not a good general hunting cartridge, that 308 Win has high recoil for killing power and pretty much everyone thinks that 270Win, 7mm-08, 6.5x55 Swedish, 260 Rem and 6.5 CM are almost perfect for medium game.
I expect US military, to create and optimize something very similar in concept to 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel but in different format. (Maybe a neckdown of 300 AAC to 6.5mm)
 
AlexF said:
As usual, the US will unilaterally pick a make-do solution which will eventually become a standard NATO cartridge.
In the 1950s, US forced the standardisation of optimized 30-06, 7.62 NATO.
In the 1960s, US unilaterally moved to 5.56x45 with the M16 when the M14 was found to be ineffective in Vietnam.
In the 1980s, NATO standardized 5.56 NATO.
In the 2010s, US unilaterally moves to 6.5-6.8 MAGA!
in the 2020s, NATO standardizes 6.5-6.8 NATO.

Any hunter knows that 223 Rem is not a good general hunting cartridge, that 308 Win has high recoil for killing power and pretty much everyone thinks that 270Win, 7mm-08, 6.5x55 Swedish, 260 Rem and 6.5 CM are almost perfect for medium game.
I expect US military, to create and optimize something very similar in concept to 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel but in different format. (Maybe a neckdown of 300 AAC to 6.5mm)
Click to expand...

Interesting post, thank you :d
 
tjhaile said:
5.56 isn't going anywhere as long as metallic cartridges are the norm.
Click to expand...

5.56 and 7.62 are going to stay.
6.5 CM is now the sniper cartridge for US special forces.
This cartridge loaded with a 130gr double the hit probability compared to 308...
What can it do as a machine cartridge with a 147gr bullet?
The same type of thinking can be applied to 5.56.
What will be the result? Something like an optimized 224 Valkyrie,
6mm PPC, 6.5 Grendel, 6.8 SPC or even 7mm BR.

Put on your thinking cap and imagine an FN FAL in 6.5-280 British or an EM2 in 6.5-280 British:
  • Maximum effective well past 600m
  • Fully controllable under full automatic fire

Shorty-EM2-with-EM2-and-FAL.jpg


We don't need to invent nothing here, just look at real requirements and optimize the heck out of existing design in cases and bullets.
What about a 6mm-224 Valkyrie, a 6.5mm-224 Valkyrie or even a 6.23mm-224 Valkyrie.
In competitive accuracy shooting, 6mm cartridges are almost unbeatable up to 600m where 6.5mm cartridges take the relay.
Maybe a new 6.25mm cartridge could be unbeatable up to 800m !?!?

Also John Garand design his rifle around the 276 Peterson and had a 10 cartridge clip but was overruled by General Patton who insisted on keeping 30-60 cartridge.
30-06 was more standard but there is little doubt that a 276 Garand would have been a superior infantry rifle.
 
Last edited:
nowarningshot said:
If it was Kanada, it would take billions and decades, just for the studies and graft to the Liberal government. Oh wait....maybe someone will change, then we can get their old rifles....garage sale style ....like the jets.
Click to expand...
nah Canada will wait for somebody else to develop something , waste time then scratch out made in USA , on the design pay 10 times more to produce it here tell everybody it’s a special “Canadian design and how better it is and the officer in charge will likely retire to work for that company
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom