quote:

Originally posted by fritz:
"The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements will both fire this more accurate and deadly round"

I have no issues with a new caliber and new ammo for the military. Certainly there are caliber designs which can be more effective than the 5.56, but yet without a whole lot of weight or other penalties in the tradeoff.

When one adds more boiler room to the round, the projectile has more kinetic energy. Nothing new here. Think 6.8 SPC, 6.5 Grendel, 22 Nosler, 224 Valkyrie. Plus some 6mm wildcat chamberings.

I find it tiring that new cartridges always seem to be "more accurate" than the 223. Sometimes there's no data to back up the accuracy claims. Or even flight and energy ballistics. When data is shown, it tends to be with the newest whiz-bang wonder bullet in the new chambering versus a 55 grain FMJ in 5.56.

AAC was notorious for this with the 300blk that "they invented". I've shot enough 300blk to know that yes it does put more energy on target at reasonable distances, but its accuracy is wanting.

I have less experience behind a 6.8 SPC, but I still don't see its accuracy even equal to that of a quality 5.56/223 rifle with good ammo. The 6.8 SPC in its current form is definitely not more accurate than its 5.56/223 counterpart. Maybe new developments will change that.

It will be interesting to see what becomes of the Army's tests.

If you really want something you'll find a way ...
... if you don't you'll find an excuse.

I'm really not a "kid" anymore ... but I haven't grown up yet either

quote:

I have less experience behind a 6.8 SPC, but I still don't see its accuracy even equal to that of a quality 5.56/223 rifle with good ammo. The 6.8 SPC in its current form is definitely not more accurate than its 5.56/223 counterpart. Maybe new developments will change that.

It will be interesting to see what becomes of the Army's tests.

quote:

I know some shooters have 6.8s that shoot around 1 MOA at 100 yards. In this day and age with decent ARs and good ammo, that's not all that difficult to accomplish. Building an AR that consistently shoots better than 1 MOA, at distance, is the challenge. I have three AR-15s that have produced a considerable number of 100 yard 5-round groups in the .5" to .7" range, with machine-like consistency in the .7" to .9" range. My best one has produced groups in the .3s. I don't know of shooters doing that with 6.8s.

That said, the 6.8 SPC -- or something like it -- may eventually end up being a more effective military cartridge than 5.56/223.

quote:

One of the major goals of the MHS effort is to adopt a pistol chambered for a more potent round than the current 9mm, weapons officials said. The U.S. military replaced the .45 caliber 1911 pistol with the M9 in 1985 and began using the 9mm NATO round at that time.

Soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan have complained that the 9mm round is not powerful enough to be effective in combat.

“The 9mm doesn’t score high with soldier feedback,” said Easlick, explaining that the Army, and the other services, want a round that will have better terminal effects — or cause more damage — when it hits enemy combatants. “We have to do better than our current 9mm.”

The MHS will be an open-caliber competition that will evaluate larger rounds such as .357 Sig, .40 S&W and .45 ACP.