New US Army Primary Rifle Round

A

azsixshooter

New member
I have been looking everywhere and can't find a good, definitive source of info proving that the US Army is looking for a new cartridge. I saw an article that mentioned the XM8 and said it is currently in development. Then I saw on here that they are supposedly still sticking with the M4 until 2015.

I'm just looking for a single source of, preferably official, information that I can keep an eye on. I'd like an AR-15, but I don't want a 5.56 so I'd like to know asap what the army settles on. 6.5 Grendel? 6.8 SPC?

I've searched around but couldn't find a thread solely dealing with just this topic. It seems to just get mentioned in other threads.

Thanks
 
I

IZinterrogator

New member
The Army is not switching rounds. If we were, the "let's report RUMINT as truth" folks at the Army Times would have had a story on it within the last month.
 
B

bufordtjustice

New member
The military is always "looking" for something better. That has very little to do with whether or not they will use it. Given the billions of dollars of equipment that has been trashed by use in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as the M4 and Marine M16 being relatively new to them, I will make an educated guess that it will be at least 10 years before any changes are made.
 
M

mikejonestkd

New member
the M4 and Marine M16 being relatively new to them
Click to expand...

The m16 has been in service longer than any military issue rifle since this country was founded...

They are always looking at new ideas but adopt only a few that they try.
 
C

Citizen Carrier

New member
I recall reading in Shotgun News a few years ago that China is going to something like a 6.5mm bullet in a new line of Chinese designed small arms.

They feel the 6.5, presumably with some kind of steel core, gives them better capabilities against potential enemies wearing advanced body armor.

Know anybody like that?
 
C

Chui

New member
Yeah, China is moving ahead with their 5.8mm cartridge. It seems to perform quite nicely - especially armor piercing capabilities. Not sure how well it would work on unarmored troops, though. Of course, it "works"; a hole is a hole to a large extent.
 
B

Bartholomew Roberts

Moderator
I would hazard a guess that 6.8 is DOA. Federal was able to demonstrate a 5.56 bonded bullet to the USMC that had ballistic gel cavities almost identical to 110gr 6.8 OTM at similar velocities.

If the round is determined to be legal for land warfare, it will be hard to ignore the advantages of using existing 5.56 while still being able to upgrade to 6.8-like performance.

Of course, it does make you wonder what the Federal round in 6.8 would do. :)
 
P

pesta2

New member
Yeah, China is moving ahead with their 5.8mm cartridge.
Click to expand...

The Latest version of ‘Cartridges of the World’ has a article about it. It’s performance was less that the 5.56 and 5.45.
 
S

Scorch

New member
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the military to change any time soon. 5.56 is in. The 6.8 mm has been dead for a few years now. But I imagine they had pretty much this same argument back in 1892 (30 caliber?? Preposterous!! Why the 45-70 has the clear advantage in projectile mass, pony penetration, and it smells good too!).
 
B

bufordtjustice

New member
mikejonesstkd,

Being since the M-4 was adopted in the mid 90's and not fully integrated until several years later, I would definitely say it is NEW to the Army. In fact, when I left the 82 ABN in 1996, we still hadn't seen them yet. The Marines didn't start switching switching over to the M16A4 until several years after that (around 2003 I think) which also makes it relatively new to them. An M4 or an M16A4 are definitely not the same old M16 or M16A1 issued 40 years ago.

So, the point is, the military spent gobs of money equipping Joe with "new" guns and accessories such as expensive optics anywhere from 5-10 years ago. Adding the cost of the wars and the current economy, they aren't going to do anything anytime soon.
 
J

johnwilliamson062

Moderator
With Obama planning to expand the number of people in the military while cutting expenses, I doubt there will be any money to upgrade much of anything.
It would be really great if we could just cut the red tape and use JHPs. I would imagine a 5.56 with a JHP can do wonders on 'enemy combatants,' which tend to be unarmored.
 
Last edited:
C

Chui

New member
U sure about that, pesta? In what was it classified "inferior"? That's not at all in consonance with other reports about the cartridge... :confused:
 
S

sholling

New member
Just my opinion but I don't think that 6.8 is quite dead yet but it's major advantage lies in shorter barrels. 5.56 ballistics aren't all that impressive from a 16" barrel. 6.8 on the other hand gains little going from a 16" to a 20" barrel. I think it will come down to a long term decision of what direction the brass thinks warfare will take. Urban vs open terrain and rifle vs carbine.
 
S

Slamfire

New member
The logistic trail is so long and expensive, the Army ain't going to change calibers in our lifetime, your kids lifetime, or their kids.

There just is not enough Corporate money on this issue on Capital Hill to force the Army to change.

And the Army does not like change.
 
P

pesta2

New member
U sure about that, pesta? In what was it classified "inferior"? That's not at all in consonance with other reports about the cartridge...
Click to expand...

Yep. The wound channel was not near as devastating as the 5.56 or 5.45. They yawed or fragmented while the 5.8 did neither, just went through straight.

Pick up the “Cartridges of the World 11th Edition” there is a long article about the 5.8 and testing done.
 
J

jdscholer

New member
With guns in general being so darned evil, perhaps our military would be better served by utilizing "more humane" weapons such as night-sticks and pepper spray.:rolleyes: jd
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top