Tell me about 6.8 cal. remington?
what is it? Kasey has one for sale....whats it do other than go bang...??? purpose
0
-
Our military had .308 / 7.62 diam as its standard infantry cartridge
NATO adopted as well
To heavy - to large was the complaint
Our military went to .223 / 5.56 diam as its standard infantry cartridge
NATO adopted it as well
To light - to small was the complaint
Our military is moving again to the "new" 6.8 diam as its standard infantry cartridge
NATO will adopt it as well
It's surprising similar in spec - size - performance of the .276 diam standard infantry cartridge proposed circa start of - leading up to WWII
The M1 garand rifle and other offered in the military spec trials were at first chambered in this cartridge - supposed to be an improvement and replace the .30-06 and become the standard infantry round
The cost of replacing all the existing common cartridge platforms used by our military was said to be to expensive - cost prohibitive and with to long a timeline so when they adopted the garand it was in .30-06
We need a commonality of cartridge comparability in our infantry rifles and light machine guns - cuts down on supply and production problems and makes it easier to get the right ammo to the guys on the ground
It's a matter of length - weight - and performance
This lies between the 7.62 and the 5.56 as far as dimension and performance go - it's the next generation of our go to ammo
Modern tech gives performance closer to the .30-06 while keeping it smaller and lighter
Affects magazine size - and weight and how much ammo you can carry within weight limits
That's a basic explanation - off the cuff
Others may expand or provide more detail or specific cartridge specs
Mike0 -
Purpose - provide money for the military industrial complex. 0 -
pwillie,
This is the .30 Remington cartridge necked down to take the .277" bullets. Yes, .27 caliber bullets.
5.56 NATO vs 6.8SPC (Special Purpose Cartridge)
This is a fairly decent article about the cartridge and its development:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/04/04/not-so-special-a-critical-view-of-the-6-8mm-spc/
You will find all manner of discussions about the comparison between this cartridge and 5.56 NATO or the 7.62x39 in dozens of formats, whether magazines, blogs or forums.
Currently, it is in low profile mode since there are very few shooters using it and the military hasn't acknowledged it's usefulness yet. Yes there is a balance between load out weight, number of cartridges in that load and just how big the load can be, based on the mixing of genders now prevalent in the military. There is also the huge cost of converting existing rifles to this cartridge and the implementation of manufacturing to increase the amount of ammunition required for the fronts we are involved with now.
If I had to bet, I would bet that Lake City already has the conversions in house, but not fully set up on the lines yet.
My opinion is to skip this intermediate cartridge and go right to the 6.5 Creedmoor and screw NATO. We'd have the best cartridge in the world and let the other catch up. Then start training the soldiers to shoot properly instead of the methods employed now. If the women can't handle the load or the recoil, put them behind the rear lines.
Best.0 -
It is my understanding, from what I have read, that it was general Douglas MacArthur who convinced the army chief of staff, that it would be better to stay with the 30.06 cartridge rather than change over to the 27 caliber. This was account of all the millions of rounds that were already in storage, and having to re-chamber and re-barrel weapons. His biggest sticking point was the cost. 0 -
I own a 6.8 SPC AR upper and have used it to shoot a deer. It does fine within it's range parameters but just be aware of those. I'd call it an OK cartridge for a light weight carbine. Performance is adequate for deer hunting out to 200 yards. It's far from equal to a 260 or 7mm08 which are better suited to a medium weight(vs light weight) carbine.
I see little use for it as a varmint round as the .223 is far better and cheaper to boot. In a full size rifle, why bother unless you're challenged by recoil.0 -
Thanks guys! 0 -
I have had one for several years and also have a 5.56X45 AR. The 6.8 is/was intended to deliver more bullet mass (60 grain vs. 110 grain) at a lower velocity ( 3000 fps vs. 2600 fps) for a net gain in delivered energy. As military rounds can't be expanding bullets [;)] this would, in theory, deliver more energy to the enemy than the 5.56 did. With the modular nature of the M-4/M-16 family it would only require a barrel, bolt head and magazine change. Haven't seen anything to indicate it is going to happen soon. The 27 caliber was something the Brits were considering before the Great War, so it's nothing new. 0 -
I have 4 of them and I like it a lot more then the 5.56. The only problem I have is that ammo is harder to find and average cost is a $1 a round. Some more and some less. Your not gonna find it at Wal Mart or Dunhams or even most gun shops. Your best bet is to buy it on line from the Sportsmans Guide or places like Natchez. The last 4 deer I've shot have all been 1 shot kills out of an AR. I pretty much use the Hornady SST 120 grain load, its reliable and accurate. Some months ago I bought a Ruger SR556/ 6.8. I wanted a piston gun and now I have it. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
8 comments