Ammo For Sale

« « I’ll take 50 | Home | Who watches the watchmen? » »

Alternatives to the 5.56 NATO

Heartless Libertarian discusses them:

The thing that really got my attention in the article is something that I’ve been looking for for a while: hard comparison data for the various currently existing potential replacement, and for both 20″ and 14.5″ barrels. I have yet to see an article in a gun magazine comparing the 6.8 SPC to the 6.5 Grendel, for example. And I had never heard of the 6x45mm and 6.5x42mm rounds. The only round I’d be interested in knowing more about that isn’t on the table is the new 5.8x42mm Chinese round, which Mr. Crist states “by any objective standards, must be considered the best assault rifle cartridge currently in service.” He urges the Army to take “similarly bold action” to what China has done and “adopt a new, more capable rifle cartridge” to better equip our troops for the challenges of the COE.

4 Responses to “Alternatives to the 5.56 NATO”

  1. emdfl Says:

    The 6X45 was developed to let citiziens in countries that forbid civilian ownership of rifles in military cartridges to play with military rifle clones.
    Then there is the 7mm TCU the 5.56 case opened out to 7mm. One of the better bench-rest cartridges for a while before the PPC caes came on the scene. Personally I’d rather have a 6.5X51, the .308 necked down to 6.5 – better known as the .260 Remington. I’m thinking about having an FNFAL rebarrled to that one.

    6.8SPC to 6.5 Grendel comparison has been all ove the web for a couple of years now. The (apparent) short story IIRC is that the 6.5 is a better round after 800 yds…

  2. Lyle Says:

    Some are taking “shots in the dark”. Reach for the light switch:
    http://www.modernballistics.com/

  3. Heartless Libertarian Says:

    If you look at the table in the article, the 6.5 Grendel has more energy than the 6.8 SPC at ranges considerably less than 800m.

    From a 20″ barrel, the Grendel has more energy from the start (0m) and the 6.8 energy sheds its energy much faster the further from the barrel it gets.

    From a 14.5″ barrel, the 6.8 starts with more energy, but it falls behind the 6.5G by 100m and gets further behind the further downrange the rounds go.

    The Grendel also shoots flatter and has less wind deflection, as well.

    Now, why the heck aren’t ya’ll making these comments on my blog?

  4. straightarrow Says:

    7.62 NATO, 7.62x39mm not ideal but effective, 6.5x55mm all are available and all of them will shoot well enough to do the job as far as most riflemen can shoot. The .308 Win is good for sniper work. Anything it won’t handle requires .50BMG, anyway. Left out the 30.06 due to its small advantage over the .308, that most shooters can’t avail themselves of anyway.

    Except for specialized shooting, I’ll be damned if I see a need for an entirely new cartridge, unless there are just some manufacturers we want to reward for some reason or another. Although I wholeheartedly agree the the 5.56 is suitable for prairie dogs, but damn dangerous to anybody shooting at anything that shoots back.

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives