Small Arms and Ammunition

huh
norfolk, i didn't know sfu have a website hosted on them that are related with weapons

ahho said:

huh
norfolk, i didn't know sfu have a website hosted on them that are related with weapons

Click to expand...

Yep ahho, that was from the Canadian-American Strategic Review, located at SFU.

Here's some Small Arms Calibres and Ammunition stuff that hypothetically might replace the NATO 5.56x45mm round - but don't bet any money on it happening. The first article discusses some of the shortcomings of the 5.56mm round, and compares it to the classic NATO 7.62x51mm round as well as the Remington 6.8x43mm SPC round that's used by SF and the 6.5x39mm Grendel being tested (and apparently used as well) by SF, amongst others. The 6x45mm and the 6.5x42mm are also featured. Not surprisingly to those who follow small arms and ammo, the 6.8mm SPC and the 6.5mm Grendel take top billing over everything else except for the 7.62mm, and even there the 6.5Grendel outshines the 7.62mm at longer ranges. The 6.8mm SPC has a slight advantage over the 6.5 Grendel at short ranges, then it's the Grendel the rest of the way. "High-Performance Alternatives to the 5.56 NATO Round" by Stanley C. Crist:



And here's the 2004 NDIA Small Arms Symposium PPT Presentation on the 6.8mm SPC - not bad:



By contrast, this gives a comparision of the ballistic of the 6.5mm Grendel with 3 different loads to the NATO 7.62mm in 2 different loads and the 6.8mm SPC and the NATO 5.56mm each in a single load. The Grendel outperforms all of them in most of the ways shown:



Finally, a modified AR-15/M-16 firing 6.5mm Grendel on the range:



In short, the 6.5mm Grendel is clearly a round with not only superb performance, but also a lot of future potential. It almost matches the 6.8mm SPC in muzzle energy and quickly surpasses the 6.8mm at around 100m or so, and then surpasses the NATO 7.62mm at around 500-600m; it is potentially more or less accurate to 900m. Superb light round.

I really do think that, as many Armies' stocks of M-4 carbines, M-16 rifles, and Minimi light machine guns are either quite elderly now or are simply worn out, making the change to the 6.5mm Grendel (providing that it passes tactical testing most satisfactorily first) would be a very good thing to do in the near future.

Well from the review it is said the 6.5mm bullet performs pretty well. As you said, the foreign armies' M4, M16, and Minimi are aging and maybe is time for replacement and they may look for newer and more capable system out there.
However there are newer weapon out there such as HK416 that is "almost" similar in production and still uses the same ammunition and with improved reliability. Also one more thing on why they standardized to 5.56 nato round in my opinion is that, in times of a major war like the World Wars, allied country can go into a war sharing ammunition and not really too worried about that.

I think for foreign country to adopt the 6.5mm only if the United States will start doing so first, since they still have a war going on and able to test it in the battlefields.

I am just wondering, have they field tested this bullets yet? because the stopping power issue is only able be tested on a human.

there is evidence that at least some in of the US military are forward thinking enough to look into a new rifle however they are having a hard time selling it. 6.5 has some nice attributes but i have yet to read how it does up close the rounds power seems like it would go right through the same problem the 5.56mm rounds seem to be having.


the m249 was supposed to be a temporary fix yet when the date to issue it's replacement came nothing happened. how knows perhaps when the British swap the L85A3's out because they have not been made in over thirteen years ( end date of L85 service life 2010 ) the US will decide to change as well. right now the possibility's are getting better with the options of FN SCAR ( aproved and in production), XM8 ( back in evaluation due to "extreme dust environment." testing ves FN SCAR and M4 carbine, HK416, Patriot Ordnance Factory P 415 and 416 systems,Robinson XCR ( AK long stroke yuck!), and the MAGPUL MASADA Adaptive weapon system( a new comer that has every thing you could ever want in a assault rifle, to be honest I am hoping that in 2012 when you see a picture of a soldier in the field he is carrying a Masada in his arms and a Smith and Wesson M&P 45 on his hip. the guy behind him is carrying a Us manufactured HK MG4 saw and nearby is a M24A3 sniper rifle in the hands of a Army sniper. )

I have a question, didn't colt once mentioned that they have the same fix for m16 and m4 just like the m416??

ever since Old Sam passed Colt and innovation is a once in a century affair. they just came out with there folding butt stock and thats it, nothing on a piston rod system just more of the same. I guess they are counting on the conneticet congress people, there colt Canada and lawyers. It's disgusting they only make M16 and M4 nothing but and only sell to the government they have concluded that they can do as they please because they are the US gov's pet. yet if the US military decides and rightly they should that colt is not living up to it's agreements and moves on to some thing better there goes the main part of it's business

the Turkish army has adopted the HK416 as replacement for the G3

TerraN_EmpirE said:

the Turkish army has adopted the HK416 as replacement for the G3

Click to expand...

And here's a picture:

Uh-oh, they picked the Elcan C79 sight... doesn't exactly have rave reviews from the troops...

Couple of Questions:
Standard sight?! Where will it be made? And what's the difference between this and the MKE?
Why doesn't Turkey just use the HK33?

And why has the C79 been getting?