New rifle, bigger bullets: Inside the Army's plan to ditch the M4 and 5.56

[myhightechsec]

I am surprised to see them attempt to pull this off without a 30-year study.


If selected by senior leaders, the weapon could resolve a close-quarters weapons debate about calibers that critics say dates to the 1920s and has influenced military small arms ever since.


https://www.armytimes.com/articles/...inside-the-armys-plan-to-ditch-the-m4-and-556

 

[hog slayer]

While I was active I would refer to the Marine Times as the fish wrapper. I wanted everyone to remember that it wasn't official word. I still know how to look into official programs in the USMC. It's often interesting how the XYZ Times gets their stories. Stand by for the thirty year study.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I am surprised to see them attempt to pull this off without a 30-year study.

The ACR Program was 30 years ago.

 

[Mgderf]

So, if the U.s. and it's Nato allies cease to use the 5.56mm round, what will this do to market availability, and price?
Obviously, if the military(s) are no longer using it, manufacturers will curtail production. No more "Mil-Surp" offerings...

 

[Robert Richardson]

So, if the U.s. and it's Nato allies cease to use the 5.56mm round, what will this do to market availability, and price?
Obviously, if the military(s) are no longer using it, manufacturers will curtail production. No more "Mil-Surp" offerings...

By the time it happens, we all will probably all be to old to think about that.

 

[natdscott]

As an individual who has just about fully wrung out the 20" AR for it's range and power, I have to say that it is about time somebody seriously addressed the topic.

Advancements in cartridge efficiency along with increased knowledge and availability of good components has well-proven that the 6mm--and certainly 6.5mm--have the ability to put a LOT more power on target, a LOT further than any cartridge with a .375" headstamp. All this while being much more easily controlled and fired, with well lower ammunition weight than the .308 round.

I still find it odd...or intriguing at least...that just about as soon as the US Milit'ry gets into a conflict with long range slug matches, they find that they need to COMPLETELY change their fleet of small arms... We did the opposite with the M14 in Vietnam; the thought pattern being that 'most conflict is short range', and that they needed to carry more rounds, so why use heavy ammunition in that old wooden rifle?

This: A mid-size action SCAR (NEITHER M16 or M110 size) or thereabouts in a medium capacity 6-6.5mm catridge with a 100-125 grain bullet; 1-4x or 1-6x battle optic; suppressor-ready FH like an AAC, or what have you; 20-25 rd capacity in METAL magazines.

-Nate

 

[miguel]

So, if the U.s. and it's Nato allies cease to use the 5.56mm round, what will this do to market availability, and price?
Obviously, if the military(s) are no longer using it, manufacturers will curtail production. No more "Mil-Surp" offerings...

Steel case!

Buy extra barrels while they are cheap!

 

[Leo]

As an individual who has just about fully wrung out the 20" AR for it's range and power, I have to say that it is about time somebody seriously addressed the topic.

Advancements in cartridge efficiency along with increased knowledge and availability of good components has well-proven that the 6mm--and certainly 6.5mm--have the ability to put a LOT more power on target, a LOT further than any cartridge with a .375" headstamp. All this while being much more easily controlled and fired, with well lower ammunition weight than the .308 round.

I still find it odd...or intriguing at least...that just about as soon as the US Milit'ry gets into a conflict with long range slug matches, they find that they need to COMPLETELY change their fleet of small arms... We did the opposite with the M14 in Vietnam; the thought pattern being that 'most conflict is short range', and that they needed to carry more rounds, so why use heavy ammunition in that old wooden rifle?

This: A mid-size action SCAR (NEITHER M16 or M110 size) or thereabouts in a medium capacity 6-6.5mm catridge with a 100-125 grain bullet; 1-4x or 1-6x battle optic; suppressor-ready FH like an AAC, or what have you; 20-25 rd capacity in METAL magazines.

-Nate

Like maybe 6.5 grendel? I never played with the 6.8mm spc but I do not even see it around anymore. From a civilian point of view the bullet selection in 6.5mm would make it a lot more versatile.

 

[sig1473]

I have a 6.8 Noveske and it shoots very nice. The 6.8 is long from dead. The 6.5 Grendel is another intriguing round which I am looking at. Waiting for the Rainier barrels to come back in stock since I've got 4x stripped uppers collecting dust. Here is a good read:https://sofrep.com/76391/5-56mm-vs-6-8mm-can-better-bullet-keep-bad-guy/

 

[JAL]

While I was active I would refer to the Marine Times as the fish wrapper. I wanted everyone to remember that it wasn't official word. I still know how to look into official programs in the USMC. It's often interesting how the XYZ Times gets their stories. Stand by for the thirty year study.

Same, same for The Army Times, which too many civilians took to be official Dept. of the Army gospel when it's not. Significant portions of it are "all the news that print to fit" with headlines intended to attract attention. Some of it's no better than the latest rumor from the third stall on the left in the latrine.

John

 

[throttletony]

I know that 6.5mm pills are inherently voodoo.
Before reinventing the wheel... why not the humble .243 in an ar10 pattern rifle, or a SCAR setup. (6mm/.243 would be a great improvememt)

 

[natdscott]

Like maybe 6.5 grendel? I never played with the 6.8mm spc but I do not even see it around anymore. From a civilian point of view the bullet selection in 6.5mm would make it a lot more versatile.

Well Leo, I didn't want to play favorites... But yeah, 6mm AR and 6.5 Grendel would be way up the list; that is, unless they are trying to build a true 800+ yard rifle (which is unlikely for general use) where the medium capacity .308 casing is a good idea.

I know that 6.5mm pills are inherently voodoo.
Before reinventing the wheel... why not the humble .243 in an ar10 pattern rifle, or a SCAR setup. (6mm/.243 would be a great improvememt)

In regards to the M110, the "why not" is that it sucks. At least, it does when paired with heavy loads in high pressure cartridges like the .243. Ask Tubb about that one and how many broken bolts he had (guy won a National with it, probably to prove a point to himself and others, and the next year immediately dropped the whole platform).

As with many firearms designs, a 1:1 upsize of the M16 idea did not work as well in the 0.473" casings, and some of the match upgrades we can make as target shooters with extended barrels are not an option for a 20" Service Rifle that has to function reliably 100% of the time.

-Nate