Got any data on it? I posted the info I found on the 6.8 AP loads that existed, but they were limited to penetrating Level IV to 100 yards. I've never seen anything out to 200 yards for 6.8 since it wasn't ever put into service, I only know of two loads developed for it. 97gr and 75gr AP. See attachments.There is already a 6.8 SPC round that will defeat NIJ 4 rifle plates at 200 meters made in the USA. Its just not sold in the U.S. as company making it says it costs too much money to get anything through U.S. military trials so they sell it overseas. They have a 7.62x51 round that extends NIJ 4 failure to nearly 300 meters and a 300 Win Mag to 500 meters. Copper pre-fractured bullet with tungsten core sou the copper expands violently when hits water based medium like human or animal flesh, is barrier blind and when his armor it just keeps drilling through. I scored some test rounds in 5.56, 6.8, 308 and 300 Win Mag but was under the agreement could not release photos or velocities but it will never be something discussed much on our side of the pond as it does to within 80% the 277 Fury does in a M4 chassis.
Agreed. However I posted this short clip excerpt on another thread and I agree with the idea that it would have been better if the cartridge that the new 6.8x51 80,000 PSI hybrid was based on the 6.8 SPC instead:Well, no matter what the military does, I still love my 6.8 SPC. To me it is a jack of all trades for Texas hunting. I guess that I will just start collecting more brass so that I can still shoot my little toy gun when the ammo manufacturers stop making factory pills for it. BTW, all you guys realize that this conversation is academic. We will all have to wait until the rifle and accessories are actually in the field for a few years to evaluate who is right and who is just waxing flatulantly... Peace out brothers and sisters....
Can someone tell me if the new Sig rifles will be compatible with the 6.8 SPC, if not why? I am just not very well versed in ballistics ;-) but I do own a 6.8 SPC AR platform and a bunch of 6.8 SPC ammo. I know the .277 Furry requires a heavier barrel but I did not know if it was compatible with the 6.8 Common Cartridge or the 6.8 SPC.Sig's web site has the Elite 150gr Bonded pegged at 2830 FPS for a 16" barrel which is blazing fast for that barrel length and weight. 2667 ft-lbs muzzle, similar to 270 Win performance from a 24" barrel, but the 270 Fury is doing that from a 16" barrel. @ 700 yards it is still cooking along at just a tick under 1700 FPS @ 958 ft-lbs. BC is listed at .500. Chamber pressure is around 80k PSI, hence the hybrid cartridge design, massive bolt lugs and new platform.
For a 13" barreled MCX Spear with integrated suppressor, no sights, lights, optics, it clocks in at 8.4 lbs, pretty heavy compared to a 6.8 SPC chambered M4.
6.8 SPC would have enhanced a fire teams capabilities at the same ranges as 5.56 NATO is used, but it clearly doesn't provide the long range capability for the mountains of Afghanistan nor does it provide armor penetration beyond 100 yards, so I get why a full powered cartridge was developed capitalizing on 6.8mm bullet's balance between terminal performance and exterior ballistics.
While this will never happen, the most ideal solution in my opinion would have been to adopt 6.8 SPC to replace all 5.56 NATO chambered M4A1's for applications intended for 5.56 NATO and then develop / adopt the new 6.8x51mm full powered cartridge / NGSW platform for DMR and Squad Automatic roles which augment a fire team's capability.
A fire team could theoretically be comprised of three 6.8 SPC M4's with one XM5 (rifle variant) or one XM 250 (machine gun variant). Alternatively, you could equip two team members with 6.8 SPC M4's, one with an XM5 and one the XM 250.
It's just a shame 6.8 SPC was passed over in favor of the M855A1 load in 5.56 NATO because it still does everything 5.56 NATO does, but much better. And they could have used the same projectile design of M855A1 or the now defunct MK318 scaled up for 6.8 SPC just like they did with M80A1.
No, the sig Fury is the size of a 308Can someone tell me if the new Sig rifles will be compatible with the 6.8 SPC, if not why? I am just not very well versed in ballistics ;-) but I do own a 6.8 SPC AR platform and a bunch of 6.8 SPC ammo. I know the .277 Furry requires a heavier barrel but I did not know if it was compatible with the 6.8 Common Cartridge or the 6.8 SPC.
My sense is neither dollars or pounds were major factors in the decision tree. Nor were all lessons learned to date incorporated. As usual the WAGs are still trying to fight the last war, and not very intelligently.My 200 yard statement was wrong (sometimes I do that) but remember the MAI ammo is loaded to 6,8 SPC pressures same as XM68GDs because that is what Uncle Sugar tested and their bigger clients (middle east) adopted early. That bullet in both the 75 gain and 97 grain loaded to upper end of 6.8 spc II range will punch a USGI "30-06 AP" rated plate at a greater distance than 100 yards. Beyond this can't say too much. I now have NIJ 4 plates under three pounds now and a set under four pounds. Even have a front plate at 2.9 pounds in female shape for the wife.
While military use around the world is really ramping up their armor and night vision to keep up it comes with a weight price when up armoring, most of my military armor is rated "burst from 9mm submachine gun" for soft, "7.62x51 M80 ball", "30-06 AP" and other similar nomenclature. They are not using NIJ standards in marking their plates and the 30-06 AP plates I have are miserable weight to wear, especially in the large size so I shot one of my sets to discover it doesn't like certain loads that I would want to stop in combat.
No military issue plate I have been able to acquire and shoot will stop 7.62x51 ADVAP. ADVAP is nothing more than M80a1 EPR with a tungsten penetrator instead of mild steel used in M80a1. Have some of the new kits from Australia and Romania (Romy is good stuff and issued in female) and some that carries "DARPA" labels. The lightweight plates seem to only be filtering into Tier 1 units best I can tell but as normal what the Tier 1 units are using today will filter to the regular GIs with time.
Issue is it will take just a little training to teach them to go for hip shots where a busted artery will bleed out almost as fast as a heart or liver shot. Same with neck and face, NIJ 3 helmets are already out and have two not counting the SLAAP Plates that Velcro to standard MICH helmets that up-armor them to NIJ 3 but kit even a burly man out with a Level 3 helmet, milspec Level 4 threat plates, fully kit him out with comms, IFAK, the new rifle ammo load out, etc and they will have 100 pounds of gear.
I would have swapped M4s over to the 6.8 while adopting the spc II standard instead of SPC and then replaced the M110 Sass with the new SIG rifle. Each squad sized group would have their SDM/SPR toppers with the bigger rifles while allowing the bulk to still be light and fast. Am currently working on a project to shoehorn 280 AI in a BN-36 or LAAR chassis which the receiver and magazine is a tad longer than AR 10s but will handle 30-06, 25-06, 280 AI and possibly 7mm Rem Mag at competitive weight with the new rifle and be less expensive plus sharing enough parts would be less for armorers to inventory.
I believe the military is thinking way beyond he NIJ 4 plate. Have some military issue only Tencate plates along with lightweight flexible NIJ 3 (Stealth Armor Systems Hexar) and swapping groin, shoulder along with flexible lightweight side armor to Level 3 is here. But like with ACOGs increasing the hit probability of average 11 Bravo in Gulf 2 and Afghanistan, the new optic the Army is about to field that ranges the target, figures wind drift and puts bullet on target is going to allow way more "average" infantrymen to make "Scout Sniper" quality shots.
We learned some hard lessons in Afghanistan with the M4 which could have been solved such as all the rifle failures at the Battle of Wannat. Have already started swapping my gas tubes to V Seven Inconel Extreme Environment tubes, using advanced material bolts including those made with S7 steel instead of Carpenter 158 and swapping my cam pins out to the V Seven Improved Cam Pin. Just swapping a few parts in the M4, slowing cyclic rate down with MGI Rate Reduction Buffers combined with 4150 melonite barrels and we have not been able to cook an AR upper on full auto lowers yet.
These are 6.8 uppers running full power spc II loads and running mag dump after mag dump. Same improvements on the Sr-25 and swapping it over to 6.5 Creed could have transitioned the military to much improved equipment on a budget and kept a competitive edge for a couple more decades.
Yep. Can't wait to see Joe Snuffy toting that beast in triple canopy, wishing for a stripped down M4 w a red dot.My sense is neither dollars or pounds were major factors in the decision tree. Nor were all lessons learned to date incorporated. As usual the WAGs are still trying to fight the last war, and not very intelligently.