6.8 SPC Forums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I've been lookin and reading about the 6.5 Creedmoor and the 7.62x51, seen where the military wants 50,000 7.62 rifles (now), seen and heard the debate. Not saying one is better than the other ( now don't get your panties in a twist) when the barrel length DROPs below 20 in.
THIS IS THE TOPIC A SIDE BY SIDE comparison between the 6.5 Creedmoor and the 7.62 NATO the military with not issues 22-24 barreled rifles to combat troops, room to room or mounted ops with that length is near impossible. In my reading the 6.5 shines only due to barrel length but when placed side by side, apples to apples there is really no big difference between the to. Now I know there are far more knowledge men on this forum would love to heard your thoughts. So let's stir the pot. Please stay on topic of barrel lengths of 16in -20in and ammo 110-140gr for best side by side comparison.

mods if this needs to be moved for better input/responce please move.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,453 Posts
ammo cost would be my deciding factor i saw some chart the other day showing ballistics,,,let see if i can find it again
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
I've been trying to keep up to date on how this is going to play out, but news seems to have dried up as late. Manufacturers are probably knee deep in reliability testing and trying to sort out any bugs that showed up with the M80A1 before submissions. http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/08/15/gonna-compete-icsr-armys-will-help-get-ammo/

Just my guess on how it is all going to play out.

Step one in the future:

.Mil picks one of the newer light weight platforms(I'm hoping more then anything)

Somewhere beyond that in the future:

Caseless ammo technology ends up getting scrapped or it evolves into something slightly different from it's current state. (from what I've seen, it appears to add a lot of cartridge width even if lighter, could seriously limit the amount of rounds able to be carried just as much as weight)

The .Mil tries to apply it's armor piercing technology to the 6.5 round (260 or 6.5cm) and the resulting round doesn't have enough of a significant advantage in long range performance or armor penetration to justify switching.
Previously adopted platform goes thru several small changes with suppressor use, lightweight variable power optics become standard on all rifles like the Elcan Specter (but lighter hopefully)


With at least a major part of the adoption being focused on the ability to defeat individual ballistic plates, it is hard to guess what and how the 6.5 will compare to the 7.62. Unless the .Mil allows the use of something like the MK318 or M118LR for certain applications or theatre's. I don't see any reason why they wouldn't allow that, and take it into consideration, something like the Federal Gold Medal 142 grain .260 round could easily be adopted for use as a sniper specific round.

Given the velocities I've seen for the M80a1 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/06/16/wound-channel-tests-7-62-308-m80a1-epr-glorious/ It should place 16-20 inch barrels in the 2850-2950 fps region. In terms of armor penetration that might be the hardest part for a 6.5 round to overcome. Standard 120-130 grain 6.5 rounds just meet those velocities out of a 22 inch barrel AR. Good Chrono results listed for the 6.5 CM here https://www.ar15.com/forums/precision-rifles/JP-barreled-22-6-5-Creedmoor-Build-Results/4-6522/ Ultimately the round needs to be developed before any of us can make a guess on how it is going to compare. .Mil could decide on and develop a screamer 100-110 grain round that does better versus armor, but might have poor long range performance. At this point anybody's guess is possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
It seems that are back to a sniper is a sniper and needs a rifle capable of long range engagements where infantry units need a rifle that is multipurpose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,840 Posts
Less recoil with 6.5 Creedmoor from what I've read. But increased barrel wear. I'll find out when I get my barrel from ARP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,518 Posts
7.62x51 Pros:
- Assortment of ammo
- More assortment and power for hunting or tactical use (more momentum)
- More cost effective in ammo and components

7.62x51 Cons:
- More recoil with high performance heavier bullets
- At long range a bit more wind deflection and drop

260 / 6.5 Pros:
- Less recoil
- Flatter trajectories and less wind drift
- Great for paper and ringing steel at long range

260 / 6.5 Cons:
- Less ammo choices
- No low cost options like 308
- Max out at 140gr bullets so less momentum. Great for steel at long range as soon as one doesn't have heavy steel gates to score extra points.


Here a couple of very nice factory match loads for you to compare...




I adjusted the loads with a 200 yard zero with 10mph 90deg.full value wind, Temp 20C and 555ft ASL.

8.5mils at 1000 yards for the 6.5 vs. 9.9mils for the 308 winchester.
At 1,100 yards the 6.5 catches the 308 in energy but not in momentum but it is too close to the transonic range anyway.

For a long range shot lets say between 600 to 800 one will have to decide if they want the better trajectory of the 6.5 or
the extra energy and momentum of the 308.
Neither caliber is a wise choice for longer ranges specially when it involves certain game size like mule deer or elk. For that
we have the magnums.

IMO for the average man, for the average use, the 308 winchester is more versatile and can do more things than the 260 and 6.5 and save money along the way.

Perhaps nobody will ever need to load a 180gr-200gr bonded bullet to tackle very large or even dangerous game at average range in the woods but
the 308 will also give you that choice and the 6.5 will not. There are solids and flat metplat spitzers too.

Keep in mind that one has also bullets like flat line solids for further improving the long range capabilities of the 308w w/o increasing the recoil.
they are more expensive but they are not more expensive than factory if one reloads.

I hope this helps.




308Wvs65Creed.JPG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,518 Posts
I am not sure how critical is long range for you but the good thing this also includes shorter ranges.

Here another two nice ones for hunting...

In this case the 308W nosler shoots slightly flatter than the 6.5 hornday ELDx.
Also more energy and momentum for the 308 at any distance.
Obviously the lighter 6.5 bullets produce less recoil.




308Wvs65CreedHunting.JPG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
IMO, the decision to go with the 7.62 has more to deal with supply chain management than any other factor. Dozens of allied countries make NATO 7.62 ammo. The same cannot be said for the 6.5. I've got 14 different head stamps in my garage I've reloaded.

The US military has millions of rounds of 7.62 in stock throughout the world. What would they do with all the ammo if they switched? Our association with NATO also requires the utilization of a common round.

With the limited number companies making 6.5 ammo, the existing stockpiles of 7.62 ammo, the use of 7.62 machine guns, and NATO, I cannot envision switching away from the 7.62 in the foreseeable future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
IMO, the decision to go with the 7.62 has more to deal with supply chain management than any other factor. Dozens of allied countries make NATO 7.62 ammo. The same cannot be said for the 6.5. I've got 14 different head stamps in my garage I've reloaded.

The US military has millions of rounds of 7.62 in stock throughout the world. What would they do with all the ammo if they switched? Our association with NATO also requires the utilization of a common round.

With the limited number companies making 6.5 ammo, the existing stockpiles of 7.62 ammo, the use of 7.62 machine guns, and NATO, I cannot envision switching away from the 7.62 in the foreseeable future.

This is exactly the reason. The reason the DoD needs those 50K 7.62x51 rifles in Afghanistan is that they are typically engaging the enemy at more than 500 meters and the 5.56 round is practically worthless at that distance. So years ago, they added the requirement that every squad have a 7.62 marksman rifle. They adopted the really heavy EBR. The EBRs they have been using for are too heavy so they are looking for a lighter weight rifle that does the same thing using the same 7.62x51 round. You swap out the rifle, not both the rifle and ammo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,820 Posts
260 / 6.5 Cons:
- Less ammo choices
- No low cost options like 308
- Max out at 140gr bullets so less momentum. Great for steel at long range as soon as one doesn't have heavy steel gates to score extra points
Hornady offers the 147g ELD-M and the 160g Interlock so the max out at 140g is inncorrect. I also heard of another offering for match shooters that is 150g. It is getting new developments weekly
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,518 Posts
Hornady offers the 147g ELD-M and the 160g Interlock so the max out at 140g is incorrect. I also heard of another offering for match shooters that is 150g. It is getting new developments weekly
I don't know those bullets and whether they are good for this application. too new. New bullets and powders are coming out but also for the 30 calibers and 7mm.
In the long term you are looking at lead free bullets and the 6.5mm will not make it to that type of grain. Tungsten is also out.
Those are still not good for heavy targets. In practical/tactical competition 6mm and 6.5 mm are great but have failed to score in heavy rusty gates whereas a 180gr 30 caliber will not fail.
Even with decent energy left, the momentum simply falls too low. Momentum and energy two different things.
The trend has been to remove those hard to score targets from many competitions or replace them with easier ones but the military and tactical need is still there.
It is not energy but momentum that gets things knock out. 6.5 will do great in soft targets like many other calibers but tactical and military they also need that punch to tackle tough targets.
And that is why also the 300WM and 338 lapua where introduced with heavy loads. Anything smaller is just going to fail at long ranges.

The thing with the 308 is that while is not perfect we already have it and is not totally bad.
New bullets are coming out and if we see what a 130 to 150gr lead free bullet can do, specially from shorter barrels, then we realize
this is not as bad as some advertise. New powders are coming out too that are moving those lead free bullets very fast.
I would not be surprised if we see a 150-170gr lead free bullet for the 308 for long range too.

All calibers are evolving, that is good news for everyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
IMO, the decision to go with the 7.62 has more to deal with supply chain management than any other factor. Dozens of allied countries make NATO 7.62 ammo. The same cannot be said for the 6.5. I've got 14 different head stamps in my garage I've reloaded.

The US military has millions of rounds of 7.62 in stock throughout the world. What would they do with all the ammo if they switched? Our association with NATO also requires the utilization of a common round.

With the limited number companies making 6.5 ammo, the existing stockpiles of 7.62 ammo, the use of 7.62 machine guns, and NATO, I cannot envision switching away from the 7.62 in the foreseeable future.
The first thing the government would do is sell all those 7.62 to other countries like they alway do. As far as the 6.5 vd 762. I'm a little bias I will admit. My go to for long range is my AR10 6.5. Using Hornady precision hunter. It is a very expensive round. Buy I have never shot a round more accurate than the 6.5. N almost zero recoil. It's like shooting at 800 yards with a .22LR. I was amazed when I first took the gun to the range. the trajectory is so flat! I've read the responses, my advice if you haven't fired this round find away to get your hands on n try it for yourself. I have also heard our military is talking about going to a one size fits all round also replacing the 5.56 for cost reasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
143 Posts
The first thing the government would do is sell all those 7.62 to other countries like they alway do. As far as the 6.5 vd 762. I'm a little bias I will admit. My go to for long range is my AR10 6.5. Using Hornady precision hunter. It is a very expensive round. Buy I have never shot a round more accurate than the 6.5. N almost zero recoil. It's like shooting at 800 yards with a .22LR. I was amazed when I first took the gun to the range. the trajectory is so flat! I've read the responses, my advice if you haven't fired this round find away to get your hands on n try it for yourself. I have also heard our military is talking about going to a one size fits all round also replacing the 5.56 for cost reasons.
Yep I like the 6.5C, we got one. We have a lot of other one offs too, but our family has (6) 308s. (5) 22LR (4) 6.8SPCs (4) 223. We must like the the 6.5 cause the barrel is just about wore out. We load for it, but one seems enough. Everybody wants their own 308. Some like 243 some the 270 or the 300WSM. Betting the 6.8 Western will be the next Goldilocks round...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
The 6.5 CM and Rem 260 excel out past the 600-800 yard range over the 308 (7.65x51).
From reading international military forums, this is the main reason. A human is a very small target at these ranges, so hit probability is a big thing. As I understand it, it is really more about wind drift than drop. The kinetic energy seems to be less important that hitting the target in the first place. Compared to the 5.56x45 at 400-500 yards, the 6.5 CM and 260 Rem still have a lot of KE at 700-800 yards.
One of the interesting things that I learned from the Military Guns and Ammunition forum is that the French (special forces, I believe) have been working with 260 Remington for a while. Apparently this predated the popularity of the 6.5 CM, so they plan to stay with the 260 Rem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
6.5mm heavies have been around for 30+ yrs.
Clinch River 147 VLD's
B.Caterucio 150 VLD's
Sierra 155 HPBT MK's

I've burned up several barrels chambered in 6.5x57 Improved/.100" short,6.5-08,6.5 SAUM shooting LR 8,9,1000 yd Prone matches over the years.

With the introduction of the heavies for 7mm/.284" bores,the BC,Velocity,Re Coil aspects were re-written.

For ELR the .338,.375,408,416 & 50's dominate that game.

It's not the arrow...it's the Indian/trigger actuator!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
143 Posts
From reading international military forums, this is the main reason. A human is a very small target at these ranges, so hit probability is a big thing. As I understand it, it is really more about wind drift than drop. The kinetic energy seems to be less important that hitting the target in the first place. Compared to the 5.56x45 at 400-500 yards, the 6.5 CM and 260 Rem still have a lot of KE at 700-800 yards.
One of the interesting things that I learned from the Military Guns and Ammunition forum is that the French (special forces, I believe) have been working with 260 Remington for a while. Apparently this predated the popularity of the 6.5 CM, so they plan to stay with the 260 Rem.
I can see the attraction of the 6.5 for military use. Hunting it works well. Just believe bigger in that realm is better. There is no doubt that bullet tech has never been better for hunting making them more attractive for more situations. Still that does the same for the .308. Since we don't hunt humans here the .308 will always have a following. Honestly in the west the 270 has been dethroned. Not by one, but several as a group. All the magnums and to a certain extent the new Cinderella's together represent the bulk of the game taken in the west. For most the 270 was the 'One'. For us it was the 308 because of surplus rifles and ammo and our Dads and Uncles came back from service liking 30s. The .223 was seen as a varmint round.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top