Marines To Upgrade Rifles, Investigate Use Of Hollowpoint Bullets

meketrefe

meketrefe

.450/400 Nitro Ex
Messages
12,806
Reaction score
16,328
Location
Dexter, ME
Will you seem to like ballistics. Read about the Army settlement due to the M855A1 based on the arrowhead design from Liberty that was stolen from them.
Esentially they asked liberty to test their bullet for its potential (tungsten tip at the time) and decided to go and "invent" their own.
The key with any bullet design is to understand the behavior at impact and withing the speed spectrum designed for it.
IMO the "lead free" is a joke because training fields and ranges are full of lead already so anyway so who cares.
And specially for a battlefield round. We are going to fvck you up in an environmentally conscious way! lol.
I don't have a link but there are plenty of demonstrations how they perforate hard barrier but also how soft target makes them collapse and do a number
in most situations. I still think a stout (thick body) small channel hollow point with some lead like a nosler partition style it is a better way to keep length shorter and therefore pressure
build up down. So there is very good penetration and less reliance on tip collapse and tumbling.
Read about it and let me know what you think.
 
Marine Cpl

Marine Cpl

.577 Tyrannosaur.
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
20,632
Location
Orange County
Meke, I think the Army is trying to make the 5.56mm do more than it was designed to do. You can't have a new round be designed for barrier penetration and also be the best at terminal ballistics. It's one or the other in my opinion.

If it were up to me and I needed to field my troops with just one round for logistical reasons, it would be a bigger caliber.
 
Last edited:
Cleck

Cleck

.308 Win
Messages
2,686
Reaction score
2,379
Location
Under the cloak of the Empire
Interesting read. Basically we've been copying them for years, but now that their budget is shrinking, they're copying us. Now they might actually be "military assault rifles" lol
 
Marine Cpl

Marine Cpl

.577 Tyrannosaur.
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
20,632
Location
Orange County
The Marines use the Bear Claw open tipped round that's good for terminal ballistics. Crew Served machine guns still field the 7.62x51. Marine Designated Marksman also field the 7.62 so they have barrier penetration covered there. I think they have it right with that setup.

The Army on the other hand is trying to get a one round fits all. It's not going to be the best.

It didn't work for their combat uniforms either. That universal pattern was a disaster.
 
meketrefe

meketrefe

.450/400 Nitro Ex
Messages
12,806
Reaction score
16,328
Location
Dexter, ME
Willjr75 said:
Meke, I think the Army is trying to make the 5.56mm do more than it was designed to do. You can't have a new round be designed for barrier penetration and also be the best at terminal ballistics. It's one or the other in my opinion.

If it were up to me and I needed to field my troops with just one round for logistical reasons, it would be a bigger caliber.
Click to expand...

Agree. Rounds that excel at something are not the best for something else and viceversa.
The whole firearms / ballistics / equipment is a world of trade offs always.
They wanted something with more penetration and vehicle stopper. Also the thing is, well train
shooters can be so good that they can put the bullets where it counts that is more important than
the terminal ballistics details.
 
Podmonkey

Podmonkey

.577 Tyrannosaur.
U.S. Military
Messages
21,647
Reaction score
30,269
Location
Cambria co. PA
Actually, I am very glad meketrefe is here now. A long time ago there was a 5.56 replacement discussion at the otherplace and I suggested a modern 6.5 cartridge could replace both the 5.56 and 7.62. Meketrefe suggested a 6mm cartridge, at the time I thought that a 6mm could not replace a .30. But now I think the Navy and Marines really had something with the 6mm Lee Navy and potato diggers, the metallurgy and powder tech just wasn't there yet, but now.... How about similar ballistics to the old 6mm of yore? 105gr 6mm launched at around 2500 fps. The moderate velocity keeps recoil down f I r controllable automatic fire, the long heavy bullet allows for enough retained velocity for decent range. The bullet shou l d also be long enough for room for a combined effects cartridge. Light, expanding/fragmenting nose portion and a heavy, hardend shaped penetrator base.
 
BuellSix8

BuellSix8

.40 S&W
Messages
215
Reaction score
286
Location
HUDSON VALLEY
The Grundal (hehehehee) does give more range but the 6.8 is def more common, used by police departments and a few government agencies already. Companies like LWRCI have been outfitting units with it for a few years now not including the Saudi contract with th Six8 (which I'm obviously a fan of and own a few).

Just a thought lol.

I do love shooting me some grendal but let's be honest... The recent combat scenarios are 300yards or less well within the 6.8 range of thumpin. Def in 6.5 wheel house too.
 
Podmonkey

Podmonkey

.577 Tyrannosaur.
U.S. Military
Messages
21,647
Reaction score
30,269
Location
Cambria co. PA
Darth said:
I'm thinking the tried and true .300 Blackout.
Click to expand...
Specialist round, lacks range. Range is still important as soldiers in Afghanistan have discovered.
And yeah I get you're trolling but others will agree with that anyway.
 
Last edited:
meketrefe

meketrefe

.450/400 Nitro Ex
Messages
12,806
Reaction score
16,328
Location
Dexter, ME
Thanks guys for the vote of confidence. As I said I wish I knew as much as others already forgot.
In terms of efficiency from small carbines 16" and less the modern 6.8spcII is hard to beat. IMO it makes a lot more sense than the 308 if the intention is 16" or less.
Specially with solid bullets between 85-100 grains make this round devastating. It can actually propel a 90gr bullet at 2,900 that is comparable in speed and trajectory
to a 62gr in 5.56 so a more momentum on the target and a true 500-600 yards effectiveness.
With all that said the 16" lmt adoptted by the Brits is a nice gun but they had to reformulate a new load to make the 16" work better. You see a 308 was really designed
for optimal burn in 22" barrels and should stay in 20" or more although 18" could be a decent compromise. When using 16" one needs to look into lighter bullets and
faster powders otherwise a lot of the 308 fuel is wasted and burned outside the barrel with the corresponding slap in the face.
In terms of what we have today the 5.56 is actually a pretty good round but in places where the ranges are extending (like afganistan, Iraq, etc...) we could use a bit
more grain with the same speed thus a larger caliber. If we simply necked up the 5.56 to 6mm we will end up with the popular 6x45 perhaps with a tad extra freebore
and diameter at teh shoulder. This cat is as easy as they come and essentially gives a net improvement of 25% over the 5.56 without doing much. A 85 gr bullet can
be propelled to 2,850fps from a 18" barrel. It is plentiful, only a barrel is needed and very affordable with bullets superior to the 5.56 especially for hunting where the 5.56
bullets are not that great. Esentially the 6mm assortment for hunting is huge and starts where the 223 ends that is very limited to small game.
But, for an easy upper that can put deer meat on the table with authority, the 6.8 is hard to beat.
 
meketrefe

meketrefe

.450/400 Nitro Ex
Messages
12,806
Reaction score
16,328
Location
Dexter, ME
Darth said:
I'm thinking the tried and true .300 Blackout.
Click to expand...

the 300 Obama is what it is. There is nothing wrong with this caliber considering its limitations. I can be a lot of fun specially for subsonic shooting that
is what it does best. The whole hate thing is not with the caliber itself but with the company promoting a bunch of BS and lies in order to sell it to sometimes clueless
souls. It is the first main internet/forum caliber result of tacticool marketing campaigns.
If you really know what you are getting into they there is a client for it. If one has a truck load of 5.56 brass and doesn't mind preparation and finds some dirt
cheap 30 bullets this makes a great plinker. There are some prime bullest in 110-125gr but those are originally designed for 308 for varmint and SD is too low
to hunt with authority. Also the 150gr are too heavy due to the lack of case capacity. In this case a high pressure 7.62x39 is a much better choice that is also
an affordable caliber for plinking. Not the best self defense neither. Specially russian ammo, jackets are too hard and they suck in terminal ballistics.
In hard barrier testing the now retired 5.56 M885 can penetrate a 3/8 hot roll steel at 100 yards whereas the 7.62x39 and specially the blackout will fail
due to the lack of speed. So this myth about being more effective at short ranges and car stoppers is just that, a myth. Speek kills.
 
meketrefe

meketrefe

.450/400 Nitro Ex
Messages
12,806
Reaction score
16,328
Location
Dexter, ME
Bullet Guy said:
Come on, does the average soldier really engage out to 300?
Click to expand...

A good read...
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a512331.pdf


Increasing small arms lethality in Afghanistan: Taking back the infantry half-kilometer by Major Thomas P. Ehrhart, United States Army, 72 pages. Operations in Afghanistan frequently require United States ground forces to engage and destroy the enemy at ranges beyond 300 meters. These operations occur in rugged terrain and in situations where traditional supporting fires are limited due to range or risk of collateral damage. With these limitations, the infantry in Afghanistan require a precise, lethal fire capability that exists only in a properly trained and equipped infantryman. While the infantryman is ideally suited for combat in Afghanistan, his current weapons, doctrine, and marksmanship training do not provide a precise, lethal fire capability to 500 meters and are therefore inappropriate. Comments from returning non-commissioned officers and officers reveal that about fifty percent of engagements occur past 300 meters. The enemy tactics are to engage United States forces from high ground with medium and heavy weapons, often including mortars, knowing that we are restricted by our equipment limitations and the inability of our overburdened soldiers to maneuver at elevations exceeding 6000 feet. Current equipment, training, and doctrine are optimized for engagements under 300 meters and on level terrain
 
Eddie Gunks

Eddie Gunks

.338 Win Mag
Messages
5,349
Reaction score
9,813
Location
Bangkok
thx.

but most could still use 556. and a couple of well trained soldiers could have 30 cal. or 6.8. in iraq there is probably zero need for anything more than 556.

even with heavier cal can the average guy hit at 300 and beyond? really?.
 
Big John

Big John

.45 acp
U.S. Military
Messages
465
Reaction score
763
Location
Watkins Glen NY
It is a funny thing I have always been a hater of the 5.56 even in the Army, it made no sense to me to go from a .308 dia. hole to a .223 dia. hole just so they could carry more rounds. I have fired both the M14/M1a and the OLD M16 and when asked how I liked the M16 I said if I were walking through the jungle and came across an M14 buried barrel down next to a box of ammo I would pull it out of the ground kick the dirt out of the barrel put around through it and IT would be my primary weapon! As I remember my Drill Sgt. did care for that answer.
 
Eddie Gunks

Eddie Gunks

.338 Win Mag
Messages
5,349
Reaction score
9,813
Location
Bangkok
I understand many can. But can most. I see some pretty bad civilian shooters. I would have to guess there would be a correlation of some sort.
 
Big John

Big John

.45 acp
U.S. Military
Messages
465
Reaction score
763
Location
Watkins Glen NY
Bullet Guy said:
I understand many can. But can most. I see some pretty bad civilian shooters. I would have to guess there would be a correlation of some sort.
Click to expand...
My guess would be you are right. Now days most shooters that do so badly are bad because they were not taught proper shooting technique and or didn't start out learning how to shoot iron sites which I think is essential to learning how to shoot. The trends of getting a rifle and putting the biggest scope possible on it does little good if one is not taught the basics first. When the fellow I mentioned before bought his M14 at F&S he wanted to scope it right then and there and I said no and he can hit a target out to 400yds with iron sites, when he comes home on leave I will take him to buy a scout scope for his rifle and he will be ready to go (if his shooting that piece of shit 5.56 hasn't ruined him......lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top