ARCHIVED
 |
Posted: 4/9/2012 9:55:59 PM
[Last Edit: 4/9/2012 9:57:20 PM by stanc]
Originally Posted By Aramark:
two or more are missing aren't they? I dunno, but two are there that probably shouldn't be. The 77gr Elite and 120gr Barnes solids are no longer available. Plus, it looks like some may have ogives too long for mag-length loads, which inflates the number of true "6.8" bullets. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2012 10:22:41 PM
346ci
Well thats easy! A 75 gr 5.56mm out of a 16" barrel will be going about 2500-2600 ish. Hornady say 2700FPS with 24 " barrel Shorter barrel even less. A 125 gr out of the 300 Blk 16" barrel is going 2185 fps ! Ah which one has more energy at 100 yards 75 gr Horn TAP about 950 ft/lb at 100 yards 16 " barrel 125 gr 300Blk 1004 ft/lb at 100 yards 16" barrel Which one will be more effective at distance. 75 gr Tap - frag distance out of 16" barrel 175 yards yaw/tumble 220 yard after that pencil hole. 125 gr 300 Blk not a frag round will mushroom all the way out to 300 plus yards! Past that still a .308" hole vs a .223" Now lets get back to the task at hand - still waiting for the 130 gr load data for either the 6.5/6.8 inan AR paltform?  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2012 11:13:54 PM
[Last Edit: 4/9/2012 11:15:49 PM by WVHunter1s1k]
Hot off the press!!
Brand new 6.8 round coming soon. Check this out! SSA/140gr Berger Current claim; 2400fps out of a 16" barrel. http://www.ssarmory.com/6.8_spc_ammo_140gr_VLD_Berger.aspx |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 12:24:45 AM
Originally Posted By 320pf:
Sometimes people forget that they took the best girl to the dance. I think that the 5.56x45 NATO is the best intermediate rifle round. FIrst, is low recoil, allowing for light weight arms that the easy to carry. In addition, the low recoil makes for quick accurate follow up shots. Second, the light projectile (62 gr) can be pushed to 3000-to-3,100 ft/s (in 20 in barrels and about 2800-to-29–– ft/s in 14.5 inch barrels). This makes for a flat trajectory out to about 300 meters. Third, all this in a light cartridge so that one can carry more ammo. In fact, one can carry more than twice as much 5.56×45mm ammunition as 7.62×51mm for the same weight. As far as lethality goes, lethality of the 5.56×45mm was more a matter of perception than fact. A good CNS hit with any cartridge will result in quick/instant incapacitation. Similarly, a poor hit with any cartridge yields poor incapacitation results. Most of the complaints about terminal performance have more to do with the bullet construction than the cartridge. It is much cheaper and simpler to fix the bullet design than change calibers. Copying is the best form of flattery The 5.56x45mm has proven to be so effective in its all around performance, it has been copied by both the Russians and Chinese. The 5.56x45mm came out in 1963, by 1974, the Russians abandoned the 7.62x40mm and adopted the 5.45×39mm. About 13 years later, the Chinese also abandon the 7.62x40mm and adopt the 5.8×42mm. Both of these rounds are ballistically similar to the 5.56x45. This why I believe that the 5.56x45 NATO is the best intermediate rifle round. I have a lot of confidence in 5.56x45 out of a 20" barrel. However, 16" and shorter is a no-go for me. I don't know how you are getting a 62 gr projectile traveling at 2800-2900 ft/s to come out of a 14.5" barrel AR. This video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb_Ok410yuw&list=UUZ-qxagOkAmCEP-Tu6YliUQ&index=98&feature=plcp shows a guy getting ~3000 ft/s with 55gr projectiles out of 16" barrels (XM193). So I don't know how you got your numbers. I imagine once you throw a 62gr projectile down a 14.5" barrel you will be less than 2700 ft/s easy. Also, you could use a better bullet... or you could use a better round and a better bullet. A better performing cartridge/caliber will always be a better choice. 5.56x45 was designed for 20" barrels and it is hamstrung when you don't shoot it out of one. Also, as far as recoil... many of these bullets have recoil similar to AK rounds... which is perfectly manageable. We aren't comparing the 5.56 to the 7.62x51. CNS hits? I can get a CNS hit with a 9mm carbine. The point of a rifle rounds is that you don't have to hit the CNS exactly... you just have to get a solid upper chest shot (and/or head shot of course). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 1:06:17 AM
Originally Posted By stanc:
Originally Posted By Aramark:
two or more are missing aren't they? I dunno, but two are there that probably shouldn't be. The 77gr Elite and 120gr Barnes solids are no longer available. Plus, it looks like some may have ogives too long for mag-length loads, which inflates the number of true "6.8" bullets. The 135 SMK is too long for mag use, the 105GS and 130 Nosler are the longest that can be used in a PRI mag. The rest shoot fine from the mag. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 1:10:12 AM
Originally Posted By WVHunter1s1k:
Hot off the press!! Brand new 6.8 round coming soon. Check this out! SSA/140gr Berger Current claim; 2400fps out of a 16" barrel. http://www.ssarmory.com/6.8_spc_ammo_140gr_VLD_Berger.aspx I don't think SSA will load them to 2400fps . 2400 with handloads sure but SSA has a hard time getting a 115 to 2550 without excess pressure. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 1:22:03 AM
1st place 6.8 spc ii
2nd place 7.62x39 That is all. |
|
|
|
Desert_AIP
I always get the shakes before a drop
Team Member
Joined: Mar 2005  ISR
  
 Posts: 8161 Feedback: 100% (37) Link To This Post |
Posted: 4/10/2012 1:23:35 AM
Originally Posted By Tim_W:
Originally Posted By stanc:
Originally Posted By Aramark:
two or more are missing aren't they? I dunno, but two are there that probably shouldn't be. The 77gr Elite and 120gr Barnes solids are no longer available. Plus, it looks like some may have ogives too long for mag-length loads, which inflates the number of true "6.8" bullets. The 135 SMK is too long for mag use, the 105GS and 130 Nosler are the longest that can be used in a PRI mag. The rest shoot fine from the mag. Not my pic. I think some of those may be used in bolt action riifles. Throw out the few fliers, there's still a wide variety of bullets and loads for the 6.8 in the AR platform. Fast light bullets to heavier subsonics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 2:36:39 AM
I have to put my .02 in.
I think the 6.8 is a great intermediate round. I have used it for a 515 lb hog, red stag, deer and numerous exotics. The round has performed perfectly having them all drop with in 7 yds of being shot. Minial recoil. It is my favorite round to have for my hunting. It does all that I ask. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 7:40:35 AM
Originally Posted By iMagUdspEllr:
Originally Posted By 320pf:
Sometimes people forget that they took the best girl to the dance. I think that the 5.56x45 NATO is the best intermediate rifle round. FIrst, is low recoil, allowing for light weight arms that the easy to carry. In addition, the low recoil makes for quick accurate follow up shots. Second, the light projectile (62 gr) can be pushed to 3000-to-3,100 ft/s (in 20 in barrels and about 2800-to-29–– ft/s in 14.5 inch barrels). This makes for a flat trajectory out to about 300 meters. Third, all this in a light cartridge so that one can carry more ammo. In fact, one can carry more than twice as much 5.56×45mm ammunition as 7.62×51mm for the same weight. As far as lethality goes, lethality of the 5.56×45mm was more a matter of perception than fact. A good CNS hit with any cartridge will result in quick/instant incapacitation. Similarly, a poor hit with any cartridge yields poor incapacitation results. Most of the complaints about terminal performance have more to do with the bullet construction than the cartridge. It is much cheaper and simpler to fix the bullet design than change calibers. Copying is the best form of flattery The 5.56x45mm has proven to be so effective in its all around performance, it has been copied by both the Russians and Chinese. The 5.56x45mm came out in 1963, by 1974, the Russians abandoned the 7.62x40mm and adopted the 5.45×39mm. About 13 years later, the Chinese also abandon the 7.62x40mm and adopt the 5.8×42mm. Both of these rounds are ballistically similar to the 5.56x45. This why I believe that the 5.56x45 NATO is the best intermediate rifle round. I have a lot of confidence in 5.56x45 out of a 20" barrel. However, 16" and shorter is a no-go for me. I don't know how you are getting a 62 gr projectile traveling at 2800-2900 ft/s to come out of a 14.5" barrel AR. This video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb_Ok410yuw&list=UUZ-qxagOkAmCEP-Tu6YliUQ&index=98&feature=plcp shows a guy getting ~3000 ft/s with 55gr projectiles out of 16" barrels (XM193). So I don't know how you got your numbers. I imagine once you throw a 62gr projectile down a 14.5" barrel you will be less than 2700 ft/s easy. Also, you could use a better bullet... or you could use a better round and a better bullet. A better performing cartridge/caliber will always be a better choice. 5.56x45 was designed for 20" barrels and it is hamstrung when you don't shoot it out of one. Also, as far as recoil... many of these bullets have recoil similar to AK rounds... which is perfectly manageable. We aren't comparing the 5.56 to the 7.62x51. CNS hits? I can get a CNS hit with a 9mm carbine. The point of a rifle rounds is that you don't have to hit the CNS exactly... you just have to get a solid upper chest shot (and/or head shot of course). I have a 16.5 inch barrel, over the chronograph, I get between 2900 and 3000 for greep tip (SS109 63 gr) surplus ammo. The mil spec velocity for the M$/SS109 combo is between 2800 and 2900 fps if I remeber correctly. In addition, the Hodgdon reloading data lists reload data for 63 gr Sierra of Varget and H4895 at 2800 fps from a 15 inch barrel. I do not think that the difference between 14.5 and 15 will make too much difference. I run Sierra 77gr MK at about 2700-2750 fps from my 16.5 inch rifles. I beleive that the mill spec for the 77 gr MK is about 2650 to 2700 fps as well. A CNS hit is the only way to get quick/instant incapacitation. Any other wound to the upper torso requires a drop in blood pressure to incapacitate, which requires a variable amount of time. If he 5.56x45mm is not effective in its all around performance why has it been essentially copied by both the Russians and Chinese? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 7:52:31 AM
Originally Posted By Tim_W:
Originally Posted By WVHunter1s1k:
Hot off the press!! Brand new 6.8 round coming soon. Check this out! SSA/140gr Berger Current claim; 2400fps out of a 16" barrel. http://www.ssarmory.com/6.8_spc_ammo_140gr_VLD_Berger.aspx I don't think SSA will load them to 2400fps . 2400 with handloads sure but SSA has a hard time getting a 115 to 2550 without excess pressure. http://68forums.com/forums/showthread.php?27533-Long-Range Post #7 is the beginning - states the velocity. #47 verifies it. |
|
|
|
eracer
Building up my immunity to Iocane...
Team Member
Joined: Dec 2002  FL, USA
Posts: 14118 Feedback: 100% (11) Link To This Post |
Posted: 4/10/2012 7:58:37 AM
[Last Edit: 4/10/2012 8:00:15 AM by eracer]
Originally Posted By RangemasterP226: Originally Posted By iMagUdspEllr: Just because I'm on AR-15.com and I don't know how many AR variants really run 7.62x39 as good as an AK. Fair enough. But just for the record, my Colt 6830 in 7.62x39 is a fantastic and accurate shooter. And the reason I would vote for the AK round is I can buy it cheap and stack it deep. As long as you only use 5-round mags. Yes, I owned - and sold - a 6830. I replaced it with a Grendel that I love, but I'd be perfectly happy with a 6.8. |
|
|
Desert_AIP
I always get the shakes before a drop
Team Member
Joined: Mar 2005 ISR
Posts: 8166 Feedback: 100% (37) Link To This Post |
Posted: 4/10/2012 9:06:25 AM
Originally Posted By 320pf:
I have a 16.5 inch barrel, over the chronograph, I get between 2900 and 3000 for greep tip (SS109 63 gr) surplus ammo. The mil spec velocity for the M$/SS109 combo is between 2800 and 2900 fps if I remeber correctly. In addition, the Hodgdon reloading data lists reload data for 63 gr Sierra of Varget and H4895 at 2800 fps from a 15 inch barrel. I do not think that the difference between 14.5 and 15 will make too much difference. I run Sierra 77gr MK at about 2700-2750 fps from my 16.5 inch rifles. I beleive that the mill spec for the 77 gr MK is about 2650 to 2700 fps as well. A CNS hit is the only way to get quick/instant incapacitation. Any other wound to the upper torso requires a drop in blood pressure to incapacitate, which requires a variable amount of time. If he 5.56x45mm is not effective in its all around performance why has it been essentially copied by both the Russians and Chinese? As a comparison, an 85gr bullet will be pushed at ~3100fps (SSA Tactical load - not handloads) from a 16" barrel in 6.8. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 9:53:00 AM
[Last Edit: 4/10/2012 3:18:50 PM by zulthor]
For the average person I would say 5.45 is the best intermediate round...dollar for dollar by far the best.
Price ... it's one of the cheapest center fire rounds period. Ballistics...devastating damage that doesn't rely on fragmentation. Accuracy... Accurate out to 600yards with a decent gun (by decent I don't mean an ak74 that was hobbled together by a retarded child in a cave) |
|
|
|
LRRPF52
Member
Team Member
Joined: Oct 2011 UT, USA
Posts: 1526 Feedback: 100% (3) Link To This Post |
Posted: 4/10/2012 10:08:12 AM
Originally Posted By iMagUdspEllr:
Originally Posted By 320pf:
Sometimes people forget that they took the best girl to the dance. I think that the 5.56x45 NATO is the best intermediate rifle round. FIrst, is low recoil, allowing for light weight arms that the easy to carry. In addition, the low recoil makes for quick accurate follow up shots. Second, the light projectile (62 gr) can be pushed to 3000-to-3,100 ft/s (in 20 in barrels and about 2800-to-29–– ft/s in 14.5 inch barrels). This makes for a flat trajectory out to about 300 meters. Third, all this in a light cartridge so that one can carry more ammo. In fact, one can carry more than twice as much 5.56×45mm ammunition as 7.62×51mm for the same weight. As far as lethality goes, lethality of the 5.56×45mm was more a matter of perception than fact. A good CNS hit with any cartridge will result in quick/instant incapacitation. Similarly, a poor hit with any cartridge yields poor incapacitation results. Most of the complaints about terminal performance have more to do with the bullet construction than the cartridge. It is much cheaper and simpler to fix the bullet design than change calibers. Copying is the best form of flattery The 5.56x45mm has proven to be so effective in its all around performance, it has been copied by both the Russians and Chinese. The 5.56x45mm came out in 1963, by 1974, the Russians abandoned the 7.62x40mm and adopted the 5.45×39mm. About 13 years later, the Chinese also abandon the 7.62x40mm and adopt the 5.8×42mm. Both of these rounds are ballistically similar to the 5.56x45. This why I believe that the 5.56x45 NATO is the best intermediate rifle round. I have a lot of confidence in 5.56x45 out of a 20" barrel. However, 16" and shorter is a no-go for me. I don't know how you are getting a 62 gr projectile traveling at 2800-2900 ft/s to come out of a 14.5" barrel AR. This video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb_Ok410yuw&list=UUZ-qxagOkAmCEP-Tu6YliUQ&index=98&feature=plcp shows a guy getting ~3000 ft/s with 55gr projectiles out of 16" barrels (XM193). So I don't know how you got your numbers. I imagine once you throw a 62gr projectile down a 14.5" barrel you will be less than 2700 ft/s easy. Also, you could use a better bullet... or you could use a better round and a better bullet. A better performing cartridge/caliber will always be a better choice. 5.56x45 was designed for 20" barrels and it is hamstrung when you don't shoot it out of one. Also, as far as recoil... many of these bullets have recoil similar to AK rounds... which is perfectly manageable. We aren't comparing the 5.56 to the 7.62x51. CNS hits? I can get a CNS hit with a 9mm carbine. The point of a rifle rounds is that you don't have to hit the CNS exactly... you just have to get a solid upper chest shot (and/or head shot of course). M855 out of the M4/14.5" barrel is 2920fps. That Lake City brass and the charge they use is no friggin joke, which is why there is zero need for a 20" barrel 5.56 NATO when loaded to US pressures. Other NATO partners such as England and France have had to load their own light loads so their rifles don't wear out early, like the L85 and FAMAS. The FAMAS will blow brass-cased ammo apart since it really doesn't have a sufficient locking mechanism. Anyway, you don't shoot a person just once and see what happens, regardless of what caliber you're using in close-in infantry egagements. This is why 5.56 NATO is such a great round. Within 150yds, a 5.56 will produce devastating wound ballistics with M193 and M855, since they have such thin jackets. You also have more mission endurance with 5.56 NATO, shorter training time for soldiers, and higher hit probability within 200yds, especially for follow-up shots. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 10:48:35 AM
Originally Posted By WVHunter1s1k:
Originally Posted By Tim_W:
Originally Posted By WVHunter1s1k:
Hot off the press!! Brand new 6.8 round coming soon. Check this out! SSA/140gr Berger Current claim; 2400fps out of a 16" barrel. http://www.ssarmory.com/6.8_spc_ammo_140gr_VLD_Berger.aspx I don't think SSA will load them to 2400fps . 2400 with handloads sure but SSA has a hard time getting a 115 to 2550 without excess pressure. http://68forums.com/forums/showthread.php?27533-Long-Range Post #7 is the beginning - states the velocity. #47 verifies it. I'll wait for it to be released to the public before I believe that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 10:56:38 AM
5.56 is not legal to hunt with here, so that is one thing I can't do with it.
Originally Posted By GACKER1143:
346ci So running a 150gr bullet at 1900 plus fps is lobbing a mortar? I bet theres alot of 30-30 guys that would slap you around for that comment. Not to mention the millions of deer/ bear that have died from those mortar shells from a 30-30. So show me the data of the 6.5/6.8 with 130 gr and above? My 300 throws a 125 gr at 2185 fps as I said I don't see no data for the 6.5/68 . By looking at the heaviest ones they do shoot they don't have much on the 300 Blk . And this300 Blk data is on a 16" barrel- don't most of you 6.5/6.8 guys shoot a 20" or longer barrel? Do you have data based on 16" barrel as I know Hogdgon data is on a 20 " barrel for 6.5/6.8 so we need to take atleast 100 fps of the data shown below!
6.5 G 123 GR. SIE HPBT Hodgdon H335 .264" 2.250" 26.0 2288 37,800 PSI 28.7 2508 49,800 PSI 123 GR. SIE HPBT IMR IMR 8208 XBR .264" 2.250" 25.5 2180 33,900 PSI 28.5C 2497 50,000 PSI 123 GR. SIE HPBT Hodgdon Benchmark .264" 2.250" 25.0 2225 36,900 PSI 27.5C 2460 49,900 PSI 123 GR. SIE HPBT Hodgdon H322 .264" 2.250" 24.0 2192 36,600 PSI 26.6C 2434 49,900 PSI 123 GR. SIE HPBT IMR IMR 4198 .264" 2.250" 22.0 2263 43,300 PSI 24.2C 2385 50,500 PSI 123 GR. SIE HPBT Hodgdon H4198 .264" 2.250" 21.0 2153 37,700 PSI 23.7C 2375 50,000 PSI 6.8 115 GR. SIE HPBT Hodgdon H335 .277" 2.260" 27.0 2415 40,800 PSI 29.0 2569 48,500 PSI 115 GR. SIE HPBT Hodgdon H4895 .277" 2.260" 27.0 2302 34,300 PSI 29.0C 2495 42,800 PSI 115 GR. SIE HPBT IMR IMR 8208 XBR .277" 2.260" 28.0 2483 41,800 PSI 30.0C 2647 51,400 PSI 115 GR. SIE HPBT Hodgdon Benchmark .277" 2.260" 26.0 2400 42,400 PSI 28.5C 2581 51,800 PSI 115 GR. SIE HPBT Hodgdon H322 .277" 2.260" 26.0 2421 43,500 PSI 28.2C 2608 53,300 PSI 115 GR. SIE HPBT IMR IMR 4198 .277" 2.260" 22.0 2386 43,100 PSI 23.5C 2515 50,000 PSI 115 GR. SIE HPBT Hodgdon H4198 .277" 2.260" 22.0 2413 47,800 PSI 24.0C 2534 52,300 PSI 300 Blk 125 GR. NOS BT IMR IMR 4227 .308" 2.060" 16.5 1818 38,000 CUP 17.7C 1965 49,800 CUP 125 GR. NOS BT Winchester 296 .308" 2.060" 16.7 2020 40,200 CUP 17.8 2118 48,800 CUP 125 GR. NOS BT Hodgdon H110 .308" 2.060" 16.7 2020 40,200 CUP 17.8 2118 48,800 CUP 125 GR. NOS BT Hodgdon Lil'Gun .308" 2.060" 16.9 2086 35,900 CUP 18.0 2185 40,800 CUP I'm just throwing this out there because I really don't see the point of comparing the two.... I would prefer to have one of each. The BC on that NOS 125 GR .308 is .366 vs. .510 for the 123 gr SIE 6.5 - a sizable and significant difference. 300 fps is far more important than one might presume for shooting at intermediate and long range. It is the difference between .300 mag and 30/06. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 11:26:51 AM
Originally Posted By stanc:
Originally Posted By Aramark:
two or more are missing aren't they? I dunno, but two are there that probably shouldn't be. The 77gr Elite and 120gr Barnes solids are no longer available. Plus, it looks like some may have ogives too long for mag-length loads, which inflates the number of true "6.8" bullets. All of those bullets work just fine in this 6.8's and I have several boxes of both the 77gr Elite and 120gr Barnes so they still count for me. 
 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 12:15:31 PM
[Last Edit: 4/10/2012 9:42:25 PM by Zhukov]
Originally Posted By 346ci:
I thought the OP added the 300 as a joke. If we are going to pick a weak round, the 5.56 would be the best choice. It offers velocity, reach, a decent trajectory and is cheap. The FMJ and AP type bullets are what gives the 5.56 a bad rep, use a 64gr+ SP or OTM bullet and it would be much better. <Comment removed - warning sent - Z> I chose blackout because of magazine capacity, interchangeability of parts and energy. it can offer alot from a smaller package, which is important for the kind of work I do. |
|
|
|
eracer
Building up my immunity to Iocane...
Team Member
Joined: Dec 2002 FL, USA
Posts: 14122 Feedback: 100% (11) Link To This Post |
Posted: 4/10/2012 12:25:18 PM
[Last Edit: 4/10/2012 9:42:44 PM by Zhukov]
<Off-topic comment removed - Z>
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 12:28:52 PM
For a bolt gun, 270 win (6.8x65) will also fit, and will throw the 130gr 3200fps. I.e. I don't see how bolt guns are relevant, as much as yours honestly does look cool. It would probably be a thread-jack, but I'm interested if you have tried pushing the pressure up in that?
|
|
|
|
QuicksilverJPR
Multi-Caliber!
Team Member
Joined: Apr 2008 GA, USA
Posts: 6496 Feedback: 100% (5) Link To This Post |
Posted: 4/10/2012 12:45:12 PM
[Last Edit: 4/10/2012 9:42:57 PM by Zhukov]
<Off-topic comment removed - Z>
.458 and .50 are not intermediate rounds. They serve a special purpose only. They break shit up, punch big holes, and can be suppressed.... .300 AAC loaded supersonic is what I would consider an intermediate (along with any of the .300 iterations). Loaded subsonic, it's a specialty round. It can be both, but you would need both types of ammo, which means you are carrying less duty ammo....which I do not like. I definitely like the parts commonality. Major bonus for using standard USGI mags/bolts.... 762x39 and 545x39 definitely fall in this category (intermediate). Mags will be the most likely issue, but I think most of the current production ones are worthwhile.... 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel are definitely in the intermediate category. Either would work well out to 600 yards, IMHO.... 5.56 is what we are currently using (duh). It seems to work pretty well for the most part (when the right damn bullet is used in the right platform).... .308/762x51 I do not consider intermediate at all. It was developed to specifically replace the .30-06/762x63. It does it's job very well in the platforms in current use. |
|
|
|
chewbacca
I f*ckin hate liberals.... seriously, I do.
Team Member
Joined: May 2004 USA
Posts: 9414 Feedback: 100% (74) Link To This Post |
Posted: 4/10/2012 12:47:56 PM
I vote for the 25AR (also known as 25-223) wildcat. Because it use standard 223 brass, mags, bolts, etc. Only a barrel change is required. With 100 gr bullets, it provides more muzzle energy, higher BC and thus flatter trajectory, and better sectional density than the 556 or the 762x39 types. Plus being based off the 223 case, standard mag capacity is there and using standard 223 components (again, other than barrel) it is logistically superior to the 6.8 or Grendel.
|
|
|
QuicksilverJPR
Multi-Caliber!
Team Member
Joined: Apr 2008 GA, USA
Posts: 6498 Feedback: 100% (5) Link To This Post |
Posted: 4/10/2012 12:50:24 PM
Originally Posted By chewbacca:
I vote for the 25AR (also known as 25-223) wildcat. Because it use standard 223 brass, mags, bolts, etc. Only a barrel change is required. With 100 gr bullets, it provides more muzzle energy, higher BC and thus flatter trajectory, and better sectional density than the 556 or the 762x39 types. Plus being based off the 223 case, standard mag capacity is there and using standard 223 components (again, other than barrel) it is logistically superior to the 6.8 or Grendel. That or the 6x45 work very well.... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2012 2:30:20 PM
[Last Edit: 4/10/2012 2:35:53 PM by stanc]
Originally Posted By EWP:
Originally Posted By stanc:
Originally Posted By Aramark:
two or more are missing aren't they? I dunno, but two are there that probably shouldn't be. The 77gr Elite and 120gr Barnes solids are no longer available. Plus, it looks like some may have ogives too long for mag-length loads, which inflates the number of true "6.8" bullets. All of those bullets work just fine in this 6.8's and I have several boxes of both the 77gr Elite and 120gr Barnes so they still count for me. For you, yes, but what about all those people who don't have a stash? And, if you're going to bring bolt-action rifles into the discussion, there are many chamberings far more capable than 6.8 SPC. Personally, I like the idea of long-ogive bullets in 6.8 SPC. It's too bad there isn't an "AR-12.5" to shoot 'em.  |
|
|
ARCHIVED
