Army to get new M4, M-16 and SAW in 6.8mm???

Today I read a media report that indicates that the Army has chosen a new M4, M-16 and SAW, all in 6.8mm. If the info I have seen is correct the weapons will begin being produced in about 1 year, so probably later still before they are actually deployed in significant numbers. I recall the IWBA working with a 6.8 SPC round that was being tested and developed years ago, and DocGKR was pretty much right in the middle of that effort, IIRC. The basic idea is that this caliber/bullet style/weight would be better than the 5.56x45mm in range, penetration, wounding effect, etc.; while being much more controllable than the 7.62x51mm, and still be able to be deployed in an M4-sized rifle. Additionally, the 6.8 is thought to be better ballistically overall than the 7.62x39mm round which can also be deployed in an M4-sized rifle. I will stop now before I say something incorrect, since this is topic others probably know a lot more about than I do. This may just now be unfolding before us. My main goal here today was to start a conversation and see if we can all find out more about all of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glock17JHP

Today I read a media report that indicates that the Army has chosen a new M4, M-16 and SAW, all in 6.8mm. If the info I have seen is correct the weapons will begin being produced in about 1 year, so probably later still before they are actually deployed in significant numbers. I recall the IWBA working with a 6.8 SPC round that was being tested and developed years ago, and DocGKR was pretty much right in the middle of that effort, IIRC. The basic idea is that this caliber/bullet style/weight would be better than the 5.56x45mm in range, penetration, wounding effect, etc.; while being much more controllable than the 7.62x51mm, and still be able to be deployed in an M4-sized rifle. Additionally, the 6.8 is thought to be better ballistically overall than the 7.62x39mm round which can also be deployed in an M4-sized rifle. I will stop now before I say something incorrect, since this is topic others probably know a lot more about than I do. This may just now be unfolding before us. My main goal here today was to start a conversation and see if we can all find out more about all of this.

---

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....eapon-Contract

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glock17JHP

Today I read a media report that indicates that the Army has chosen a new M4, M-16 and SAW, all in 6.8mm. If the info I have seen is correct the weapons will begin being produced in about 1 year, so probably later still before they are actually deployed in significant numbers. I recall the IWBA working with a 6.8 SPC round that was being tested and developed years ago, and DocGKR was pretty much right in the middle of that effort, IIRC. The basic idea is that this caliber/bullet style/weight would be better than the 5.56x45mm in range, penetration, wounding effect, etc.; while being much more controllable than the 7.62x51mm, and still be able to be deployed in an M4-sized rifle. Additionally, the 6.8 is thought to be better ballistically overall than the 7.62x39mm round which can also be deployed in an M4-sized rifle. I will stop now before I say something incorrect, since this is topic others probably know a lot more about than I do. This may just now be unfolding before us. My main goal here today was to start a conversation and see if we can all find out more about all of this.

---

Please read the linked thread.

The new round is the 6.8 X 51mm using a new type of case which allows much higher pressures. The primary purpose behind the change is ability to penetrate the body armor of near peer adversaries and engage at longer ranges.

The new round does not fit in an M4 size weapon. The new carbine, the XM-5 offers much less advantage vs the M4 than the new M249 SAW replacement, the XM-250.

The fact is those of us who are gun nerds, shooters etc. place far too much romantic emphasis on individual weapons like rifles and pistols. Artillery, followed by crew serve weapons such as machine guns and mortars are the primary killing tools on the battlefield.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HCM

Please read the linked thread.

The new round is the 6.8 X 51mm using a new type of case which allows much higher pressures. The primary purpose behind the change is ability to penetrate the body armor of near peer adversaries and engage at longer ranges.

The new round does not fit in an M4 size weapon. The new carbine, the XM-5 offers much less advantage vs the M4 than the new M249 SAW replacement, the XM-250.

The fact is those of us who are gun nerds, shooters etc. place far too much romantic emphasis on individual weapons like rifles and pistols. Artillery, followed by crew serve weapons such as machine guns and mortars are the primary killing tools on the battlefield.

---

Your last paragraph does not fit all of us, sir. Most who are knowledgeable about small arms and ammunition know that the best choices for civilians are those that have served well for military and law enforcement. Also, I doubt most here have access to artillery, etc. for defensive purposes against other individuals. It would be helpful to know your audience here and not be condescending which seems to occur far to often on forums that deal with firearms and weapons, etc.

That said, your additional info on the new weapons is helpful for this discussion. I, for one, was unaware that the rifle round was that length (6.8x51mm).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glock17JHP

Your last paragraph does not fit all of us, sir. Most who are knowledgeable about small arms and ammunition know that the best choices for civilians are those that have served well for military and law enforcement. Also, I doubt most here have access to artillery, etc. for defensive purposes against other individuals. It would be helpful to know your audience here and not be condescending which seems to occur far to often on forums that deal with firearms and weapons, etc.

That said, your additional info on the new weapons is helpful for this discussion. I, for one, was unaware that the rifle round was that length (6.8x51mm).

---

This is a military program of record. Whatever crossover it might have to civilian use is incidental. For military purposes rifles and pistols make little difference.

I’m on here because I like guns but I try to be realistic about the role small arms such as pistols and rifles make an actual military operations. Crew served weapons, training and tactics are all far more significant. You could take a well trained modern U.S. infantry squad, Equip them with U.S. World War II weapons and they would get similar results to those with current small arms. The TTPs would still work.

The new round using a 6.8mm projectile is coincidental and not linked to prior efforts such as 6.8 SPC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HCM

Please read the linked thread.

---

/thread, please.

Thread locked as a dupe.