- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 1/24/21 at 11:27 pm to GardenDistrictTiger
Higher pressure. 80,000 PSI. This apparently can’t be achieved using brass alone and a steel base is required to check expansion at the base of the cartridge.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 11:36 pm to DownSouthJukin
Going to be a barrel burner at those pressures, can't be good for throat and gas port erosion.
Posted on 1/25/21 at 6:15 am to chew4219
quote:
5.56 is not an effective round against people during CQB.
The ballistics experts in the MSM have told us its the most deadliest round evah evah, designed to kill they say.
Anyway thats bullshite but it IS an effective CQB round, as compared to what? A 9MM, 45ACB?
Posted on 1/25/21 at 6:37 am to DownSouthJukin
quote:
Higher pressure. 80,000 PSI.
Why????
Posted on 1/25/21 at 8:35 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
Why????
Wait wut? To replace the 556? Lol in what platform! Lol this looks like an MIC boondoggle from hell, what would one of these rounds cost lmao
Posted on 1/25/21 at 8:39 am to Strannix
Clames pretty much nailed it. Keep what you got or go back to real battle rifles.
I understand the ammo carrying capacity thing but it seems like if you want more horsepower, you could just go back to issuing M14's or AR10's or something and keep the ammo common.
Yall ever seen pentagon wars? That's what I picture in my head whenever I hear of JSOC wanting some new toys
I understand the ammo carrying capacity thing but it seems like if you want more horsepower, you could just go back to issuing M14's or AR10's or something and keep the ammo common.
Yall ever seen pentagon wars? That's what I picture in my head whenever I hear of JSOC wanting some new toys
Posted on 1/25/21 at 9:58 am to Strannix
IDK man when you have to put 2 or 3 in a guy to actually stop him, then to me it’s not that effective. 5.56 is too light of a round for people.
People act like you’re not getting shot at when you are shooting people. You want a round that has enough energy to stop an enemy combatant with one round to the mid to upper torso.
People act like you’re not getting shot at when you are shooting people. You want a round that has enough energy to stop an enemy combatant with one round to the mid to upper torso.
Posted on 1/25/21 at 10:16 am to chew4219
quote:
IDK man when you have to put 2 or 3 in a guy to actually stop him, then to me it’s not that effective. 5.56 is too light of a round for people.
There are several million dead people across the planet that disagree with that
Posted on 1/25/21 at 10:30 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
An 80,000 PSI “universal” FMJ military round just sounds like a bad idea.
High rate of weapon component wear and failure.
High cost of procurement.
Increase in recoil to levels equating a true battle rifle round.
Over penetration in CQB settings and other close-in engagements.
But I guess that’s why I don’t get paid the big bucks-but someone else is and will.
High rate of weapon component wear and failure.
High cost of procurement.
Increase in recoil to levels equating a true battle rifle round.
Over penetration in CQB settings and other close-in engagements.
But I guess that’s why I don’t get paid the big bucks-but someone else is and will.
Posted on 1/25/21 at 10:50 am to DownSouthJukin
Id be worried about extraction problems and general reliability.
Could you imagine the muzzle blast from a carbine barrel
Could you imagine the muzzle blast from a carbine barrel
Posted on 1/25/21 at 10:55 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
Oh yeah-I forgot to mention they are proclaiming 3,000 FPS for a 135 gr. bullet out of a 16” carbine barrel.
Posted on 1/25/21 at 11:00 am to GardenDistrictTiger
I don't know anything about the 6.8 cartridge that can't be googled, but I do know that the Sig offering to the competition looks like a badass gun. I hope they put out a civilian version down the road because I'd definitely get one.
The one on top is Sig's offering to replace the M4 and the bottom is to replace the M249 SAW.
The one on top is Sig's offering to replace the M4 and the bottom is to replace the M249 SAW.
Posted on 1/25/21 at 11:07 am to chew4219
I don’t know why we don’t just use .308 or 30-06
30-06 Springfield was widely used in WW2 in M1 Garland, Springfield sniper rifles, and the BAR
Seemed to do just fine as a universal round for many different types of rifles
30-06 Springfield was widely used in WW2 in M1 Garland, Springfield sniper rifles, and the BAR
Seemed to do just fine as a universal round for many different types of rifles
Posted on 1/25/21 at 11:21 am to deltaland
quote:
don’t know why we don’t just use .308
Thats what I dont understand. New platform? Sure, the M14 is what you have and its a huge ancient outdated piece. New caliber that will eat barrels? Don't make sense to me.
Posted on 1/25/21 at 11:35 am to IAmNERD
quote:
I don't know anything about the 6.8 cartridge that can't be googled, but I do know that the Sig offering to the competition looks like a badass gun. I hope they put out a civilian version down the road because I'd definitely get one.
It's basically a modified MCX with a side charger added
Posted on 1/25/21 at 11:44 am to IAmNERD
Are there suppressors out there that can hold up to full auto rifle firing? Seems i remember them needing to be taken apart and cleaned pretty often.
Posted on 1/25/21 at 11:58 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
Thats what I dont understand. New platform? Sure, the M14 is what you have and its a huge ancient outdated piece
The Ar10 platform is superior to the m14 and could be implemented with minimal retraining of the troops. Its not overly heavy and is inherently accurate.
I think they're going for a revolution in arms and not evolution here. In firearms that rarely happens successfully.
This post was edited on 1/25/21 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 1/25/21 at 12:35 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
Are there suppressors out there that can hold up to full auto rifle firing? Seems i remember them needing to be taken apart and cleaned pretty often.
There are. Putting one on every rifle seems like a pipe dream, though.
If they did adopt it, I wonder how it would affect NATO. I assume they'd just keep what they have rather than having to completely re-arm.
Posted on 1/25/21 at 1:35 pm to upgrayedd
Seems like suppressors would be dirt cheap to the military. Why woulsbt they put them on everything.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News