New Nato Round

[srt 10 jimbo]

Read somewhere , dont know if It's true but is Nato planing on going to a 6mm round?

[SightNSqueeze]

I thought that they were "looking" at the 6.8mm. It seems a 6mm round is too close to what we already have in the 5.56x45mm.

[M14man]

I haven't heard anything about any trials, tests etc. Do you know the expense to re-arm all those nations? Whoever you heard it from is telling stories. There are alot of wishers out there...and we all know that there are much better rounds out there, but it has not been decided from what I know. The other nations would have a say too.

[Pothole]

i herd that the Army postponed the project of looking for a new main battle rifle until the Iraq war is over, so they will have more data/ insight. Id bet you wont see anything serious about a new round until that point as well

[gunadvocate]

agreed

[Johnnycat]

Until a new platform to replace the M16 is sought I would not count on a new round. The 6.8 SPC is a huge upgrade, but it is really only a specialty round in the way it is being used. Same for .458 SOCOM, etc.

[gbear-48]

Nothing in the Army Times about a 6mm. They tend to stay on top of weapons and ammo trends.

[Darkfront]

The official Army statement is that they wouldn't consider a new rifle (hence, new round) until there was a significant advancement in small arms design or technology. Rifles like the ACR/Masada and gas pistons (416, etc.) are more like combat rifle 1.5 rather than combat rifle 2.0

[Tack Driver]

Heckler & Koch have been trying to get the Army to look at their HK-416

[sea_chicken1]

It's too bad they wont up their caliber till whoever in charge of their weapons program pulls their head out of their cornhole.

[Sprout47]

Originally Posted by Pothole

i herd that the Army postponed the project of looking for a new main battle rifle until the Iraq war is over, so they will have more data/ insight. Id bet you wont see anything serious about a new round until that point as well

Supposedly the FN SCAR has been given the green light and orders are being filled to the 75th Rangers with 600 rifles delivered in April 09'. They were talking a complete phase out of m-4's by 2012. Rifles are in 5.56 and 7.62.

[gunadvocate]

where did you hear this info?

[Whootsinator]

I've heard that SCARs are actually in use with our Military now, but very limited.

[gunadvocate]

Is it just with specialty forces or are they giving them to regular troops as trials...

[Darth AkSarBen]

They (military) need to adopt either the 6.8 SPC (with the II chamber) or the 6.5 Grendel and do it fast! The troops in Afghanistan could sure use some new weapons that have more punch. It is one thing to shoot someone with 1 round and put them down, totally unacceptable to keep on shooting someone with the 5.56 NATO and have them keep right on fighting and killing our soldiers. Either of those rounds have both punch and accuracy, and if they go with a piston system you will find less problems with rifle failures due to dust, sand and the like.

I bought a Saiga because of the reliability factor of Stoner's AR platform is just lacking in reliability. One needs to shoot if one wants to live. The soldiers need to have better ground equipment to meet the combatants that are using "superior" yes, I said it, weapons against them. That AK is one of the finest fighting and killing weapons world wide, and it's time we (United States) put something out on the table that beats it!

[Darkfront]

Originally Posted by Darth AkSarBen

They (military) need to adopt either the 6.8 SPC (with the II chamber) or the 6.5 Grendel and do it fast! The troops in Afghanistan could sure use some new weapons that have more punch. It is one thing to shoot someone with 1 round and put them down, totally unacceptable to keep on shooting someone with the 5.56 NATO and have them keep right on fighting and killing our soldiers. Either of those rounds have both punch and accuracy, and if they go with a piston system you will find less problems with rifle failures due to dust, sand and the like.

I bought a Saiga because of the reliability factor of Stoner's AR platform is just lacking in reliability. One needs to shoot if one wants to live. The soldiers need to have better ground equipment to meet the combatants that are using "superior" yes, I said it, weapons against them. That AK is one of the finest fighting and killing weapons world wide, and it's time we (United States) put something out on the table that beats it!

I'm not going to argue that the AR doesn't have shortcomings. It does. But the reason that it's been our combat rifle for 40 years is not because of 100% sheer laziness on the military's part. It is an accurate platform to work with, easy to maintain and is getting the job done, if not done as well as it could be.

The AK is well suited to the dust problems out in the Middle East because loose (read: poor) manufacturing tolerances contribute just as much as a piston vs. direct gas impingement design. And despite the AK's success in the Middle East, I believe the Iraqi Army did order a large quantity of M4's despite the known necessity for increased maintenance. Every weapon is reliable if properly maintained.

To put the AR platform against the AK platform is an argument very similar to the martial arts world, "Whose kung fu is better?" mentality. This question is unanswerable because you need to take into account the individual using a particular style. And just like martial arts, it's how we use the tools we are given that give us the best military in the world. Trite comparisons between platforms are useless without considering the hands that they are in.

[gunadvocate]

The U.S. prizes accuracy and shot placement rather than spray and pray, which is what under trained insurgents often use. The AR platform exceeds the AK in accuracy by leaps... not to mention the ballistic capabilities of the 7.62x39 are only good within 400 yards (at most) where the .223 can reach accurately beyond that by 200 more yards. The round itself is small and has shortcomings; but to call the AK47 the better assault rifle system based on the durability is a poor assessment at best. With proper cleaning the AR will be very reliable. When it comes down to shooting someone in the battle average (100-300 yards) and sometimes at a distance further I'm taking the M4 with a sight.

The round should be changed and the gas system made more reliable but you have to respect the platform that has killed a lot of people in the last 40 years.

[Darth AkSarBen]

I agree with you. The AK is a very crude machine, but it's their caliber that has been it's greatest advantage. There are reports from Iraq and others of insurgents needing to be shot more than once with the 5.56 NATO to be stopped. Even the AR rifles, M4 etc, past 400 yards are really loosing velocity, hence effectiveness. I would say you are being kind to the AK in your saying out to 400 yards. Much closer in, maybe 50 to 150 yards is it's best. It can be accurate, as I have shot some very tight groups from mine, in .223 and .308 Winchester, but the out of the box AR will always outshine the AK in accuracy.

Newer cartridges, 6.5 Grendel, or 6.8 SPC coupled with the piston system of some of these AR manufactures would go a long way to reach out and really thump on an insurgent, even at 400+ yards.

[srt 10 jimbo]

Talked to the guy again and told them they are not changing anytime soon. He was thinking it was the 6.8 spc round they were changing to.

[PONTIACDM]

I seen that on the military channel. They were testing a new round for the army. I believe it was a 6.8.