I think 6.8 is OK, I have hunted with it. But do this for yourself. Go get a 6.8 SPC spent case then stand it beside a fired 7.62x39 case. Then while you are looking at these two nearly identical cases (they are a lot closer than you think) convince yourself that it makes sense to spend 1.50 for one round when for the same money you can have four of the other.
6.8 spc question
- Thread starter igotta40
- Start date
- Status
crazysccrmd
Member
The 6.8 has a much farther effective range than the 7.62x39. If you compare equal quality ammo, not steel case plinking ammo, the 6.8 is even cheaper. A box of bonded Fusion bullets for the x39 is $25. A box of bonded Fusions in the 6.8 is $10.
AKMtnRunner
Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2011
- Messages
- 190
The 6.8 caught on because it was the most powerful, reasonably accessible ammo, for a light modern sporting rifle. And now having bullets designed exactly for it, it'll definitely stick around and perhaps even find its way into more US military applications.
But, IMO, what will limit its popularity in the future is the advanced development of the 308 Win modern sporting rifles. If they keep on shedding the lbs, maintain their reliability, and price points come down close to AR-15 ranges, there'll be pretty much no reason at all for someone to choose the 6.8 over the 308.
But, IMO, what will limit its popularity in the future is the advanced development of the 308 Win modern sporting rifles. If they keep on shedding the lbs, maintain their reliability, and price points come down close to AR-15 ranges, there'll be pretty much no reason at all for someone to choose the 6.8 over the 308.
WardenWolf
member
Except for the ability to fit on the AR15 platform, saving someone from having to buy a whole new rifle.
AR10's are definitely coming down in price, and more and more companies are making them now, but if you can achieve the performance you want out of the more compact AR15, why go up? The AR15 can handle .223 on up to .50 Beowulf. .50 Beowulf and .458 SOCOM are both right in the area of .45-70 for power, and that's proven to drop everything on this continent and the Big Five in Africa as well.
I'm still debating what my next upper will be. A guy at the local gun store was looking for better .300 Blackout ammo, as he was unhappy with how it performed on deer. He ultimately elected to go for FMJ (you can hunt with FMJ in Virginia). 6.8 SPC is a little more powerful, though the allure of .458 SOCOM is hard to resist.
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
I agree with this. I own one of the early 6.8 SPC ARs, and I got it due to the poor terminal performance of 5.56. Since I got my LMT MWS, I simply have not shot the 6.8. The MWS is not light or cheap, but it has better terminal ballistics, better exterior ballistics, and is deadly accurate and 100% reliable.
SSN Vet
Member
On my last build, I wanted to build a long range (~400-500 yd) varmint type AR.
I seriously considered the 6.8 SPR, but the more I read, the cartridge seemed to be focused on making the AR more lethal at shorter ranges. I couldn't even find a barrel longer than 16"
So I went with a 22" .223 bull barrel and after getting sub-MOA loads worked up for 55 gr. H-VMAX pills, I'm intending to focus on loads for 69 gr. and heavier.
This thread has me wondering if perhaps I could have achieved my goal with the 6.8 after all.
I seriously considered the 6.8 SPR, but the more I read, the cartridge seemed to be focused on making the AR more lethal at shorter ranges. I couldn't even find a barrel longer than 16"
So I went with a 22" .223 bull barrel and after getting sub-MOA loads worked up for 55 gr. H-VMAX pills, I'm intending to focus on loads for 69 gr. and heavier.
This thread has me wondering if perhaps I could have achieved my goal with the 6.8 after all.
True, the 6.8 was designed as a killer rather than paper puncher. With the bullet weights and obtainable velocities, it puts it around a 300 yard medium game cartridge from a carbine.
That .277 SMK isn't exactly new though, and was one of the bullets used in early production ammo circa 2004. Agreed, the 115 SMK is on the poor BC side, with .324 versus .373 for the 77 SMK.
77 SMK @ 2750 muzzle fps/16" bbl = 1078 ftlbs @ 100 yards
115 SMK @ 2600 muzzle fps/16" bbl = 1392
115 Nosler Competition gets a better BC than the SMK (.375) and puts 1434 ftlbs @100
Hornady and Berger also have good options, but none of these really qualify as long range. Neither does the 5.56, so all of this is a moot exercise.
77gr 5.56 @ 500: 1403 fps 337 ftlbs -84.5 drop from 100 zero
115gr 6.8 @500: 1571 fps 630.6 ftlbs -71.3 drop from 100 zero
dh1633pm
Contributing Member
I went the Ruger Mini route to 6.8 with a full up rebuild by Accuracy Systems. I live close to the Remington Plant in Ilion and when the factory had a special on ammo picked up an 1000 round case through a friend that works at the plant. If you reload and have the new Spec II chamber you can load them pretty nicely for a good price. They make short work of deer here in New York and I am sure that hogs shouldn't be too much of a problem either. Wouldn't mind a bolt gun in the same cambering. Once you've gathered up whats needed to reload, it doesn't really matter how successful or not successful the cartridge is, just as long as it works for you. For me it works.
Attachments
Works great on hogs. Deer too.
On broadside double lung shots the 6.8 SPC dumps them a bit quicker than the +75 grain .223/5.56.
AABEN
Member
6.8 is a 270 bullet so there is a lot of chose to be had when reloading
rbernie
Contributing Member
Yes, and no. Most traditional .277 bullets that were designed for use in the 270 Win chambering have ogives that are too long to allow them to be used in a magazine-fed 6.8SPC (using the 2.26" OAL constraint imposed by the AR platform and carried over into any chambering designed to work in the AR). Only the shortest of varmint bullets would work.
In fact, the 6.8SPC popularity has spawned a whole new generation of .277 bullets with short ogives that didn't exist when the 6.8SPC was first introduced.
What rbernie said, the 6.8 is not a "just use 270 bullets" cartridge. Typically you want .277 bullets of 120 and less (down to 85). Previous to the 6.8, that diameter was 130+ with a few varmint options at lighter weight (Sierra 90 varminter) that was typically a 270win handloading option only. Several good bullets in traditional, bonded, and monolithic in 85-120 now.
There are some handloading 6.8 for 130+ for specialty applications and SSA did a 140 Berger factory load that was an interesting niche.
There are some handloading 6.8 for 130+ for specialty applications and SSA did a 140 Berger factory load that was an interesting niche.
6.8 has no practical advantage over 7.62X39 EXCEPT that it is better suited to the excellent AR platform. That in itself does mean something.
But, ballistically speaking in barrels of equal length, with bullets of equal weight, 6.8 bests 7.62X39 factory loads by about nothing.
http://m.hornady.com/store/6.8mm-SPC-120-GR-SST/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62×39mm
But, ballistically speaking in barrels of equal length, with bullets of equal weight, 6.8 bests 7.62X39 factory loads by about nothing.
http://m.hornady.com/store/6.8mm-SPC-120-GR-SST/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62×39mm
Gtscotty
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 3,634
I'd say it's pretty much the opposite actually. Having owned and hunted with both, my comparison would look something like:
6.8 Spc advantages over 7.62x39:
-faster velocities at all overlapping bullet weights, much faster velocities when bullets are compared by SD
-Better SD's at similar weights, for better penetration given similar bullet construction
-Better BC's, combined with higher velocities for a flatter trajectory
-Much better hunting bullet selection (than normal .311)
-Better function in AR-15
-Better bolt strength in AR-15
7.62x39 advantages over 6.8 Spc:
-Cheaper (mostly for blasting ammo, not that much of a difference in hunting ammo cost)
-Can potentially use heavier bullets
I can see how 7.62x39 would be a better range toy ammo, but for EBR deer or hog hunting I'd take the 6.8 any day.
Float Pilot
Member
From my Black Hole longer barreled 6.8mm AR, some of the traditional .227 caliber bullets work just fine. I use 1,000 ft pounds of energy as my minimum hunting impact energy for things like Mountain Goat, Dall Sheep and Caribou
130gr Sierra Soft Point flat base...27.0gr AA-22002.280 co,,Vel=2,658 fps and a 1.0 inch group Dirty necks Muzzle Energy 2,039 ft lbs. Point Blank hunting range of 263 yardsHolds 1,000 foot pounds out to 425 yards.
130gr Hornady SST BC=.460...27.2gr AA-2200, CCI 41 Military primer2.290 colVel= 2,570 fps and a 2.00 inch group Pressure signs OK, no dings, Ojive had to be crimped close Muzzle Energy , 1,906 foot pounds, point blank hunting envelope to 256 yards Holds 1,000 ft pounds out to 410 yards, fired at 10 degrees below zero
150gr Speer Soft Point Flat Base...25.0gr AA-22002.280 colVel= 2,360 fps and a CLOVER-LEAF HOLE dirty necks, semi-flat primers Muzzle Energy 1,855 foot pounds, Point Blank hunting range 237 yards Holds 1,000 ft lbs out to 375 yards
150gr SPEER SOFT POINT ...25.3gr AA-2200, CCI 41 Military primer2.291 col Vel= 2,286 fps and a 0.50 inch group No pressure signs, clean cases, cycles well Fired at 10 below zero.
Forgive me if I try again to insert some facts back into the discussion. The case capacity of 7.62x39 is 35.6 gr. water. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62×39mm The case capacity of 6.8 SPC is 34.8-36.9 gr. water, apparently depending on maufacture. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.8mm_Remington_SPC
So explain again how with equal bullet weights 6.8 is significantly faster? I've got no problem with 6.8. Only a slight problem with perpetuated fallacy.
So explain again how with equal bullet weights 6.8 is significantly faster? I've got no problem with 6.8. Only a slight problem with perpetuated fallacy.
I agree. I was going to do a 6.8 AR. It is one of the few calibers in an AR that I do not have. ha ha. The slightly smaller bullet should be better at 250 yds plus but neither round has enough energy for me past those ranges. Maybe with a longer barrel like float pilot uses the 6.8 would make sense for me. Like you I could not find anything the 6.8 does that handloads in 7 62 39 would not do. If you do not handload maybe 6.8 is better. It seems like the 6.8 should have more velocity than it does. If you could get it up to 2800 fps it would start to shine over the Russian round.
Gtscotty
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 3,634
Ok, not only does the 6.8 have more case capacity, it operates at a higher maximum average pressure, 55kpsi vs 45kpsi for the 7.62x39 per SAAMI... No magic, just physics.
http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_information/specifications/Velocity_Pressure_CfR.pdf
But that's only one of the strengths I mentioned, the others are significant as well.
"Significant" is relative, but operating pressure was mentioned above so case capacity/powder burn rate/bore ratio is a bit better for the 6.8. Probably how Hornady does it.
Closest apples/apples I am aware of. The 6.8 still outpaces the x39 from 4" shorter barrel.
Hornady 122gr x39 from 20" barrel
MUZZLE fps/ftlbs 100 200 300 400 500
2350/1508 2040/1136 1755/841 1502/616 1289/454 1129/348
Hornady 120gr 6.8 from 16" barrel
MUZZLE fls/ftlbs 100 200 300 400 500
2460/1612 2250/1349 2050/1120 1862/923 1685/756 1522/617
And, again, the 6.8 is military issue. Just not for the US. It's being supplied by Federal for an overseas contract to governments in the Middle East.
It's being used as in a short barreled firearm for protective guards and security details - against users of 7.62x39. Furthermore, it was a brain child of SF and the AMU in Ft. Benning, initial research and development was paid by taxpayer dollars and it's design intent was to increase power 50% when used in the M4 with a 14.5" barrel. Not 16".
The Army made it happen and now we export it to other armies. How is it not a military cartridge? Whether or not it's issued to our troops doesn't determine "military." We don't issue x39, either. Oh wait - surplus brass buyers have found both in government lot sales. Hmm.
It's a military cartridge.
It's being used as in a short barreled firearm for protective guards and security details - against users of 7.62x39. Furthermore, it was a brain child of SF and the AMU in Ft. Benning, initial research and development was paid by taxpayer dollars and it's design intent was to increase power 50% when used in the M4 with a 14.5" barrel. Not 16".
The Army made it happen and now we export it to other armies. How is it not a military cartridge? Whether or not it's issued to our troops doesn't determine "military." We don't issue x39, either. Oh wait - surplus brass buyers have found both in government lot sales. Hmm.
It's a military cartridge.
- Status
