AR-15 Article: Some Won't Like It, But....

[N555]

I did steal the title from:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/ar-15-article-some-wont-like-it-but.902926/
And changed it accordingly, that one gave a bunch of kind of dumb reasons why Stoners rifle supposedly isn't that good, turns out the guys who made it are shrills for FN, HK, sig, ect and want free stuff. This one is about trying to replace 5.56mm, but keeping DI design.

In the very late 1900s and I was a believer that anything that wasn't 30cal was junk. My cousin owed me money and I fixed his ford (temporarily) so he owed me. I took his mini14 and some ammo as reconciliation.
First test blew away water jugs, more impressive than I expected. 55gr fmj was good, 45gr varmint ammo better.
Next test abandoned car way back in the woods, 55gr fmj went straight through everything that wasn't the engine, transmission, wheel rim. Very much like 30 call did but 223 was supposed to be like a 22lr....
The last test, a spoiled ham. 55gr fmj blew it to bits. Okay I was hooked, 223 was cool but the M16 was still junk, or so I thought.

 

[d2wing]

Most proponents of bigger heavier cartridges forget one of the original reasons for the 5.56. An ordinary soldier would be able to fire the weapon in full auto and be controllable. Having fired an M-14 in full auto as well as an M16 I can attest to big difference in ease of use and controllability. Increasing mass of the bullet can cause more problems.

 

[CapnMac]

Time to bring the M14s out of storage because they were designed exactly for that.

And, the "other side" switched over to 5.45x39 decades ago . . . go figure.

Now, the 6arc has some cool "juju" on its side. It's basically a .243 that fits a STANAG mag well. The rounds are lighter than the 6.5/6.8mm competitors out there.

There's probably a legitimate argument that 6arc would make a spiffy SAW round. Just enough "more" to outrage the Squad's rifles, but still light enough to allow the gunner to tote a couple hundred rounds linked in belts. Be cool if Knight's Armament were working with Crane on such a beastie (other than both of those are full up with projects as is right now).

 

[Heir Kommt Die Sonne]

223 was cool but the M16 was still junk, or so I thought.

The earliest ones did have issues if they weren't kept properly clean, but this is hard to say if it's the rifles fault since the Army used the wrong powder type in the ammunition.
Although I prefer the traditional configuration, the newer ones are indeed a improvement. The carry handles are detachable now, meaning you can add whatever you want on the top. The uppers are thicker, and the hand guards are as well. Plus cold hammer forged.

Now, the 6arc has some cool "juju" on its side. It's basically a .243 that fits a STANAG mag well. The rounds are lighter than the 6.5/6.8mm competitors out there.

I'm still rooting for .300 Blackout but if 6.5 is really the way of the future maybe i'll look into it.

 

[N555]

The earliest ones did have issues if they weren't kept properly clean, but this is hard to say if it's the rifles fault since the Army used the wrong powder type in the ammunition.
Although I prefer the traditional configuration, the newer ones are indeed a improvement. The carry handles are detachable now, meaning you can add whatever you want on the top. The uppers are thicker, and the hand guards are as well. Plus cold hammer forged.



I'm still rooting for .300 Blackout but if 6.5 is really the way of the future maybe i'll look into it.

I have rediscovered some of those issues running 5.56 on ballpowder (double base) with a silencer. Very dirty but as long as that particular load has enough oomph to cycle a dirty rifle it runs.
My stick powder (single base) loads run great and are so clean.
300 blackout can run subsonics, if you are into that kind of thing.

 

[Heir Kommt Die Sonne]

300 blackout can run subsonics,

Is essentially a pistol cartridge, more economical to load for and thus the logical option to adopt.(according to me)

But all this proves, we all have our own opinion and version of prefrerences that would favor one cartridge over the other for adaption. What none of us have though is control over the actual military industrial complex, let alone the budgets. Sticking to what we got is still far more economical and in case of our allies, it'd be a bad move to change cartridges right now. There'd be compatibility issues.

 

[marksman13]

Is essentially a pistol cartridge, more economical to load for and thus the logical option to adopt.(according to me)

But all this proves, we all have our own opinion and version of prefrerences that would favor one cartridge over the other for adaption. What none of us have though is control over the actual military industrial complex, let alone the budgets. Sticking to what we got is still far more economical and in case of our allies, it'd be a bad move to change cartridges right now. There'd be compatibility issues.

300 BLK just isn’t versatile enough for a general issue rifle. Imagine the Marine Corps trying to qualify at 500 yards with a slingshot and that’s a pretty fair comparison. I’d hate to know I had to qualify at 300 yards with a 300 BLK on a windy day.

 

[David Hoback]

Ok, well. Anyone who wants to get the 6mm GRENDEL, go right ahead. Oh, Grendel you ask? But isn’t an ARC… super-DEE-duper “Advanced Rifle Cartridge”??? Uh-huh… look at the case. It’s a Grendel case. Not similar… it’s IDENTICAL! As in, you could neck size to 6.5 and run it in a Grendel. Funny thing.., I remember guys like him saying the Grendel was going to be the next one. I guess they meant THIS one.

So, military has no plans get rid of the 5.56 through 2028. Let’s see if the Democrat party hasn’t destroyed this country by then and then worry about losing 223.

 

[35 Whelen]

Army Chooses New Rifle for Combat Troops

35W

 

[Varminterror]

Anyone who wants to get the 6mm GRENDEL, go right ahead. Oh, Grendel you ask? But isn’t an ARC… super-DEE-duper “Advanced Rifle Cartridge”??? Uh-huh… look at the case. It’s a Grendel case. Not similar… it’s IDENTICAL! As in, you could neck size to 6.5 and run it in a Grendel.

The 6 ARC, in fact, is NOT identical to 6 Grendel (6mmAR/243LBC/6Grendel). So no, neck sizing 6.5 Grendel will NOT yield a round which fits into the 6 ARC chamber. Functionally, your claim is like saying a 260 Rem is IDENTICAL to a .30-06… both are incorrect, because both are necked down AND pushed back, giving up case capacity and horsepower, so NOT “identical” to a necked down version - the 260rem ain’t a 6.5 A-Square…

I HAVE been shooting 6 Grendel - a 243LBC - for a few years, very literally a straight neck down of 6.5 Grendel cases, and have about a grain and a half greater powder capacity, and around 150fps greater velocity than my 6 ARC. I just can’t fit the long 108/109/115 bullets into mag length with the 6 Grendel, which DO fit into mags with the shorter 6 ARC case.

 

[David Hoback]

Sorry, full length size…which you’d do anyway. (I use LC 7.62 for my 260Rem loads. I still have to resize it, but it’s the SAME case!)

And dat’s all!

 

[Varminterror]

Sorry, full length size…which you’d do anyway. (I use LC 7.62 for my 260Rem loads. I still have to resize it, but it’s the SAME case!)

And dat’s all!

What he didn’t address is the doughnut he pushed from his shoulder into his neck, and proper fireforming - and then you neglected the 30thou overall trimming he had to do after FL sizing - but then again, he’s running his rifle to stretch brass apart instead of tuning his rifle to his ammo, so to each their own.

But your original claim remains false, hence my correction. The 6 ARC is just as much a 6 Grendel as your 260 is a 6.5-06… it ain’t.

 

[C-grunt]

Army Chooses New Rifle for Combat Troops

35W

Meh. Still being tested. I doubt it will replace the M4 in the long run.

 

[czhen]

Many full-time yutbers needs to stir the pot in order to capture more viwers or keep them, having few combat experience or nothing.
Sadly, the 5.56 wasn't the right choice then, nor the iterations.
My choice now is 5.56 right now, if I would have full supply of ammo pass me the 7.62×51 on any shape: FAL, CETME.
Think about my choice with plastic mags weight issue solve.
The 7.62×51 is antipersonel and material (vehicles) round which the 22 can't do.
For instance just a bunch of Argentines with FALs downed a Helicopter from 250 meters.
Btw my war experience is only 30 push ups. When bullets fly and sound on the ground all theories will fail. Run as much you can, take cover shoot again because all the gear is left behind.

 

[daniel craig]

When you've got so much capital tied up in a particular arm and ammo, it's tough to change.

That is, unless some senator's or president's son with ties to a manufacturer wants the military to use his new product...

Wouldn't be then also have to get NATO on board?

 

[N555]

The plastic and cheap aluminum ar15 mags and weigh almost nothing. The AR15 and AR10 both have light weight magazines.
The not new (but they think it's new) military 7-08 round is going to weigh about double per round as a 5.56 with a 120 to 140gr bullet, at least 45gr of powder, the case is definitely heavier but don't know if it's double.

Nato has wanted a 7mm or 6.5mm round since the start, don't think it will be a hard sell.