Recent Topics
Oil recommendation for 2014 2.5l Suburu Forester
by tomartomau - 08/23/19 11:32 PM
Castrol 5W50
by Snagglefoot - 08/23/19 11:29 PM
Camry Broke Down
by Nick1994 - 08/23/19 10:51 PM
Pumpkin Beer
by Capt - 08/23/19 09:26 PM
Possible bad Iridium plug
by Eric Smith - 08/23/19 08:57 PM
Is the 5.7gm engine still made brand new?
by motor_oil_madman - 08/23/19 08:19 PM
Motomaster OEPlus MOPH/MOCH Filters
by gamefoo21 - 08/23/19 07:29 PM
Man's best friend!
by Mad_Hatter - 08/23/19 06:53 PM
2007 Ford Fusion Cam Pics
by tig1 - 08/23/19 05:31 PM
Cloning a Lexus key
by Nayov - 08/23/19 04:23 PM
2011 GMC Acadia Shock/Strut Replacement
by panthermike - 08/23/19 03:49 PM
Confusion on oil to use on BMW 328i 2010
by goldenjava - 08/23/19 03:21 PM
ProSelect 27356 cut open
by Sayjac - 08/23/19 03:04 PM
Electrolux - Dryer reliability warning.
by pezzy669 - 08/23/19 02:37 PM
Microfiber Towels for different applications?
by Quattro Pete - 08/23/19 01:53 PM
Coated vs. painted rotors
by atikovi - 08/23/19 01:13 PM
New spark plugs, occasional misfire
by avacado11 - 08/23/19 12:34 PM
Newest Members
Boogyman, GeoffPD, CabanaBanana, tblack, goldenjava
69048 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
23 registered members (ctechbob, Duffyjr, 4WD, Deontologist, bernau, 2015_PSD, 3 invisible), 535 guests, and 19 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics293,713
Posts5,045,461
Members69,048
Most Online3,532
Jul 30th, 2019
Donate to BITOG
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 #4891899 10/09/18 12:47 PM
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,726
U
user52165 Offline OP
OP Offline
U
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,726

Last edited by user52165; 10/09/18 12:51 PM.
Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: user52165] #4891921 10/09/18 01:12 PM
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 13,869
C
CT8 Offline
Offline
C
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 13,869
The tax payers pocket is truly bottomless.

Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: CT8] #4891931 10/09/18 01:32 PM
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,139
ArrestMeRedZ Offline
Offline
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,139
Originally Posted by CT8
The tax payers pocket is truly bottomless.


Of course, because our soldiers and Marines don't deserve anything developed in the last 50 years. In fact, think of the savings in ammunition costs if we went back to muskets!

The total cost of this program will be less than the rounding error of the cost of a squadron of F-35s.

Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: user52165] #4891941 10/09/18 01:52 PM
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,773
B
BMWTurboDzl Offline
Offline
B
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,773
err...and the rest of NATO?

I wonder if the COD fanboys are getting squeamish about being able to resell their .223/556

Last edited by BMWTurboDzl; 10/09/18 01:53 PM.

“It took untold generations to get you where you are. A little gratitude might be in order. If you’re going to insist on bending the world to your way, you better have your reasons.”

435i
Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: user52165] #4891954 10/09/18 02:05 PM
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,719
R
Reddy45 Offline
Offline
R
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,719
.223/5.56 isn't going anywhere, and neither is 7.62.

Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: user52165] #4891966 10/09/18 02:19 PM
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 414
W
wdn Offline
Offline
W
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 414
The United States Army have been saying the same thing for the past 30 years. I could not even count all the "future infantry weapons" DoD has spent large on and later abandoned.

Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: user52165] #4891967 10/09/18 02:26 PM
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 414
W
wdn Offline
Offline
W
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 414
XM29 OICW (Objective Individual Combat Weapon) not to be confused with Advanced Individual Combat Weapon, and so on and so on, ad infinitum.

Not to be confused with Next Generation Squad Weapon.

Last edited by wdn; 10/09/18 02:42 PM.
Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: user52165] #4891988 10/09/18 03:00 PM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 385
Timo325 Offline
Offline
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 385
This is old news, but doesn't seem so here.

This is not the OICW program, and this is a relatively "cheap" program for the change that it is going to make. I'm including logistics chains, etc..

This program is likely going to happen.

Why?

Because we are having problems with M855 and others penetrating body armor. This is a deficiency that absolutely needs a solution for our warfighters. I believe most would agree, that they deserve this change.


2011 Odyssey Touring Elite 80k mi. M1 EP, 0W-20, FU
2008 Mustang GT 81k mi. Edge EP (Gold) 5W-20, FU

Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: Reddy45] #4891991 10/09/18 03:09 PM
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 9,261
L
Linctex Offline
Offline
L
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 9,261
Originally Posted by Reddy45
.223/5.56 isn't going anywhere, and neither is 7.62.


I keep waiting for both to come back down to a $99 per 1000 rnds - wouldn't that be nice again.


"The evidence demands a verdict".
(Re:VOA)"it's nearly impossible to actually know the particular additives that are in there at what concentrations."
Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: Timo325] #4891994 10/09/18 03:17 PM
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,115
M
maxdustington Offline
Offline
M
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,115
Originally Posted by Timo325

Because we are having problems with M855 and others penetrating body armor. This is a deficiency that absolutely needs a solution for our warfighters. I believe most would agree, that they deserve this change.
I thought the M855A1 improved performance significantly, having more penetration than 7.62 M80 at longer ranges. Keep in mind the 556 was designed for AR-15s, it is good that they design a cartridge and weapons together. That might have been the problem in the past, changing calibers is not so drastic if you are introducing a new gun with it.


03 Jetta AWP/09A 210k kms
Edge 0W40 + Mann 719/30
Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: user52165] #4892027 10/09/18 03:52 PM
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 3,046
SubieRubyRoo Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 3,046
If we had more of these, we wouldn't be talking about armor-penetrating capabilities...

Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: maxdustington] #4892146 10/09/18 06:49 PM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 385
Timo325 Offline
Offline
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 385
Originally Posted by maxdustington
Originally Posted by Timo325

Because we are having problems with M855 and others penetrating body armor. This is a deficiency that absolutely needs a solution for our warfighters. I believe most would agree, that they deserve this change.
I thought the M855A1 improved performance significantly, having more penetration than 7.62 M80 at longer ranges. Keep in mind the 556 was designed for AR-15s, it is good that they design a cartridge and weapons together. That might have been the problem in the past, changing calibers is not so drastic if you are introducing a new gun with it.


I will only speak to what I know is open source, and to that I will add the credible statement below:

Gen. Mark Milley testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee that the service's current M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round will not defeat enemy body armor plates similar to the U.S. military-issue rifle plates such as the Enhanced Small Arms Protective Insert, or ESAPI.


2011 Odyssey Touring Elite 80k mi. M1 EP, 0W-20, FU
2008 Mustang GT 81k mi. Edge EP (Gold) 5W-20, FU

Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: ArrestMeRedZ] #4892255 10/09/18 08:26 PM
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 13,869
C
CT8 Offline
Offline
C
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
Originally Posted by CT8
The tax payers pocket is truly bottomless.


Of course, because our soldiers and Marines don't deserve anything developed in the last 50 years. In fact, think of the savings in ammunition costs if we went back to muskets!

The total cost of this program will be less than the rounding error of the cost of a squadron of F-35s.

The caliber was an issue back in 1962 !!!

Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: ArrestMeRedZ] #4892256 10/09/18 08:27 PM
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 13,869
C
CT8 Offline
Offline
C
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
Originally Posted by CT8
The tax payers pocket is truly bottomless.


Of course, because our soldiers and Marines don't deserve anything developed in the last 50 years. In fact, think of the savings in ammunition costs if we went back to muskets!

The total cost of this program will be less than the rounding error of the cost of a squadron of F-35s.

The caliber was an issue back in 1962 !!! We are looking at a similar to a 7.62x39 ish performance, well a bit better.

Re: 6.8mm to Replace Some 5.56 and 7.62 [Re: SubieRubyRoo] #4892263 10/09/18 08:32 PM
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 13,869
C
CT8 Offline
Offline
C
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
If we had more of these, we wouldn't be talking about armor-penetrating capabilities...
Kinda heavy to tote.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™