Ordinance has the best thought, however the fallacious cartridge. It appears like they’re making an attempt to interchange each the 5.56 and the 7.62 with the SOCOR 6.8mm. I believe for a light-weight, crew served weapon they need to return to the total 30.06 machine gun and do away with the .308 totally.
In a earlier dialogue I indicated that the .257 could be an excellent substitute for the .223. I have been researching it additional, and it appears like a 6mm (.243) “secant ogive” of 87 grains would give the perfect outcomes. With a ballistic coefficient of about .400 its superior to the 62 grain 5.56, and nonetheless has respectable velocity. As you would possibly know, the flatter the trajectory, the simpler it’s to remain on track.
This bullet would nonetheless be efficient to about 500 meters, which is to say very efficient at 100-300 meters. And lengthy vary efficient – as in full auto suppressive hearth – out to possibly 1000 meters. The most important concern with the 5.56mm is that it isn’t deadly out to the ranges that common troops are in a position to goal with correct coaching (et. al., did any of you qualify behind the grenade shed?)
A barely heavier and bigger diameter bullet would remedy the issue with out sacrificing ample velocity and subsequently trajectory. If Ordinance foregoes politics and actually strive’s to do the best factor, I believe they need to provide you with the identical conclusion. The one different factor they want is to do away with that silly crimp in the midst of the cartridge. It was alleged to cease folks from capturing avenue cartridges within the full auto M-16, however everyone knows how simple it’s to switch.
This provides comparable powder quantity to the 6.8, which does not have the crimp both. The explanation for the ball propellant was to economize, however within the context of a brand new cartridge, it is smart to spend a bit extra on powder to save lots of weight (together with retooling.)
The ballistics of the 7.62×51(.308) and the 30-06 are almost similar, in navy masses. Why change? Our 7.62 weapons can use ammo from any of our Allies. I do not assume any navy makes use of 30-06 any longer. In the event that they nonetheless have a few of the outdated Browning MGs, they have been transformed to 7.62.
I am not knocking the 30-06. It is a high-quality cartridge, I personal 4 30-06 rifles. A bonus of the 7.62 is it’s shorter than the 30-06(7.62×63), that 1/2 inch means the motion has 1 inch much less to journey throughout firing. The shorter motion weighs much less.
Any Grunt will let you know, lighter is nearly at all times is healthier.
I could also be mistaken, however I imagine the Mexican Military nonetheless makes use of the “Mendoza” which is chambered in 30-06 (7.63 X 63). It is their very own design, and I believe used the perfect concepts from the BREN, and BAR for its operation.
So far as changing the NATO 5.56mm, it is by no means going to occur till everybody in NATO, or anticipating to be in NATO, will conform to a typical new spherical, and re-chamber all of their weapons accordingly, and chances are high they cannot afford to try this.
The unique Mendoza design was in 7×57 Mauser, in 1943 they produced some in .30-’06, however they weren’t adopted by the Mexican Authorities. After the struggle he (and his son) tried to develop a “Fusil de Asaulto” in 7.62mm NATO, however that too, was not adopted by the Mexicans, they as an alternative selected the G-3.
Due the Mexican Legal guidelines, no firm is allowed to export navy weapons, and really strict anti-gun legal guidelines, Merchandise Mendoza switched to producing workplace merchandise (compasses, staplers and gap punches) and sporting items (knives, bicycles and air rifles).
Though now, they do produce a 9mm submachine gun and a few .22 cal rifles.
I agree it is unlikely they may exchange the 7.62mm any time quickly, except it is with a smaller cartridge. Extra importantly, why is SOCOR making an attempt the 6.8mm M468 if its not wanted? Perhaps they need to shoot for 2 totally different .277 cal cartridges. The explanation for going again to 30.06 could be that they are not utilizing the .308 as a lot as they used to (i.e. M60 and so on. changed with SAWs).
The M-60 WAS NOT changed by the SAW (M-249.) The M-240 changed the M-60 and, the 240 is heavier. The SAW is, because the acronym spells, a Squad Automated Weapon. The Squad stage, the M-60 or the M-240 is GPMG, Normal Objective Machine Weapons. In an Infantry unit, they’re a Platoon asset.
I noticed the report when it first got here out. I work within the firearms business. Nowhere does the report advocate dropping the 7.62 in favor of the 30-06.
I will base my choice on 4 years as a Grunt.
An M-240 in 7.62 shall be lighter than an M-240 in 30-06. The 7.62 ammo is lighter too. The lighter the 17 wsm Ammo for sale, the extra the gunner and his workforce can carry. That is additionally one of many arguments for the 5.56 in opposition to the opposite rounds.
Now, I will provide you with an instance. My Son was a Grunt additionally. He served three years in an Airborne Infantry unit. He did excursions in Afghanistan and Iraq. His rucksack alone, in Afghanistan, weighed 104 kilos. Now add his helmet, weapon, ammo, water, IBA and so on. The load distinction between a 30-06 weapon and ammo versus a 7.62 weapon can add up actual fast underneath these circumstances.