Another blow to SIG - the XM7?

[basstracker89]

in killing deer with both the 6.8spc and the 5.56, at ranges under 200 yards I can make out no significant difference in the two. I did use hard Barnes bullets in both, and I think the velocity of the 5.56 skews things toward more effectiveness with the 5.56 I was not impressed with the 6.8 and the 95 grain Barnes. I have given up on anything that will fit into a 5.56 framed receiver except 5.56 as there is only "so much" you can do with that cartridge length. A 62 grain TTSX bullet will kill the biggest deer in the woods if you hit him in the front half. The army is wasting money on some attempt to put 10 pounds of crap in a 5 pound bag.

I like that last sentence.......I guarantee you, somebody is making money on that deal. I'm really not a fan of the 223 for a battle rifle, but they've been doing it a long time. I liked reading about your experience though. I will say there is a lot of merit in pack weight as I've carried both a 308 and 223 battle pack. As I aged, I liked the lighter weight of the 223

 

[Redleg]

Use Artillery, just sayin

 

[basstracker89]

Use Artillery, just sayin

Air Force and Navy.......

 

[Redleg]

The sad part is that this Captain was given an assignment at a staff school, I bet. Wanting to write a good paper, he used his experience and looked at the notoriety that he got. The XM& is a good weapon, but for who, 6'3" 260 lbs SF that still feels the recoil and is bounced of target for the second tap? Great weapon, wrong audience.

Next thing you know, they're be strapping tow ropes on Artillerymen to pull 105 mm M101A1.

 

[Fatal_Bert]

in killing deer with both the 6.8spc and the 5.56, at ranges under 200 yards I can make out no significant difference in the two. I did use hard Barnes bullets in both, and I think the velocity of the 5.56 skews things toward more effectiveness with the 5.56 I was not impressed with the 6.8 and the 95 grain Barnes. I have given up on anything that will fit into a 5.56 framed receiver except 5.56 as there is only "so much" you can do with that cartridge length. A 62 grain TTSX bullet will kill the biggest deer in the woods if you hit him in the front half. The army is wasting money on some attempt to put 10 pounds of crap in a 5 pound bag.

That's my thinking too. By no means an expert on combat or anything. But I'm a nerd for logistics. 5.56 just hits a sweet spot. To get significantly more power and energy you have to pay a price in weight, overall size, and capacity that I just don't think is worth it for a rifle that you need to do everything with.

 

[ram 50 v8]

This whole thing seems ridiculous to me..

Take a rifle with this "great new cartridge" designed for longer barrels, but stuff it into a 13" barrel, but now its tooo loud, so we gonna put a suppressor on it so soldiers ears dont bleed.... and now its a huge, heavy gun, actually hravier than M1A, while having pretty much same ballistics....

 

[basstracker89]

This whole thing seems ridiculous to me..

Take a rifle with this "great new cartridge" designed for longer barrels, but stuff it into a 13" barrel, but now its tooo loud, so we gonna put a suppressor on it so soldiers ears dont bleed.... and now its a huge, heavy gun, actually hravier than M1A, while having pretty much same ballistics....

Well, it shoots flatter. Less filling.........

 

[renagadeinjun]

I think this will be more of a blow to the Army guy who wrote the op-ed than it will be to Sig.
But I don’t care for Sig…

 

[renagadeinjun]

That's 10mm short & weak to you.........

fixed it .........

 

[basstracker89]

fixed it .........

No, no........