Army Marksmanship Unit match grade ammo requirements for 6.8x51mm

[greg vess]

Knowing our government like they are, instead of selling to the public to offset the cost of the switch they will give it away to other forces to aid in their struggles. Then turn around and pay to have it shipped via. commercial freighter at a insane amount of money. Costing millions.
All because we got caught with our pants down holding a 5.56 out in open country in long range engagements. A major factor anyway.

 

[Lightning8]

The 6.8x51mm is intended to replace both 5.56 and 7.62x51mm.

I bet M4s are in inventory for a very long time.

 

[Winterborne]

I use to have dealings with the AMU and a development "Contractor"...

The AMU is both development and a competition unit.

Back in the day everyone would shoot M1A's and m1903a3's at milsurp competition shoots.
The AR15 had a tough time of it at longer range.

The AMU was given to the task of getting the AR-15 up to snuff.

I use to have a small stack of papers out lining their rifle/ammo requirements.

Low and behold as time went by the AR's started being more competitive and this was largely due to the AMU involvement IMHO.
Note..most people still don't build an AR to AMU specifications.

The conflict in the sandbox showed us some major limitations of 5.56

Now to another round.
When 6.8 spc was developed is wasn't really for longer range shooting,
It was for more energy/accuracy/stopping power at reasonable combat distance of 0 to 500 yards.

Now their research showed the 6mm/6.5mm projectiles to be more accurate and the 6.8/7.62 projectiles to have better incapacitation on pigs.
Soooo..6.8 spc was born as it fit the goals.

*Now...we are not discussing 6.8spc vs 6.5 Grendel debate..both are good.

Now back to AMU and .277 Fury.
The world is changing.
Varied combat scenarios without having to change weapon platforms is a must.
Factor in body armor and longer range for engagements...we need more umphhh out of our weapons across the board while maintaining a size/weight and ammo load out spec.

I can fully see the AMU given the task of getting the most out of the 6.8x51.

The papers they will produce will detail:
Average/extreme accuracy at varied ranges.
Barrel life and wear vs accuracy and round count.
Barrel/receiver/bullet/ case/primer/powder and other materials and treatments.
They will do studies in hostile environments.
They will even watch what the competition circuits are doing.
*Maybe body armor penetration test.

I have a great deal of respect for the AMU.

The 5.56 isn't bad, and I would love to have a Russian 7n6 style bullet for the 5.56 so it doesn't have to rely as much on velocity, but we need an upgrade.

These changes will take years to complete so I would not hold my breath for cheap surplus to hit the streets...from a regime that doesn't want civvies to own firearms.
Most likely they will be donated to Ukraine, Israel and Wakanda.

Most of the above is based upon my dealings from past experiences...but times change.

IMHO...they should have built a better rifle for the 7.62x51 with a 7n6 style bullet for the ground pounders.
Modded for SOG social work at need.

FN Scar, Robinson XCR, AR10.
Heck..Ruger has proven you can build a light weight AR10.

But....all it takes is an election and penny pinchers to stop any progress.

I would love for us to field another great U.S. design/produced weapon/ammo platform.
But most likely it will have Sig, FN, Glock, Beretta, Benelli, CZ, Canik stamped on it.