-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
The days of the US military obsession with the 5.56 may be numbered
- Thread starter kuduboss
- Start date
well that's certainly a theory.....but I doubt a full on replace of all M4's will happen. More likely they will add the newer rifle as a supporting role.
Quote "So the service is considering options to outfit soldiers with a true “battle rifle” chambered in 7.62×51, a more powerful round with a greater range than the 5.56, analysts say" Uh, didn't we have that as our main Battle Rifle? Like the one I carried in Germany called an M14? Duh..
Writers have to have something to write about. Even if it's pure speculation and theory. Must be a slow month for that guy.
I have always wondered why they they don't do this...The troops need different weapons for different jobs. The M4's are fine, and the short barreled M4's are fine, as long as they are utilized in their effective ranges. When the troops are opting for a longer barreled M4 because they need more range to be effective, it only makes sense to employ a new weapon with a more effective long range caliber, altogether.
I have always believed the .7.62x51 should be utilized in every single platoon. Mix it up some. The 5.56 is a good round for certain things, but it doesn't do everything, as no caliber does everything. If they don't wish to issue every troop 2 guns, then give half, or even 2/3 of the guys a 5.56 and the other half or 1/3 a bigger rifle.
Perhaps they utilize the 7.62 round more often than I realize, but it doesn't sound like it. I really don't know.
The .264 round sounds intriguing.
Good article!
The 5.56 round/weapon significantly improved the firepower/number of rounds/weight issue for individuals.
The idea that special forces were gyrating toward the .17 hmr because of the capability to carry large number of rounds with effective firepower out to 200 yards. Because most unit actions do not require the ability to reach out and touch someone beyond that range.
The fly in ointment is the terrain in places like Afghanistan, require every member to have the capability to return fire at essentially trained sniper distances
The idea that special forces were gyrating toward the .17 hmr because of the capability to carry large number of rounds with effective firepower out to 200 yards. Because most unit actions do not require the ability to reach out and touch someone beyond that range.
The fly in ointment is the terrain in places like Afghanistan, require every member to have the capability to return fire at essentially trained sniper distances
.308 developed 60+ years ago. Are we to believe there isn't a better cartridge with new propellants or projectiles for better performance today?
In my humble civilian opinion 6.8 spc and 6.5 Grendel and 308 all look nice but if the military really wants for the front line troops to outrange everyone then they should keep the 556 indefinitely for training and support personnel, and start putting putting ultra smooth 6.5 creedmoor bullets into everything possible up on the line that is less than .50. SAWs, 16" AR10s, and 24" sniper rifles all firing one long distance round.
When asked why I shoot 7.62x51 instead of 5.56 I reply that people have a tendancy to want to hide behind things when you shoot at'em.
