Gun Forums banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,281 Posts
FTFA
"The most compelling reason the United States military will have for not adopting the Barrett M468 is the simple fact that it currently has millions of 5.56mm rounds on hand, and in looking for a replacement for the M-16 the simple answer (though not necessarily the correct one) would be to adopt a rifle that shoots ammunition which is currently in stock and available. "

you guys are fuckin retarded. $140B a year and your worried about a couple million rounds of ammo. WTF!

"While the 7.62mm NATO round used in the M-14 is much more powerful than the 5.56mm bullet, it is also much larger; a soldier can carry twice as many 5.56mm bullets as he can 7.62mm."

yeah, but it takes 3-4 5.56 to put down a somali, but only 1 7.62

i think they are grasping at straws here. how can the livelihood of your soldiers not be your primary concern?
 

·
Fanatical Feline
Joined
·
5,279 Posts
There not allowed to do that anymore....

This is why you only see parts of military ammo now, Im not sure about when could have been 95.. Figures..

Anyone know anything more about this? thats all I know.
 

·
Negative Nancy
Joined
·
1,164 Posts
Nose Nuggets said:
FTFA
"The most compelling reason the United States military will have for not adopting the Barrett M468 is the simple fact that it currently has millions of 5.56mm rounds on hand, and in looking for a replacement for the M-16 the simple answer (though not necessarily the correct one) would be to adopt a rifle that shoots ammunition which is currently in stock and available. "

you guys are fuckin retarded. $140B a year and your worried about a couple million rounds of ammo. WTF!

"While the 7.62mm NATO round used in the M-14 is much more powerful than the 5.56mm bullet, it is also much larger; a soldier can carry twice as many 5.56mm bullets as he can 7.62mm."

yeah, but it takes 3-4 5.56 to put down a somali, but only 1 7.62

i think they are grasping at straws here. how can the livelihood of your soldiers not be your primary concern?
well that and the 6.8 spc is garbage.
 

·
Fanatical Feline
Joined
·
5,279 Posts
Read up on stuff before calling it garbage, from all they I have read about it sounds like a hell of a replacement for the 5.56. OR what they should do is switch back to the 55 grain bullets that shatter, why the rounds are not takeing targets down is there useing 62 grain rounds that fly right through and just make a very small hole...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,882 Posts
It is a well known fact that most of einzelherz posts are just inflammatory drivel, since his first few neo-nazi posts with us. Freedom of speech lends itself to freedom of idiocy at times.

Back on subject. Having fired both 5.56 and 6.8 in virtually identical AR’s at Camp Pendleton a few weeks ago, it’s nice to have a larger caliber AR within the same form factor. Stag Arms's Claim "80% of the power of a .308 with 50% of the recoil!" could be close. I'd say it was pretty close w/o any scientific equip to measure.

I look forward to shooting a 6.5 Grendel this summer in a similar side by side.
 

·
Negative Nancy
Joined
·
1,164 Posts
ORCA said:
It is a well known fact that most of einzelherz posts are just inflammatory drivel, since his first few neo-nazi posts with us. Freedom of speech lends itself to freedom of idiocy at times.

Back on subject. Having fired both 5.56 and 6.8 in virtually identical AR’s at Camp Pendleton a few weeks ago, it’s nice to have a larger caliber AR within the same form factor. Stag Arms's Claim "80% of the power of a .308 with 50% of the recoil!" could be close. I'd say it was pretty close w/o any scientific equip to measure.

I look forward to shooting a 6.5 Grendel this summer in a similar side by side.
i'd love to hear about how i'm a neo nazi, but i suppose that's just cause my handle is german.

there's something about shooting past 400 yards that makes it crap. I'm sure you 100M paper target folks don't care about that, but if i were in the sand box and I have a clear line of sight for a half mile in all directions, i wouldn't mind being able to hit something i can see as well as retain more than 1/4 of the energy from the muzzle. short fat bullets SUCK period.

but hey, that's just einzelhitler speaking, so feel free to ignore it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,882 Posts
Woah my bad einzelherz I got you mixed up with user WeisserWulf, probalby due to the germanesq type name and the fact of the short, no reason initial answer, "well that and the 6.8 spc is garbage." Which he was notorious for. And the Neo Nazi rant was directed at him 100%. My memory is getting worse as I get older.

SORRY! My Bad! My Apologies!

Anyways back to the topic...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,281 Posts
just got word from a friend back from Iraq that they are in fact deploying this upper to duty use currently. and the soldiers love it.

ill post if i hear anything else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
It is a good round, on a good gun. Only problem is that it will take a while to phase out completely. That and the mass abundance of the 5.56 ammo versus the slimmer market of the SPC.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top