Bullets And Butter
By Mitch Berg
Joe Doakes, no longer from Como Park, emails:
“Return of the Rifleman” is the title of a big write-up in the NRA magazine on the subject of the Army’s new rifle.
You didn’t know? Neither did I. Turns out the Army has been looking for a new rifle and cartridge since WW II when the M1 with its 30.06 bullets in stripper clips was determined to be too slow and too heavy. “Lighter weight” and “capable of fully automatic fire to saturate close range targets” got us the M16 but now the Army is looking for an upgrade again.
6.8 x 51 mm cartridge at 80,000 psi chamber pressure gave better ballistics than the .223, 308, 30-06 or even the 6.5 Creedmore. Slightly smaller diameter than the 7.62 x 51 NATO round but same length cartridge requires an AR-10 sized platform. Steel jacketed cartridges weigh slightly less than brass and are cheaper to make but cartridge size is the same. No reduction in total size or weight, no gain in rounds carried, so the deciding factor was effective range: 800 yards.
I have trouble believing new recruits will be able to hit anything shooting that far. Current Army rifle qualification course shot with an M16 is a series of 40 pop-up targets from 25 to 300 yards. That’s a far cry from the 800 yards the new gun was designed for. Also, the whole point of switching to the 5.56×54 M16 rifle and 9mm pistol ammo was standardization with our NATO allies. Is that out the window now?
My question: does this signal a change in strategy? What war are they anticipating? Where will combat troops be expecting clear fields of fire half-a-mile long to make use of a new cartridge? Not in Europe, not interchangeable with our allies. Not in the jungle, that’s for close range weapons. Not in the desert, that’s what the Barrett is for. Where does the Army anticipate it will be fighting?
Russia?
China?
America?
Makes me think conspiracy theory thoughts about the military industrial complex wanting a change merely so it can sell new hardware and ammo; and the administration wanting to ban sales of AR15 ammunition to civilians to preserve manufacturing capacity for the Army to supply its new guns; and whether the newest woke recruits wearing red high heels and rainbow arm bands will be able to use the new gun/ammo to full effect.
I’m a big believer in Chesterton’s Fence. Color me skeptical about this change.
Joe Doakes, formerly in Como Park
Not that I disagree with Joe – it’s hard to be too cynical about any branch of today’s American government – but there are rationales for the caliber change.
This particular Youtube account – by a former admittedly mediocre infantryman, who does some really good open-source intelligence stuff – explains some tactical rationales from a grunt’s-eye view.
As to the caliber thing? I do feel a little awkward as an American. In the sixties, we jammed 7.62.51 down on NATO, over the objection of the Brits, whose 7x43mm round had immense potential to be the sort of “intermediate” cartridge that modern “Assault Rifles” needed; America believed in long-range marksmanship, which required the full power cartridge…
…until Vietnam, when it turned out long range marksmanship was largely irrelevant, and the US jammed down the 5.56x45mm.
Which brings us to another jamdown, today.
February 15th, 2023 at 6:16 am
I don’t know the business numbers, but I can sense the AR15 market is saturated with too many players. This is making the big boys not liking it becoming a commodity. Both rifles and ammo.
Just like Jerry Seinfeld says, “New and improved Tide, hasn’t Tide been doing a great job for years?”.
February 15th, 2023 at 7:40 am
800 meter range?
a platoon on patrol with a drone mounted FLIR on point would be devastating and near untouchable in most of rural and suburban America.
February 15th, 2023 at 8:53 am
Pig’s comment sounds about right. If we keep using the .223, a domestic rebel can fuel his own AR with captured ammunition. Count me concerned.
My take overall is that while there is some evidence that a heavier round will penetrate Russian and Chinese body armor better, the evidence we’ve got now is that what we have is working pretty well. Hence I am reluctant to desire a change.
February 15th, 2023 at 9:54 am
If you look at weight/capacity comparison, XM5 is by FAR a clear looser. CFT had a chance to redeem itself by going with plastic ammo, but I guess clearly stated goals mean nothing in the post-meritocracy world. But here is a catch – every XM5 will be outfitted with XM157 FC. Don’t know what it is? look it up! Now, even red pump and matching lipstick wearing recruit will be able to reach out and touch anyone and anything from 1 to 800 yrds with one shot. Selection of an 6.8 extremely flat trajectory cartridge simply takes ALL the guesswork out. Nooo… this is not about CQB, this about shot superiority. Key is XM157 which you can mount on ANY weapon. I suspect selection of the platform just came down to someone owning shares in SIG and their ability to sway CFT decision.
As to JD’s conspiracy theory, how long will it be before XM157 is ubiquitous around the world removing ANY superiority, perceived and otherwise? Remember, “when everyone is super, no one is”. Anyone wants to bet XM157 tech will be restricted to average American citizen while it will be given away to all the enemies of the US? Anybody wants to take the over-under China will have a knock-off in 6 months? BTW, AR15 platform can be barreled in just about any caliber, 6.5Creedmore is actually a very popular one and that is what 6.8SPC is based on. Where was I? Oh yeah, with key being XM157, there is no need for a cram-down.
February 15th, 2023 at 10:50 am
I have 3 AR platform rifles. 2ea 5.56 (one carbine and one rifle) and a 6.8SPC I built to hunt hogs. It’s a reliable day ruiner for a hog at 300 – 375 yds, all day long. Farther than that, it is certainly capable, but not completely reliably so, at least in my hands.
I also have a Ruger Precision Rifle in 6.5 CM. I’ve been putting in quite a bit of work with the RPC, and have improved my consistently accurate (1MOA or better) groups out to 600 yds. I have a friend who can consistently hit a pie plate, dead center, with it at 1000 yds.
Moving from 300 to 600 yds is a leap. Moving on to 800 and better is a quantum leap, and requires sophisticated optics of the type you do not want to be hauling around in an active combat zone. The chance that 1 in 500 foot soldiers will ever make effective use of this new platform is 0/10.
February 15th, 2023 at 11:07 am
I will break my vow, but you obviously have not read up on XM157, BN. But I do agree with you that in CQB situation it is an absolute and utter overkill.
February 15th, 2023 at 11:34 am
I’m in the camp of accuracy at 800 yards, isn’t all that important. If you look at some of the videos out there of insurgents being hit by a sniper from long distances, you see all of the people around him, immediately drop to the ground and stay there. Psychologically, if rounds start hitting tress, buildings, etc; around an enemy at that distance, will definitely affect their morale and may very well thwart an attack before it gets started.
February 15th, 2023 at 12:27 pm
jpa, 2 of my 5.56 AR’s have Vortex Viper VPR-M-06BDC scopes on them (the carbine has a Vortex Spitfire red dot). My RPR is fitted with a Vortex VHS-4315-LR; by the time I added mounts and a sunshade it cost almost as much as the rifle; it’s a wonderful scope, and I think Vortex is the best rifle scope available for large caliber rifles.
I’m also a pretty damn good shot, because I work at it. I believe I’m a guy that could make good use of a smart optic system, and probably make that quantum leap fairly from 600 to 1000 yards fairly quickly. But to say “even red pump and matching lipstick wearing recruit will be able to reach out and touch anyone and anything from 1 to 800 yds with one shot” is ridiculous.
No scope can compensate for flinch, or bad weld or weak grip, or trigger jerk, or bad breath control (or low IQ, which is something the military has always dealt with). Will it help? Sure, probably for a lot of guys, but it won’t make any difference for a lot of others.
February 15th, 2023 at 12:28 pm
“2 of my 5.56 AR’s have Vortex Viper”
…one 5.56 and the 6.8
February 15th, 2023 at 2:24 pm
sigh… and yet again I am reminded of why I put BN on “ignore”. I am talking about XM157 which activates sear when target is in the crosshairs, ELIMINATING ” flinch, or bad weld or weak grip, or trigger jerk, or bad breath control (or low IQ, which is something the military has always dealt with)” and he answers with Vortex Viper VPR-M-06BDC. Back to “ignore”, lesson learned.
February 15th, 2023 at 2:47 pm
jpa
in essence the XM157 turns the foot-soldier into an all terrain weapons positioning system – if a squad of XM5/XM157 were networked with combat drones and a scaled down Aegis fire control system it would provide an extraordinarily lethal system that would be difficult to defend against.
February 15th, 2023 at 3:44 pm
jpa dumped and ran: ” I am talking about XM157 which activates sear when target is in the crosshairs”
OK, well I looked through several articles about the XM157, including the NRA piece and the press release from Vortex. None of them suggest the optics control the sear (hammer release), which isn’t surprising, since the first question to be answered is “How would the scope know the difference when what is in the crosshairs is a target, or just something being observed?
jpa has pulled the covers back over his head 👋🏼, so maybe someone has a link that describes an automated firing feature for this optical system.