Best Caliber for M16 for a Battle Rifle

[Lloyd Smale]

Well, we're running a two caliber system now so how about just changing the ratios? Introduce more 7.62X51 mm rifles and reduce the 5.56mm to squad and asst. squad leaders for the close in, maybe as a sub gun profile and use. 240B as squad support (or in the WWII German mode - squad supports the 240B).

dont try common sense it doesnt work for some. no committees with expense accounts and no internet experts

[M-Tecs]

ive never once heard one of our enemys say a marine corps sniper with his m40 was lacking.

Apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suit. The Army looked at the 762x51 for their new Interim Combat Service Rifle (ICSR). The Army canceled that and opted for the 6.8x51. I wonder why? Not really since they are looking for a better solution to body armor.

The claim for the "need' is the current common use of body armor and general lack of stopping of the 5.56 particularly with M855. We do know the 5.56 falls short on body amor even with the various improved rounds that have been fielded. The question of was the 5.56 a poor decision has been argued since 1964. The question is it a poor choice today and for the projected future needs for the Army? The current contract only supplies the Army.

The .277 for the 6.8 SPC selection raised question at the time why .277"? That doesn't change the fact that the "need" for the 6.8" was due to the lack of quick stopping from 5.56 in the tunnels and caves of Afghanistan. The 6.8 SPC being hurriedly fielded was admitting the 5.56 was not up to the task in that application.

http://demigodllc.com/articles/6.8-m...-arms-carbine/
Troubling reports about 5.56's performance were coming back from the field. Several soldiers had been killed or wounded by Taliban fighters who had already been shot multiple times by the Americans' 5.56 M4 carbines. These failures to incapacitate spurred the 5th Special Forces Group (SFG) to design an "Enhanced Rifle Cartridge" (ERC) to outperform 5.45x39mm, 5.56, 5.8x42mm and 7.62x39mm. MSG Steve Holland (5th SFG (A)) and Cris Murray of the U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit (USAMU) led the ERC project to provide optimum terminal performance from an M4 with minimal changes to the weapon. Troy Lawton (Chief Ballistics Technician) and Cris Murray (Service Rifle and R&D Gunsmith) of the USAMU assisted in developing loads, and built the rifles for the ERC project.

More history on the 6.8 SPC https://www.americanrifleman.org/con...y-performance/
The 5.56x45 mm M855 cartridge launches a 62-gr. bullet at 2900 f.p.s. through an M16A2 but at only 2600 f.p.s. from an M4.

The program actually began in early 2002 when initial reports of the M855’s shortcomings started to trickle back from Afghanistan.


I do find it very telling that the 6.8 SPC was developed from the bottom on up.

Back to the 6.8x51. Without access to their test data we will never know how the 6.8x51 compares to the 7.62x51 verse body armor.

Also the 7.62x51 is still widely in service with the various versions of the M-14, M110, M110A1, M110A2, M110A3, M24 and the M240.

Before the 6.8x51 the Army was looking at the 7.61x51 for a new Interim Combat Service Rifle (ICSR). The real question should be how much additional cost is the 6.8x51 compared to a 7.62x51 similarly configured verse a long-term selection? The 7.62x51 was billed as interim solution. That indicates they viewed the 7.62x51 as lacking?

https://govtribe.com/opportunity/fed...-w15qkn17x0a1v

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/army...service-rifle/
The Army has officially canceled its search for an off-the-shelf 7.62mm Interim Combat Service Rifle (ICSR) meant to replace the standard-issue M4 carbine — a major setback in the branch’s search for a new infantry rifle to augment soldier lethality.

ive never once heard one of our enemys say a marine corps sniper with his m40 was lacking.

That also show lack of understanding the limitations for the 7.62x51 for snipers. Stopping power is not the issue. It's the ability to hit at longer range. That is the reason for the US military using numerous cartridges for that application. Even back in Vietnam the Military used more powerful cartridges like the 300 Win Mag and 300 Weatherby Mag to extend the range. A good friend used a 300 Weatherby Mag in Vietnam. I was just getting to know him at the time. It sounded suspect to me at the time so I did so research. Yes the 300 Weathery was issued in limited numbers.

Too bad the Army is wasting more money here since the 7.62x51 is all that's needed.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/y...nes-and-socom/

A new sniper rifle for the Army, Marines and SOCOM
By Todd South
Jan 29, 2021


The great sniper rifle replacement across the Army, Marine Corps and SOCOM has begun with the newest sniper rifle and it’s the Barrett Multi-Role Adaptive Design rifle chambered in three calibers.

Over the next five years, the MRAD will replace the Army’s existing M107 sniper rifle and M2010 Enhanced Sniper Rifle under the Precision Sniper Rifle program, and all bolt action rifles in the Marines, delivering conversion options so that snipers can choose from 7.62mm, .300 Norma Magnum and .338 Norma Magnum, depending on their shooting needs.


The military designation for the rifle will be the Mk22, which is the nomenclature for the PSR.

RELATED
https://www.militarytimes.com/off-du...-sniper-rifle/
“The Army plans to purchase Multi-Role Adaptive Rifle (MRAD) systems for Foreign Military Sales and Precision Sniper Rifles (PSR) systems for Army Snipers and EOD personnel,” PEO Soldier spokesman told the website Task & Purpose. “The MRAD is one component of the PSR.”

Marine Corps budget documents from early 2020 noted that the “ASR will replace all current bolt-action sniper rifles in the Marine Corps.”


Those documents cited a purchase of 250 MRAD rifles for the Corps.

That means the decades-old M40, which has been in service midway through the Vietnam War. The M40, was scheduled to be replaced by the Mk13 Mod 7.

SOCOM awarded a contract for the MRAD back in March 2019 and deliveries were scheduled to start this January, according to a Barrett company release.

The search for the convertible rifle began back in 2016 with a SOCOM request.

The original plan was for the Army to buy 536 MRAD rifles under the previous program, a PEO Soldier spokesman told Task & Purpose that the new plans will include purchasing an estimated 2,800 rifles over the next five years.

[M-Tecs]

we are lucky here to have such an expert with such vast knowledge on the subject and an air force vet to boot. comical thing is in 10 years that design will be obsolete and the committee's will be back in full swing wasting our tax dollars while we are probably fighting some third world country we gave m16s to. But i bow to your superior intelligence and real world experience.

OK you want to play that game that will get this thread locked or deleted. Note to the mods. If this gets out of hand please just lock it and deal with whoever you feel is out of line. Too much info posted about what stage of Army is in with its quest for a new battle rifle.

As to being an "expert" please tell us how your uncle in Korea used an M-14????? I do agree with him that it was the "best battle rifle". If the XM7 meets spec the XM7 will replace the M-14 and hold the title of "best battle rifle" IMHO.

I love the M-14. I went Distinguished with it and I've built close to a 100 for NRA Highpower Service rifle competition for both military teams and civilian competitors.

The Korean War ended on July 27, 1953. The M-14 was in adopted 1957????????????

uncle detested them. told him proudly when i was 14 that i bought one for my first deer rifle. he looked at me with a scowl and said it aint a fitting rabbit gun. he was a staff sergeant in ww2. i forget the battle now but he said they were pinned down by a jap sniper in a tree. he said he took his mi carbine and tried to sneak around behind and find him. he did and shot him 4 times. the sniper then shot him in the leg. thankfully a flesh wound. he got out of there and back to his guys and the sniper was still shooting and by then 2 of his men were dead and himself and 2 others were wounded. he grabbed a Garand and took back off into the jungle. snuck up on the guy and shot him in the guts and he tumbled out of the tree dead he said two of his carbine shots were in the legs and he would have expected them to stop someone but the other 2 were in the chest and if they would have come from a real rifle would have saved the life of one of his men. he said he carried a Garand the rest of the war. he was shot twice by the germans and once by the japs and was just as in love with toyotas and volkswagons as he was the m1 carbine. he fought in korea too by then a master sergeant . said when he got there they offered him another m1 carbine and he laughed and said nope ill keeps this one. which was a 14 and in his opinion the best battle rifle ever made

Yes, yes, yes the vfw, legion and the dva are the best placs to determine what the US Army believes it's future needs are.....................................particular against adversaries wearing body armor.

yup i can just imagine what this wonder rifle is going to cost tax payers. government is probably pushing it because they know civilians wont be able to afford a semi auto version. or they wont allow commercial ammo to be made. wonder what psa will make an aerospace buck rogers barrel. in the end if you put the dot where you should it doesnt much matter what gun you have. if i was pinned down in a firefight id be screaming for air support or artillery and would hope my government spent their budget on that instead off some politicians wanting martini lunch committees where people who never wore a uniform waste millons of dollars studying a problem that doesnt exist and if it actually did are clueless about fixing it. want a new rifle take 20 actual soldiers that saw lots of combat and let the design it. that said im in the vfw, legion and the dva here locally and ive never heard a younger member that saw combat bad mouth the 16. on the other hand ive built ar15s for some of them because they loved them so much and in some cases were the reason they made it home. ar is a fine weapon. spend my tax dollars on ships and planes tanks, drones ect, and CLOSING THE BORDER. that would be money much better spent. unless you want to learn to speak a mix of chinese and mexican. i cannot think of a bigger waste of our military budget other than woke training

After the movie "American Sniper" came out it was hard to go into a bar without meeting a military sniper. Yet when quarried about what a KD was they didn't have a clue? Same for wind reading and mirage?

[M-Tecs]

dont try common sense it doesnt work for some. no committees with expense accounts and no internet experts

You mean like the Army wanting a single cartridge for the front-line combat troops? The Army clearly indicates it does not want the 5.56 on the front lines. At worst is would be 6.8x51 and 7.62x51. Since the Army only stated the XM250 is the replacement for the M249 we can only guess where the leaves the M240. Will the XM250 and M240 be deployed together? Maybe someone can run down to the local " vfw, legion and the dva" and provide us the answer???

[Lloyd Smale]

blah-ba-blah blah blah.

Yes, yes, yes the vfw, legion and the dva are the best placs to determine what the US Army believes it's future needs are.....................................particular against adversaries wearing body armor.

aint a bad idea as long as any air force opinions are from PJ's. they sure know more than you. If a nascar team needs advice on how to tweak a car to go a bit faster do they ask a bunch of congressman to form a committee and spend millions trying to come up with an answer. or do they ask an internet expert thats closest thing to racing is driving his prius 5mph over the speed limit? nope, the first one the ask is the driver. when those committees are a totally a group of army and marine and other branches special service troops e-6s and above (real drivers) then i will respect their opinion. not some senators with a golden spoon in their mouth and money being slid under the table by military contractors wanting a piece of this total waste of our tax money. wonder how many F18s could have been bought with the money wasted on this over the last 30 years?????? wonder how many soldiers lives could have been saved with some more armed drones???? maybe a couple more ac130s to pound the heck out of enemy troops allowing ours to get out and come home. you would think an air force vet would see this as common sense. go ahead and dig up a few more links.