[tdoyka]

as far as i am concerned, the 7x57 is should of where they stopped.

 

[tdoyka]

Paul Mauser did it right.

 

[tdoyka]

i have a few of the old AP ammo in the '06, somewhere. they are black tipped. my grandpap brought them home after WW2.

back when i was in the Army, they had a 500 or 600 meter target that we could shoot at. this was with aperture sights and supported/unsupportive. once when ya figure out the drop and the wind(5.56), you can hit the target. it seemed to me, that we were giving away our position to unsuspecting troops. but i was trained on the USSR coming into Europe and the flak jackets just aren't as good as the Kevlar vest and plates.

boy, do wonder off!!!!!!!

 

[tdoyka]

you have a stick, i have a sword

you have a sword, i have steel armor and a sword

you have a bodkin tipped arrow, i have chain mail

and so on.

weapon beats armor everytime. do you want to be in a t-80 tank or a Javelin operator? i'm not trying to go political, but where would you rather be? i'd take Javelin every day and twicet on Sunday.

 

[tdoyka]

Cheap body armor is showing up all over the globe. You can get a plate carrier for $179 t hat will stop a .308 AP. You really don't want to be behind the curve on such things. The fact that you personally didn't wear it, or that you rarely encountered it is anecdotal data from ONE guy. The army leadership is concerned.

I see ZERO evidence for any of your thoughts. The army is concerned about the threat, they are the experts on what the army needs, not us. They feel its a problem, and they're one of the only military organizations that is addressing the issue.

Just don't understand why gun people are so conspiratorial.

heck, i'm stating this as a fact that the Army believes, weapon beats armor every time. it may take you a little bit of time, but weapon beats armor. would i have worn it? yes, i would have, but Kevlar plates weren't out yet. i did wear a Kelvar helmet, tho i miss shaving in my steel pot and cooking eggs and a whole bunch of other stuff.

i ain't conspiratorial, i tell all the egg heads have at it, you'll never know if you don't try.

the $20 million or so is like pocket change to the gummint. as an aside, i don't like the 5.56x45, i find the 7.62x39 and esp 7.62x51 superior. but this is one guy's opinion. on body armor, 5.7x27 or 4.6x30 will penetrate it. i believe its 200 meters and under can go through NATO CRISAT or a Level IIIA Kevlar vest? but i am only a conspiratorial member, so........


.

 

[tdoyka]

we have some great cartridges in the ar-15, like 6.5 Grendel, 6.8 Wolverine, 6.8 SPC, heck i even go with the 6 ARC (didn't the gummint already had this?)....but the gummint says ar-10 in 6.8x51(277 Fury).

i'm going from memory(don't trust it. i don't!!!), the gummint wants to have a heavier platform, 20 - 25 rnds per magazine, heavier cartridge, semi to full auto, 2 piece cartridge body, it "kicks" the bejeezus out of ya. this is all for the 3000fps+ and it penetrates body armor? ahhhhhhhhh...yeah, go ahead and buy it. and find out that Army/Marines qualification scores go down.

this is just me, but wouldn't the gummint do a 2 piece case in 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC? then they could do ar15 type weapon with 80,000 psi or CUP or whatever. DARPA, i'm talking to you.

i like the idea of 6.8x51 for the heavy machine gun, it could take the 7.62x51 off the map and the 5.56 MG(m240 and 249) and throw them away.

hmmm....maybe i don't want 6.8x51. 80,000psi is alot pressure and can it take it? the barrel life, i mean. i have never done it, but the m60 with 7.62x51 could heat the barrel red hot. thats why we trained with 6 - 9 rounds (a short burst). i think it somewhere around 250 rounds that you had to change the barrel? but we never did, we go 750 - 1000 rounds before we changed the barrel (makes you glad to use and carry an asbestos gloves ), but that was with short bursts. a long burst was really, really frowned on by our sergeants. not that i did it or anything...............

oh well, NMP.

 

[tdoyka]

2 to the chest, 1 to the head will make your target dead.

British Sherman tank crews called it the Ronson lighter. "lights the first time. every time!!!"

Sherman tanks were mass produced. in a cargo ship, you could fit 2 Shermans' against 1 heavy tank.we did quantity over quality. in theory, a Sherman tank could not fight a tank battle. instead, they were infantry support vehicles. Shermans would let a tank destroyer battalion (m10 and m36) or a true heavy tank (later in WW2) m26 Pershing.

 

[tdoyka]

if you say so, Dark. i'll believe my late grandpap on his experience on the Sherman in European WW2. it was a piece of history that is best forgotten and worst being b-word at because it lights up like a Christmas tree. oh, by the way, ask the Russians about German tanks......it will be the complete opposite of what you said. i will believe what old timers said before i believe the misinformation that they spew now.

 

[tdoyka]

This is a absolute nightmare. There is nothing wrong with the 5.56 as a combat cartridge as you can see in the Ukraine. I carried the M4 as a contractor in Iraq and always carried 400 rounds of ammo and that is something I could not do with this abortion. If I was Grizzly hunting sure but for people massive over kill and too heavy.

mostly they use 5.45x39 in their ak's, but they have 7.62x39 somewhere.

i never used a M4, it was M16A1 or A2. the 5.56 is a good 300 meters/yards and under combat cartridge. but once you over 325 - 350 meters/yards, it has a problem or problemS. the 7.62x39 and the 5.34x39 have the same problems. i felt that i was under gunned with 5.56, probably because i was a hunter.

back in my day.....they didn't have the cartridges that they have now....6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC or.....whatever. (wildcats are not included) we had the 5.56x45 and the 7.62s51 and 50BMG. in my mind, the 5.56 and 62gr M855 was a groundhog gun. fun to shoot but it just wasn't fer me. the 7.62x51 however, was "the man's cartridge". but it was only available in the M60 machine gun and it weighed about 20 lbs. "the Pig" was a good name for it, heavy, loud and has a voracious appetite for bullets. i luved to shoot it, but hated to carry it.

NATO has finally got its act together (finally has 5.56x45 for all nations) and then we do this poop, 277 Fury and oh, by the way, the old rifles? get rid of them. buy an ar 10 action and go from there. you've got to kidding me? do a 2 piece body case if you HAVE to and do a new barrel for 6.5 Grendel or other 5.56 cartridge length.

yes, i feel the 5.56 is under gunned at above 300 meters/yards. but there is a range of cartridges and length (5.56) to go after.

 

[tdoyka]

my biggest concern is what are you going to do whenever someone goes full auto on the rifle. shoot at the sky after 2 rounds? you do know that it "kicks"? the armed forces are going to see the qualifications scores go way down. Special Forces, Delta, Seals are the first up to get it and they will tell the gummit to shove it. the recoil, esp at full auto, should be enough to disqualify the rifle. you think that the gummint would remember the SCAR rifle. (5.56x45 and 7.62x51 and the 6.5 Creedmoor are chambered in the SCAR, the 7.62x39 and ak magazine are chambered to the SCAR also) i think that the Special Forces are the last ones left that uses the SCAR. the rifle was supposed to be THE GUN for the armed forces, go figure.

oh, i know!!! i'll develop a new cartridge and a new rifle....oh, i'll do the optic sights too. here's the best part. i'll tell NATO that they have buy the the new and improved rifle and cartridge.

ahhh.....yeah. do you know that pigs can fly and do hand stands under water?

 

[tdoyka]

ELITE BONDED POLYMER TIPPED 277 SIG FURY HYBRID (sigsauer.com)

ELITE BALL FMJ 277 SIG FURY (sigsauer.com)

if you notice both of rounds and the fps and out of WHAT barrel, do you really think that the 13" barrel is going to 3000fps? the round can't make 3000fps with a 16" barrel and Sig is telling me that 3000fps out of 13" barrel is real?

 

[tdoyka]

I wish I could publish the MH Walker note books. The inventor of the 222 was MAD about the .223/5.56 and had nothing at all good to say about the 'Gov guys that never heard of Newton and seemed intent on doing the impossible by throwing more money at it.'
Mike Walker was NOT impressed by procurement guys at all and wrote cryptic notes that are entertaining to one that loves ballistics. "Where is a 10K altitude range? That'll work!"
They chronographed some loads in Leadville CO. Instant magic!! Instant trajectory repair. Write it down!

thats a caliber that used accuracy as its middle name, 222 remington. i had a savage m325 in 222 rem and it was exceedingly accurate. i got it second or third or.... hand and the only thing i did was to exchange the scope, 6x Swift (when they had an over-the-counter warranty). i shot at woodchucks, red and grey foxes, crows, rocks, targets, soda bottles......at ranges out to 300 yards, i did however shoot a groundhog at 330-350 yards (didn't have a laser range finder thingy back then) the trigger pull was horrible, but after i shot it several times, i got used to it. 50gr Hornady sp with a max load of h322 would go under 1/4" at 100 yards(5 shots/bench). i must have shot 6000-7000 rounds thru her (3 - 4 years). i don't know the round count because i bought it 2nd or 3rd hand. anyway, i took it to my gunsmith (RIP) and he bore scoped it and he said, what i could have known, that barrel was fried and some spots the rifling was non-existent.

so i did the most stupidest thing i could do, i sold her and bought either a rem m700 or was it a savage 110 in 223 rem. stupid, stupid, STUPID!!!! i should have rebarreled her to the 222 rem.

i could not do 1/4" groups, heck, i hard time doing 1" groups. IMR, Hodgon, Hornady, Speer, Sierria....didn't matter what i tried, i had a hard time doing a 1" group. a couple of years later, i sold her.

i have a 20 Vartarg right now that can do .1 - .2" at 100 yards(5 or 10 shots/bench) with careful handloads. sloppy reloads is around 1/2" at 100 yards. i sold all of my varmint calibers off (expect 22rimfires) expect the 20 VT. a 222 rem, however, has a space in my safe, ready and able.

 

[tdoyka]

🤦
Anyone who followed the links and researched the actual sources, knows that the requirement for the 277 ammo was to weigh less than the 7.62 NATO. Meaning they know that the ammo doesn't weigh anything like 2.5 times what the 5.56 does... Similarly, they would have researched the XM157 contract. Meaning they also know the new optic weighs less than the currently issued mess.

Here are some more links, that some will also ignore.

XM157 discussion, from the source.

Study on hit probability of the Garand.

Study on hit probability of the M16 family with optics.

i'll give Vortex the nod because you don't need batteries to shoot it. the only problem that i have will be CQC (close quarters combat). i would mount on the side a reflex sight, i know, the batteries.....its much easier to use than a 1x scope on a rifle. but that is just my opinion.

back when i was using my m16a2 and aperture sights, i learned(but it was not taught) that anything under 50 meters was a front sight only. i didn't need the back aperture, just the front sight. but this was just with thousands of bullets that i fired that i learned to do just the front sight. 75+ meters, i had to use the aperture.

 

[tdoyka]

Goody bye M16! Military Adopts the M5 rifle and 6.8x51. Are they crazy? - YouTube

 

[tdoyka]

i just find it easier to use the reflex sight instead of the scope. with a scope, you have to have a cheek to stock weld every time in the same spot. with a reflex sight, as long as you can see the "dot", (then cheek to stock weld goes out the window) then you are good to go.

i guess you can call it point shooting. i don't know.

room to room, then "point shooting. across the street, it depends. i'd go "point shooting", but anybody else would go to the scope.

i treated the M16 like a shotgun under 50 meters. i was good at shotgunning small game. "if it flies, it dies" was my grandpap favorite saying i must have got a gene from my dad, because i was a terror in fields and woods. pheasants and grouse were on my menu. i shot coveys of them. it was 1 shell to 1 bird. except doves, it was 3 or 4 shells to 1 bird. you gotta take me down a step. i don't know if i magically shot a pheasant or if i had some skill. but i did have it, whatever "it" might be.

i try and go back to the times i did "point shoot", but it was just something i did. i wish i could teach "point shooting" but for the life of me, i can't remember the what, but i can remember the why.

 

[tdoyka]

Can you provide some budgetary reference, for that cost claim?

i'm still waiting on that price too.
in any case, the government could pay $100,000 for a new rifle or a scope, if it works!!! and i don't think the 6.8x51 is an answer. cost doesn't matter, we deserve better for our troops.

 

[tdoyka]

the Army went back to WW2 dress greens (or i think they did?).

the BDU's has changed so much it makes my head spin. i would make everyone wear a ghillie suit. the POG's would be ecstatic. just think, a chairborne warrior in a ghillie suit making coffee.