>U.S army wants too replace 5.56 with a larger caliber >This

>>34958988
At most the army would just have to abandon some already worn barrels and bolts. It's not like they'd be replacing the AR platform.
That's the beauty of the AR being so versatile. Just a few parts swapped and you have a new caliber ready to go.

>>34959048
>a few
>the upper, lower and barrel
>a few

I for one welcome our new .300blk m4 overlords.

>>34959052
>.300blk m4 overlords.
What are the rumored 5.56 replacements?

Is this the revival of the 30-06?

Time for some dank dank .280 brit? Or an evolution of at least?

>>34959051
>lower
this meme again

>>34958988
>>34959052
>>34959084


its to fight a armored adversary (looking at russia and china)

meaning something maintaining a slightly larger caliber at least with higher velocity. Meaning 300 blk is probably not the choice. 7.62 AP is the most likely candidate. No source, but it makes more sense logistically.

so yeah youd have to swap out the lower

>>34959066
iirc they were looking at some .260 cartridges.

>>34958988
>>34959060
CTSAS. A new, long 6.5mm bullet is the only one we know of, partly because the LSAT program started with the less-controversial LMG design.

In addition, because of long-range firefights in the Afghan mountains, some fools are calling for every infantryman to have this same round so that they can wildly miss Taliban at 1200m with unguided rounds. Also, muh single-caliber logistics.

Another alternative would be a cased-polymer PDW intended for <400m, which would make more sense given that most infantry combat is <100m, and anything beyond 1km really should be engaged with area weapons (including MGs) or guided weapons.

File: 534534.jpg (34KB, 427x202px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 427x202px

>>34958988
>replace rifles to larger caliber so it can penetrate advanced Chinese level IV body armor from alibaba
>require these rifles to be build around ammunition that doesn't penetrate these armors
What does Army mean by this?

So how is it gonna be till current service rifles and service calibers are gonna get phased out for this new round?
Providing that it actually happens of course.
I need more US military surplus.

>>34959235
never

Where are our laser guns?

>>34959226
I mean whats the alternative to Level 4 ammo? Start handing out .600 Nitro or .50 BMG rifles?

File: vlcsnap270333.jpg (19KB, 704x400px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 704x400px

6mmx49?

File: 12353453.jpg (317KB, 987x1000px) Image search: [Google]

317KB, 987x1000px

>>34959999

>>34958988
Remember when the army was gonna buy a whole new rifle during the Individual Carbine competition a couple years ago?

Or when a couple years before that they were going to replace everyone's rifle with the XM8?

Or a couple years before that when they were going to etc etc with the OICW?

Or before that with the ACR?

Yeah. This program is going nowhere just like the last five or six attempts.

>>34960131

.50 BMG as standard issue would be dope as fuck desu

>>34958988
It's the same old shit again.

>>34959052
Tards in the brass thinks M4s don't have enough range (as if that is their purpose), thus .300BLK isn't what they're looking for.

>>34958988
>How did this Fake News got spread?

Boutique caliber shills.

>>34959061
Let's hope not.

>>34959066
God no, I don't see why Anglophiles are so obsessed with that cartridge.

>>34959226
"... military intelligence, two words combined that can't make sense..."

>>34959060
>What are the rumored 5.56 replacements?

5.56 isn't being replaced, 7.62 might be replaced with 6.5 Remington.

>>34962651
>7.62 might be replaced with 6.5 Remington
Doubt.

>adopt rifle with cartridge designed to function optimally from a 20" barrel
>chop 25% of the barrel off
>it suddenly performs way worse
>the solution is adopting a whole new rifle in a completely different caliber
Is being short-sighted a requirement to work in ordninance?

>>34962656
.260 Remington, 6.5 Creed and .264 USA are the calibers the army is actually looking at as a 7.62 replacement down the road.

>>34962671
Look at this fine example of Dunning Kruger.

>>34959226
If a rifle can fire M80A1 it can fire ADVAP.

>>34962596
>Tards in the brass thinks M4s don't have enough range

Speaking of people who have no idea what's going on.

>>34962671
Hey, Spergboy, do you know the difference between an M4 and an M16, as well as the roles they serve? You don't? Then shut your fucking trap.

>>34962708
Unless they can provide similar barrier penetration I wouldn't say it's a good idea.

>>34962763
.260 Remington is just .308 necked down to 6.5mm, it has similar weight bullets but with a better coefficient.

>>34962807
Oh, so it's not one of those shortened down half-measures people have been circlejerking about for carbines for the past decade? Well then I think it could have prospects, makes me think of the old .276

>>34958988
>>U.S army wants too replace 5.56 with a larger caliber
This is a fucking terrible idea. What ever happened to more bullets = more battles logistics? Why is less bullets an advantage when the army infantryman relies on shooting/laying suppressive fire in the general direction of towelheads he usually can't see? What engagement in the last twenty years makes the army brass think that these strategies don't work and the logistics of smaller bullets aren't better?

>>34959090
What about 6.5 Grendel? It's literally designed to be a hotter, flatter, harder hitting 5.56 that fits in the same lower.

>>34962708
At best this would be new caliber for DMR and battle rifles for some units, now way it will replace all 7.62 MGs on AFVs.

File: IMG_0304.jpg (56KB, 421x341px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 421x341px

No ones said so I'll say it
>6.8spc
Inb4
>6.5 Grendel is better
6.5 as a hunting round is the. Enter choice do to it performing much better out of longer barrels 20-24inch. While the 6.8 performs at the same to even better than 6.5 out of 16 inch barrels and smaller. And before I say more, both 6.8 and 6.5 are leaps and bounds better than 5.56 in range velocity and kinetic energy being delivered to target.

So why 6.8 over 6.5 if 6.5 is slightly better out of sbr(slightly)? Because unlike 6.5 that require rediculous magazines and only still being able to fit 28 round, and out of normal size stanag 556 can only fit 24. 6.8 is in appearance very similar to 5.56 requiring only a barrel and bolt change. Along with using a magazine which size is in between a 556 stanag and a 5.45 30rnd mag. The manufacturing of this new round on a large scale would be simplified due to its manufacturing process being very close to that of 556. And of course like I said before, it's great out of barrels like 14.5 inches and even smaller. Unlike both 556 and 6.5 Grendel.

>>34962888
Everyone is upset because insurgents with Mosins could outrange 5.56 carbines, and a serious adversary with body armour would seriously reduce the effectiveness of 5.56

It would also be good for logistics if you could replace both 7.62 and 5.56 with larger intermediate cartridge, but that's a lot less likely.

>>34962910
>While the 6.8 performs at the same to even better than 6.5 out of 16 inch barrels and smaller.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/04/04/not-so-special-a-critical-view-of-the-6-8mm-spc/

>>34962898
Grendel exists in a world where the only type of 5.56 is M855.

>>34962938
>Everyone is upset because insurgents with Mosins could outrange 5.56 carbines,
How many NATO troops exactly were killed by insurgents with Mosins from ranges exceeding "effective range of 5.56 carbines"? 1? 0?

>>34962938
This myth again.

>>34962967
>>34962975

You're right that it's a myth, but since when do facts matter? "Muh troops outranged!" is a powerful argument whether or not it's true.

>>34959235
>surplus now

At most you'll get the furniture. They're probably scrap the alum/steel maybe giving it to the new weapon manufacturer to recycle or they'll just give the rifles to some less fortunate country like mudlasia or whoever the fuck that still uses our clapped out 16A2s.

File: IMG_0248.gif (888KB, 500x286px) Image search: [Google]

888KB, 500x286px

>>34962939
>All tests done were done out of 18+ inch barrels
6.8 designed to work best out of shorter barrels. R u retardded?

>>34962988
If the Army was actually concerned about M4s being outranged it would actually train soldiers to shoot at distances the M4 is capable of.

>>34963039
Fun fact: maximum range soviets and Russians trained their soldiers to shot PKM is 600m. M249 outranges PKM, russkies BTFO :^)

>>34962938
>because insurgents with Mosins could outrange 5.56 carbines
Irrelevant, you have 7.62mm NATO rifles and GPMGs already for that exact purpose, on top of air support.

Also durka durkas can't aim for shit, especially not with their Khyber Pass specials, and certainly not at the ranges this has happened, this is harassing fire at the very worst, and at best "lol, you guys hear something?"
Why this has been brought up is beyond me, pvt's stepping in dog turds is a more serious problem than this.

>>34959226
LSAT bullets?

File: wV5UVry.png (319KB, 845x634px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 845x634px

>>34959161
Admittedly would could just train our soldiers more rigorously for accuracy, though that might not be practical. Either that or hand them a scope (again not the most practical idea).

>>34959090
Why not just shoot 5.56 AP out of a 20in barrel? Rips through body armor like nobody's business.

>>34960752
this.

It generates a demand for firearm manufacturers, as well as budget gov't cheese to run the tests themselves.

The short version is that people in power are lining their pockets through these programs, and keeping the budget fat and happy for the coming years. It's textbook.

>>34963413
Someone really needs to get rid of the whole budget inefficiency of "Oh you got enough money? Fine then you won't need anymore! Hell let's take some money away from ya!" resulting in the army spending more and more just to keep the budget up.

>>34963384
>just train our soldiers more rigorously for accuracy

nigger, our combat arms guys spend more time on the range in a quarter than equivalents in other countries do in a year.

>Either that or hand them a scope

ACOGs are standard across the infantry, with a few aimpoint and eotech leftovers.


Small arms are virtually meaningless in modern conventional warfare as long as they can be used effectively to maneuver. Freaking out about armor penetration is just that: freaking out. Fuck man, we literally teach people to aim low when s2 says the enemy might have body armor.

The AR family chambered in 5.56 isn't going anywhere for a while, and that's a good thing.

>tfw have a regular ar-15 instead of an ar-10 in 6.5 creedmore
Why did I fall for it?

>>34963821
You would have fallen for it if you had an AR-10 in creedmore.

I wouldn't mind seeing 5.56 being replaced with .243 or 6.5 Creed...

>>34958988
>How did this Fake News got spread?
Probably either FN, or H&K.