PDA

View Full Version : Alternatives to the 5.56 NATO



Sayeret
03-30-2009, 12:40 PM
What is everyone's opinion on the matter and why?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1: Create a 5.56mm “heavy ball” load
The simplest approach to improving the combat
potential of 5.56mm weapons is to increase bullet weight.
This has been done on a limited scale by special
operations forces, which have used Mk262 competition
ammo in the mountains of Afghanistan. The 77-grain
“open tip” match bullet reportedly is effective when used
against unprotected enemy personnel, but the open tip
design is less capable than a full metal jacket (FMJ)
projectile for penetration of barricades, brick walls,
vehicles and other “hard” targets

Option 2: Load a bigger bullet in
the 5.56x45mm case
The second easiest way to increase
performance is to “neck up” the
5.56x45mm case to accept a 6mm bullet,
something that has been done by civilian
competition and varmint shooters who
wanted more capability than the original
round could provide. The result is the
“wildcat” 6x45mm cartridge (not to be
confused with the 6x45mm XM732 round
that was developed in the 1970s), which
can be loaded with a 90-grain FMJ bullet
to an overall length the same as that of
5.56x45mm. The 6x45mm promises
increased range and lethality compared to
the M855 round, yet requires little more
than a barrel change to be fired in existing
5.56mm weapons.

Option 3: Use a bigger bullet and
a bigger cartridge case
The perceived incapacitation failures of
the M855 round during operations in
Afghanistan triggered an effort by a few
innovative Soldiers to create a more potent
cartridge for the M4 carbine. With the
approval of their commander, these
individuals, with assistance from a major
ammunition company, developed the
6.8x43mm Special Purpose Cartridge
(SPC). The 6.8mm SPC hits much harder
than 5.56mm Ball at all engagement
distances, but because the 115-grain bullet
has rather modest aerodynamic qualities,
trajectory and wind drift show little or no
improvement.



http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/gunstuff/12_fa02.pdf

Hollis
03-30-2009, 12:41 PM
What is everyone's opinion on the matter and why?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1: Create a 5.56mm “heavy ball” load
The simplest approach to improving the combat
potential of 5.56mm weapons is to increase bullet weight.
This has been done on a limited scale by special
operations forces, which have used Mk262 competition
ammo in the mountains of Afghanistan. The 77-grain
“open tip” match bullet reportedly is effective when used
against unprotected enemy personnel, but the open tip
design is less capable than a full metal jacket (FMJ)
projectile for penetration of barricades, brick walls,
vehicles and other “hard” targets

Option 2: Load a bigger bullet in
the 5.56x45mm case
The second easiest way to increase
performance is to “neck up” the
5.56x45mm case to accept a 6mm bullet,
something that has been done by civilian
competition and varmint shooters who
wanted more capability than the original
round could provide. The result is the
“wildcat” 6x45mm cartridge (not to be
confused with the 6x45mm XM732 round
that was developed in the 1970s), which
can be loaded with a 90-grain FMJ bullet
to an overall length the same as that of
5.56x45mm. The 6x45mm promises
increased range and lethality compared to
the M855 round, yet requires little more
than a barrel change to be fired in existing
5.56mm weapons.

Option 3: Use a bigger bullet and
a bigger cartridge case
The perceived incapacitation failures of
the M855 round during operations in
Afghanistan triggered an effort by a few
innovative Soldiers to create a more potent
cartridge for the M4 carbine. With the
approval of their commander, these
individuals, with assistance from a major
ammunition company, developed the
6.8x43mm Special Purpose Cartridge
(SPC). The 6.8mm SPC hits much harder
than 5.56mm Ball at all engagement
distances, but because the 115-grain bullet
has rather modest aerodynamic qualities,
trajectory and wind drift show little or no
improvement.



http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/gunstuff/12_fa02.pdf


This has been discussed so many times. If your interested, use the search.