Grendel ballistics overstated?

[JASmith]

from Tony Williams: Which prompts the question: could the Grendel be loaded to military pressures (assuming it was used in a stronger gun) or would the case need strengthening?

from Variable: ...I believe the bolt gun crowd has stomped pretty hard on the AA/Lapua brass before, and it holds up pretty nicely...

The Grendel, I believe, is a morphed PPC with no changes to internal thickness at the base. Both Ramshot and Accurate list loads for the 20 PPC at 59,000 and 63,000 psi. So yes, folks can "stomp" on the case pretty hard and be OK in bolt guns and a properly designed MMG.

I am also overwhelmed by curiosity about how well the long-awaited steel cases would work under these higher pressures.

[Deezil]

16" barrel, 120grn Nosler, 28gr 8208xbr

Had them bounce from this to 2500

[ibgp3]

Is the mission too broad (anywhere in the world tomorrow),
...and the box too small (one [perfect] no, compromise, cartridge/rifle).

Don't send them to Alaska in Desert camo, or to the mountains with CQB weapons.

AR enthusiasts usually own more than one upper; should a combat soldier?

[JASmith]

Well stated!

[Tony Williams]

Is the mission too broad (anywhere in the world tomorrow),
...and the box too small (one [perfect] no, compromise, cartridge/rifle).

Don't send them to Alaska in Desert camo, or to the mountains with CQB weapons.

AR enthusiasts usually own more than one upper; should a combat soldier?

Problem is - you can never tell when the fighting ranges might suddenly switch from long range to close quarters and back again. As the recent PEO Soldier report on Battlefield Effectiveness put it, in writing about army rifles:

Ultimately, Army service rifles must be general purpose in nature and embody a series of tradeoffs that balance optimum performance for a wide range of possible missions in a range of operating environments. With global missions taking Soldiers from islands to mountains and jungles to deserts, the Army can’t buy 1.1 million new service rifles every time it’s called upon to operate in a different environment.

and:

Ultimately, the “best” weapon for an operator with a unique target set will not be the same weapon as the best weapon for a large Army facing a wide range of targets.

[txgunner00]

That's the beauty of 2 upper with of the same caliber but different lengths. The fighter would effectively be equipped with 2 rifles but without the weight of 2.

[Tony Williams]

That's the beauty of 2 upper with of the same caliber but different lengths. The fighter would effectively be equipped with 2 rifles but without the weight of 2.

You're searching a village so you fit the short barrel. Then you leave the village and come under fire from long range so you pause while you fit the long barrel. Then you begin to close with the enemy so you stop and fit the short barrel - only to come under long-range fire from a different location.

There's a very simple solution to all of this messing about - get a bullpup! You save about eight inches in overall length, which means that a bullpup with a 20 inch barrel will be about the same overall length as a traditional rifle with a 12 inch barrel.

[BluntForceTrauma]

First: Yes, the ballistics stated were no doubt for a 24" barrel, and not a 20" barrel. And don't let anybody say the 65G crowd is a bunch of lying, hyping S.O.B.s. We are hereby, with input from Mr. Alexander himself, making a public correction to that misinformation.

Second: The 65G case can handle higher pressures, but, as someone mentioned, the AR bolt is the weak link for long-term durability. My issue with increasing the pressure of the cartridge system has to do with recoil, and the amount of recoil the average recruit can handle. The beauty of 5.56 is what it gives relative to its light recoil.

The recoil of a high-pressure 65G MUST be mitigated by something like Jim Sullivan's "constant recoil" concept, or some such. And, yes, the longer bolt carrier travel of a constant recoil system would lend itself well to a bullpup design.

If they've worked out the recoil issues on the LWMMG .338NM concept, surely something for an assault rifle is not far behind.

John

[Variable]

There's a very simple solution to all of this messing about - get a bullpup! You save about eight inches in overall length, which means that a bullpup with a 20 inch barrel will be about the same overall length as a traditional rifle with a 12 inch barrel.

It's purported that Steyr is going to resurrect the AUG A3 in the US this year... There have been 7.62x39 conversions for the AUG clones before, so I'm going to keep tuned for the possibility of a Grendel. An AUG with an 18" barrel should be just a fraction of an inch longer than a Colt Commando (11.5" barrel) with the stock extended. Around 30.25" or so.


I've read that the AUG doesn't suppress very well, but there is supposedly a patch for it. I might make room for one in the stable depending upon how everything shakes out.

[ibgp3]

You're searching a village so you fit the short barrel. Then you leave the village and come under fire from long range so you pause while you fit the long barrel. Then you begin to close with the enemy so you stop and fit the short barrel - only to come under long-range fire from a different location.

There's a very simple solution to all of this messing about - get a bullpup! You save about eight inches in overall length, which means that a bullpup with a 20 inch barrel will be about the same overall length as a traditional rifle with a 12 inch barrel.

I would think more likely for a squad to end up 2 or 3 with CQB, one with glass, and the rest with standard configuration. The big advantage would be that everyone goes to the same box for ammo.

[Tony Williams]

I would think more likely for a squad to end up 2 or 3 with CQB, one with glass, and the rest with standard configuration. The big advantage would be that everyone goes to the same box for ammo.

But that would mean that only some of your squad would be effectively equipped for CQB, while the others would be the only ones effectively equipped for long-range engagements. So you would be reducing the effectiveness of the squad in both environments, compared to one with genuinely general-purpose rifles - short, but with long barrels.

[ibgp3]

Bull-pups have advantages. Are they a real possibility for adoption?

Specialized uppers could be in the field in 5.56 very quickly.
...but would there be any reason for specialized uppers in 5.56?

[Tony Williams]

Bull-pups have advantages. Are they a real possibility for adoption?

The US military has shown some interest in the Israeli Tavor before now (the controls match those of the AR-15 family), and at last month's NDIA meeting a US Army spokesman said that a requirement for a sub-compact weapon, between a pistol and the M4 carbine, would be brought forward within the next couple of years. The photo to illustrate this was a compact bullpup which looked very like the Tavor X95 special-forces carbine, so who knows?

[txgunner00]

Hmmmm. 6.5 AUG. Interesting... 600++ yd capable rifle in a SBR package.

[JASmith]

I would think more likely for a squad to end up 2 or 3 with CQB, one with glass, and the rest with standard configuration. The big advantage would be that everyone goes to the same box for ammo.

For Tony,

You are succeeding in drawing us out!

Ibgp3 makes sense. We cannot ask one soldier to perform all of the squad duties all of the time, which is why some carry grenade launchers, there is frequently a sharpshooter, and so on.

The notion of having two or more choices of upper to draw from while prepping for patrol allows the team to have their best estimate of the appropriate mix. This is more or less the best that can be done with the AR class of rifles.

As a squad, or even as a fire team, the unit is prepared to cover the ground (and surprises) you described a few posts earlier.

Regarding the question of bull pup vs AR frame, I don't (yet) have a good enough understanding of the issues to comment. Just lots of vague quesitons.