6mmARC Military Application

[Jake TN]

I have no doubt that Hornady and several companies will support the 6mm ARC. I wouldn't put too much stock in the unspecified military unit. The 6.8, scar, h&k 416, several other weapon platforms were all claimed to be in use by military units. Most of the time that meant they were tested and one might sit in an armory of a sof unit and collecting dust. Various units in the military are constantly developing and testing a plethora of weapons to see if they fulfill a requirement. Most sit on a rack and collect dust. I can remember when everyone thought that sof was using hk416. None of the shooters ever used them. They all used 10.5 DD SBR with a surfire suppressor. Some may carry various lengths depending on their role, but nothing crazy. That might have changed now, but the large scale adoption of a new caliber and platform isn't something that happens overnight and without substantial amount of testing. Unfortunately, a lot of money gets wasted by the good idea fairies.

With all that being said, I personally think that the 6mm is the perfect diameter bullet to maximize the potential of the AR 15 platform. Whether or not the military entity adopts and uses it does not dimish that. The big army, marine corps, and white sof units will not be changing away from their current rifle platforms for a long time. I think a mainstream 6mm ar round that is supported by several well known companies is going to be well received in market if the price is right and the production capacity is there.

[Valjean]

Current polymer technology does not allow Magpul to make a magazine with walls strong enough for the fatter Grendel case and still fit within a standard AR mag well.

Word on the street...Amend2 solved this challenge. The Grendel Polymer Mag should be out in a few weeks

[VASCAR2]

Even if Amend2 brings a 6.5 Grendel mag to the market their design utilizes a single side feed with ten round capacity. I just don’t see the Amend2 mag as having any significant bearing on the popularity of the 6 MM ARC with the Mil/LE customers. Part of the problem with the 6.5 Grendel magazines is a quality control problem. My ASC magazines work but I had to tweak one mags feed lip to get it to function. All three 6.5 Grendel magazine suppliers (ASC E-L and CPD) have had QC issues.

I think a quality stainless steel magazine can be produced for the 6 MM ARC/6.5 Grendel but there needs to be significant profits for a major player to get interested.

[LRRPF52]

I have no doubt that Hornady and several companies will support the 6mm ARC. I wouldn't put too much stock in the unspecified military unit. The 6.8, scar, h&k 416, several other weapon platforms were all claimed to be in use by military units. Most of the time that meant they were tested and one might sit in an armory of a sof unit and collecting dust. Various units in the military are constantly developing and testing a plethora of weapons to see if they fulfill a requirement. Most sit on a rack and collect dust. I can remember when everyone thought that sof was using hk416. None of the shooters ever used them. They all used 10.5 DD SBR with a surfire suppressor. Some may carry various lengths depending on their role, but nothing crazy. That might have changed now, but the large scale adoption of a new caliber and platform isn't something that happens overnight and without substantial amount of testing. Unfortunately, a lot of money gets wasted by the good idea fairies.

With all that being said, I personally think that the 6mm is the perfect diameter bullet to maximize the potential of the AR 15 platform. Whether or not the military entity adopts and uses it does not dimish that. The big army, marine corps, and white sof units will not be changing away from their current rifle platforms for a long time. I think a mainstream 6mm ar round that is supported by several well known companies is going to be well received in market if the price is right and the production capacity is there.

Hk416 has been in use for many years now.







Mk.18 CQBR Block II uppers included handguards from DD, but most of the critical components are Colt, like the upper, barrel, BCG, gas tube, etc.

SCAR-Hs and SCAR-Ls have been adopted into the Arms Rooms of multiple units across SOCOM, including AFSOC, USASOC, NAVSOC, and MARSOC, though support for them in the long-term has been under dispute.

Hornady isn't going to take a cartridge to the market and claim it was for a DoD unit if it wasn't true. Tom Beckstrand made a video talking about all of this recently. He used to be A Co Commander in 3-325 AIR when I was there before he went SF, and we've talked at-length at SHOT over dinner regarding certain things in the market. Very knowledgeable guy with some of the best articles on optics you will ever find in the gun industry. He's a straight-shooter who doesn't get into the marketing hype campaigns you often see.

6mm ARC isn't meant to be a large-scale adoption of a new cartridge, just a specific request for the DoD entity that has been wanting a lightweight, long-range capable AR15-based system that has all the reach they need over 5.56, without having to lug around 7.62 NATO or .260 Rem SR25s.

Hornady has also done small project special ammunition design for DoD units in the past, like they did with the 6x35 PDW that went into the Knight's Armament KAC PDW.

There was another effort to make a 6x45mm SAW M16 back in the 1970s that escapes most people's tracking of the AR15 development over the years. That was primarily meant for the new LMG SAW, not rifles, but there was an odd AR15 they cut and welded the receivers on to make it large enough for the magazine to fire 6x45mm SAW.



This delivers 6x45mm SAW performance without having to modify the receiver set.

[BluntForceTrauma]

Googled some 6x45mm SAW info and note that its 105gr bullet achieved 2410 fps from a 14.5" barrel and 2550 fps from a 20" barrel.

So, if the 6mmARC achieves those velocities, we're doing pretty good in terms of an analog to a military cartridge studied, designed, and ready for combat.

[Fess]

If you look at the picture of the 6mm SAW bullet, it is not terribly sleek by todays standard. The curve of the ogive stops well before the bullet enters the case. I am under the impression that the cartridge was optimized for the long tracer round rather than the ball round. This would make sense because it was to be used SAW, and the tracer would be used as an aiming guide. On the other hand, this means that the ball rounds would have reduced performance. It is very difficult to impossible to get a standard tracer to follow the trajectory of a sleek, high BC bullet.
A tracer may not be developed for the 6mm ARC, or if one is, it will be an OWL (one-way luminescence) round that essentially has a brightly glowing base. I will be surprised if it will be possible to see a 6mm OWL trace at long distance without a scope or binoculars and possibly night vision.

[LRRPF52]

Googled some 6x45mm SAW info and note that its 105gr bullet achieved 2410 fps from a 14.5" barrel and 2550 fps from a 20" barrel.

So, if the 6mmARC achieves those velocities, we're doing pretty good in terms of an analog to a military cartridge studied, designed, and ready for combat.

6mm ARC seems to add 150fps mv over the 6x45 SAW. 6mm SAW should have been the cartridge we adopted for the SAW and a mid-sized AR15/AR10-based Semi Auto DM rifle.

We had the institutional knowledge at the time to have supported such a cartridge mix, but the .30 caliber nazis won out. There were some scare tactics articles back in the 1980s where they were talking about replacing the M60 with 5.56 NATO SAWs, but a 6mm SAW M249 would have been ballistically superior to the M60 and far easier to carry and employ.

It's kinda funny and sad to look back at successful and combat-proven small bore cartridges since the US military already had experience with the 6mm Lee Navy from the late 1800s-1900, where it was instrumental in repelling hordes of attackers in Peiking during the Boxer Rebellion in 1900. It was also instrumental in allowing considerable combat endurance/persistence in the Spanish American War in Cuba, where Marines did not need to resupply even after their ship-based logistics chains were cut off. I've seen articles talk about a 180-220rd combat load that was still very lightweight.

[OneHitWonder]

Magazines have historically been hard to get right...

Word on the street...Amend2 solved this challenge. The Grendel Polymer Mag should be out in a few weeks

Amend2 released the 10rd mags.

http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthrea...post262172


I posted a thread that the military was looking to switch to 6.5 Grendel uppers. The mods locked my thread, calling it click bait. Well I was right in posting that.

The 6arc is the response to testing. They wanted less recoil than Grendel. The 6arc was developed to keep the scope on target for quick follow up shots.

[biodsl]

I would think that a 10 round magazine would be a non-starter in a semi-auto military rifle.

[A5BLASTER]

Amend2 released the 10rd mags.

http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthrea...post262172


I posted a thread that the military was looking to switch to 6.5 Grendel uppers. The mods locked my thread, calling it click bait. Well I was right in posting that.

The 6arc is the response to testing. They wanted less recoil than Grendel. The 6arc was developed to keep the scope on target for quick follow up shots.

My understand of what hornady said is. The military unit tested grendel but it didn't give them the down rage ballistics they needed. So hornady developed the 6mm ARC to achieve the needed goal.

They never said anything about recoil.

The amend2 mag is cool and all but it's hardly earth shattering and I'm with biods.

No military unit is worrying about having a 10 round mag.

[OneHitWonder]

My understand of what hornady said is. The military unit tested grendel but it didn't give them the down rage ballistics they needed. So hornady developed the 6mm ARC to achieve the needed goal.

They never said anything about recoil.

The amend2 mag is cool and all but it's hardly earth shattering and I'm with biods.

No military unit is worrying about having a 10 round mag.

I never even implied the amend2 was for the military.

The reduced recoil is a DOD requirement.


The aim of the new round and rifles is to provide a weapon with increased energy and greater long-range performance over 5.56x45mm without having to shift to a larger, heavier rifle such as an AR-10. The round was developed to produce recoil light enough to enable rapid follow-up shots. Check out Will’s earlier article for more detail on the round here.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thefire...ogram/amp/

Can you keep your 10x scoped 6.5 Grendel on target to see hits at 500yards+?

Also i posted that article in a thread that got locked by more. I am finding this web site quite hostile. I hope a 6arc forum pops up done by someone else.

[A5BLASTER]

I never even implied the amend2 was for the military.

The reduced recoil is a DOD requirement.


The aim of the new round and rifles is to provide a weapon with increased energy and greater long-range performance over 5.56x45mm without having to shift to a larger, heavier rifle such as an AR-10. The round was developed to produce recoil light enough to enable rapid follow-up shots. Check out Will’s earlier article for more detail on the round here.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thefire...ogram/amp/

Can you keep your 10x scoped 6.5 Grendel on target to see hits at 500yards+?

Also i posted that article in a thread that got locked by more. I am finding this web site quite hostile. I hope a 6arc forum pops up done by someone else.

Yea as a matter of fact I can watch bullet impacts on steel at 500 and 600 yards in my scope. Even when shooting my 129 ablr handloads.

I can even pick up the vaportrail when on 10x of my 4.5x27 powered scope.

There is a 6mm ARC fourm of sorts. There is a 6mm ARC Facebook page. But pike most things facebook good luck.

Your correct they wanted reduced recoil compared to 7.62x51. Nowwheres in there does it say they wanted reduced recoil for better picking up round impacts compared to grendel.

Also what your first post took out of context is the wordage on reduced recoil was not top priority of this rounds development.

But you worded and stated it as such over the 6.5mm grendel.

So that's what I responded too.

If your feeling like your getting hostile response, perhaps it's because your wordage of your post?

We all can be a bit touch at times nobody is perfect less alone me. But this fourm is very well known for its gentleman like conduct.

[OneHitWonder]

Yea as a matter of fact I can watch bullet impacts on steel at 500 and 600 yards in my scope. Even when shooting my 129 ablr handloads.

I can even pick up the vaportrail when on 10x of my 4.5x27 powered scope.

There is a 6mm ARC fourm of sorts. There is a 6mm ARC Facebook page. But pike most things facebook good luck.

Your correct they wanted reduced recoil compared to 7.62x51. Nowwheres in there does it say they wanted reduced recoil for better picking up round impacts compared to grendel.

Also what your first post took out of context is the wordage on reduced recoil was not top priority of this rounds development.

But you worded and stated it as such over the 6.5mm grendel.

So that's what I responded too.

If your feeling like your getting hostile response, perhaps it's because your wordage of your post?

We all can be a bit touch at times nobody is perfect less alone me. But this fourm is very well known for its gentleman like conduct.

As you can see from the graph above, the 6mm ARC has better trajectory but the 6.5 Grendel has better energy – but not much. In fact, the jump in energy from 223/5.56 to 6mm ARC is more than the jump again to 6.5 Grendel.
It’s tough to pick a “winner” here without knowing your situation. If you already have a 6.5 Grendel or you want the most energy, then it’s probably 6.5 Grendel for you. However, if you’re looking at both to consider and you like the idea of low recoil and long range performance with more efficient bullets, you should get a 6mm ARC.

https://gununiversity.com/6mm-arc-review/


Less recoil than 6.5 Grendel.

[A5BLASTER]

As you can see from the graph above, the 6mm ARC has better trajectory but the 6.5 Grendel has better energy – but not much. In fact, the jump in energy from 223/5.56 to 6mm ARC is more than the jump again to 6.5 Grendel.
It’s tough to pick a “winner” here without knowing your situation. If you already have a 6.5 Grendel or you want the most energy, then it’s probably 6.5 Grendel for you. However, if you’re looking at both to consider and you like the idea of low recoil and long range performance with more efficient bullets, you should get a 6mm ARC.

https://gununiversity.com/6mm-arc-review/


Less recoil than 6.5 Grendel.

Yes that's some gun writer talking.

I'm talking about what hornady and the DoD unit spec'd it for.

Your first post took things out of context and you worded it to sound like they designed it from the get go to have less recoil then grendel.

When infact they was never a design aspec. True it's going to have less recoil, it's shooting a lighter bullet then say the typical 123 weight class grendels typically shoot.

I'm talking about what hornady and the DoD unit spec'd. Grendel was never in that list.

[OneHitWonder]

Yes that's some gun writer talking.

I'm talking about what hornady and the DoD unit spec'd it for.

Your first post took things out of context and you worded it to sound like they designed it from the get go to have less recoil then grendel.

When infact they was never a design aspec. True it's going to have less recoil, it's shooting a lighter bullet then say the typical 123 weight class grendels typically shoot.

I'm talking about what hornady and the DoD unit spec'd. Grendel was never in that list.

We can speculate because the DOD did not release the specs for the order. We have rumors of replacing the 5.56 uppers with Grendel from 2017. We have rumors of SF using grendels in Afghanistan.

The we have the facts. Recoil is at least 20% lighter with the 108gn 6arc than the 123gn Grendel.

[JASmith]

We can speculate because the DOD did not release the specs for the order. We have rumors of replacing the 5.56 uppers with Grendel from 2017. We have rumors of SF using grendels in Afghanistan.

The we have the facts. Recoil is at least 20% lighter with the 108gn 6arc than the 123gn Grendel.

...and is darned near equal when a 107 gr SMK is used.

Thr Grendel recoil is already low enough that it is not an issue.

The major factor is wind drift reduction over both the Grendel and the .308. Drop is also better, but a secondary factor.

[Sinclair]

War is a fluid and evolutionary business. History has taught us that those that do not adjust, adapt, and overcome the changes on the battlefield will pay the price in the blood of its soldiers. Whatever the reasons for change today will likely be different tomorrow. Right now the emphasis is on Afghanistan where the DA and the long ranges require better long range performance than the current rife/ammo combo. We need to solve the current problem while not limiting possible future requirements too much. Just my two cents worth. Until someone nails down just what the new weapon/ammunition is supposed to accomplish, we are just grasping at straws.

[LR1955]

I never even implied the amend2 was for the military.

The reduced recoil is a DOD requirement.


The aim of the new round and rifles is to provide a weapon with increased energy and greater long-range performance over 5.56x45mm without having to shift to a larger, heavier rifle such as an AR-10. The round was developed to produce recoil light enough to enable rapid follow-up shots. Check out Will’s earlier article for more detail on the round here.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thefire...ogram/amp/

Can you keep your 10x scoped 6.5 Grendel on target to see hits at 500yards+?

Also i posted that article in a thread that got locked by more. I am finding this web site quite hostile. I hope a 6arc forum pops up done by someone else.

OK:

I have had enough out of you.

We locked your thread because another one existed and historically we found this to be too confusing for our members.

Bill Waites spent some of his time politely responding to you back channel yet you call this web site hostile?

If you find the Grendel Forum to be hostile you should go somewhere else.

LR55

[OneHitWonder]

OK:

I have had enough out of you.

We locked your thread because another one existed and historically we found this to be too confusing for our members.

Bill Waites spent some of his time politely responding to you back channel yet you call this web site hostile?

If you find the Grendel Forum to be hostile you should go somewhere else.

LR55

This was posted before the back channel chat.

[LR1955]

This was posted before the back channel chat.

Roger.

Back to business.