Testing, testing...

[stanc]

Stan: What is it you are trying to prove or disprove?

Gene, I stated that in post #1. For years we've discussed the idea that 6.5 Grendel has good enough performance to replace 5.56 and 7.62 NATO. I'd like to see some test data that either validates or negates the theory.

As for other questions. SASS and SDMR are only names. What specific technology do these possess that other rifles don't? You specified SASS and SDMR so define them so I can tell if I have the same technology in my rifles.

In post #3 I provided links to descriptions of the SASS and SDMR. If you want more detailed info, I don't have it.

State the specific size and shape of the target.

Head and torso silhouette. Exact type doesn't matter.

What type of target material? Steel is unreliable at distance so paper should be used.

Okay.

Define a hit? If it is anywere on the paper or must be in a kill zone of some size.

Anywhere on the target.

What specific distances? Sorry but you have to be specific in the distances as again, how a shooter approaches the situation depends on distances.

I didn't list a specific distance, because not all shooters will have access to 1000-yard firing ranges.

What is your time limit for the 20 rounds slow fire?

I'd think that would depend on the distance to the target. Whatever is appropriate, as long as it's the same for each caliber.

Under what environmental conditions would you consider the test to be valid?

Under any environmental conditions that you feel like shooting in.

P.S. I've revised post #2, the infantry rifle comparison, and added the purpose of each test to posts #2-4.