How could or should the 6.5 mm Grendel be improved?

[Michael]

Cory - I disagree. The 5.56 is not sub-standard – may not be the best, but it is not sub-standard. I did some research on this in ’04 direction of HQMC for a bunch who thought that the round was underpowered/unable to stop the bad guys. What I found was SHOT PLACEMENT MATTERS, or as you said, being a marksman. There was some discussion that using the M855 ammo against an enemy who was not wearing body armor was not very effective, hence the eventual development of the Mk 318 SOST. There was an abundance of first hand, verified accounts of Marine rifle men getting one shot, one kill with the 5.56 rounds at 400-600m in the research I conducted. Mainly attributed to the RCO/ACOG (also remember one case of a soldier with the 2d BCT taking targets out at about 500m with open sights), but in each case, shot placement mattered .

You are correct, the Marine Corps is smaller than the Army, hence it does not have the budget for independent R&D to the extent of the Army. Like it or not, what the Army has, we will also. I do not believe that the DOD/DOA/DON will ever have rifles for the rifleman that are sub MOA. It is cost prohibitive.

Are there better rounds? Probably. Are there better weapons systems? Again, probably. Are we, the U.S. military, in danger of losing a war because of our primary assault weapon/battle rifle? I doubt it. Some tactically incompetent General Officer or politician will cause that.