06-26-2011, 12:08 AM
Tony Williams Wrote:While I laud the motivation for carrying out such testing, I must draw attention to the recent ARDEC calibre study which may make it unnecessary.By 6.5 and 7.0mm, do you mean .264" and .284", or .257" and .277" bullet diameters? It appears to me that it's the latter, which would mean that what we refer to as 6.5mm (as in 6.5 Grendel) wasn't even part of the test.
The Army is keeping very quiet about this, but according to the info I am picking up, they did a thorough job. 5.6, 6.2, 6.5, 7.0 and 7.8mm projectiles were tested, each in two bullet styles (Barnes TSX and a "GP" bullet similar in design to M855A1 EPR) ranging in weights from 61 for the 5.6mm to 165 for the 7.8mm.
The 6.5 and 7.0 performance was superior across the board...
This seems to be corroborated by Gary Roberts, who wrote: "...the ARDEC caliber study that conclusively proves the superiority of .277" projectiles compared to smaller calibers..."
http://www.m4carbine.net/showpost.php?p=...stcount=96