How could or should the 6.5 mm Grendel be improved?

[cory]

...The point that woohoo made is that neither of those two cartridges offers sufficient performance to replace 7.62 NATO for infantry machine guns.

Even LRRPF52 thinks that 6.5 Grendel would need to be modified for this purpose by greatly increasing chamber pressure, and thereby boosting muzzle velocity.

Here's our issue, y'all want to replace the Platoon and Mounted LMGs the 240 Gulf. If that's the case I tend to agree with LRRPF52, but why are we concerning ourselves with that here. That LMG and dismounted Infantry weapons using the same round makes no sense, at least to me.

I thought we were talking about replacing the squad level LMG the SAW. The Grendel seems perfect for that LMG.

Yes, I agree that objective requirements for performance are a must, and comparison to 7.62 NATO performance seems the logical approach.
I agree, but what you're and most of these threads have been discussing is a meet or exceed comparison. I disagree there. Now if you want to do a meet or exceeds comparison with the best rounds expected from our enemies to the Grendel and the NATO 7.62. Then use that data to determine if the Grendel surpasses the enemy's capability to a magnitude comparable to the NATO 7.62. There I think is a resonable discussion.

- Would 6.5 Grendel provide the same or better terminal effects at all ranges as 7.62x51, using the same type bullets?
No, no bullet smaller than the 7.62X51 will do this, while saving weight and reducing recoil.

- Would 6.5 Grendel with Ball ammo (not Scenar match bullets) deliver the same or better trajectory and wind drift as 7.62x51 Ball?
Maybe, worth looking into.

- Would 6.5 Grendel with Ball ammo (not Scenar match bullets) deliver the same or better grazing fire capability as 7.62x51 Ball?
Define grazing fire capability please. If you're asking can it effectively impact dirt at the same distance. Very likely.

- Would 6.5 Grendel Tracer rounds be visible to the same distance as 7.62x51 Tracer?
Unless we're trying to replace the 240 Gulf I think this is a mute point.

These are valid concerns.

We're just not going to be able to have our cake and eat it too. There's no magical bullet that'll do all the things the 7.62 can while reducing weight and recoil. At least not with current smokeless powder technology. There has to be trade offs.