Posts
The author hates the AR because of its gas system. Um, show me a Grendel gun that's not based on the AR.
The 6.8 is better than an M4, but it doesn't fit in an AR magazine. Really?
 |
| Which one is the 5.56 magazine? |
He impugns the M249 in his article too. While advocating the 6.5 he's also forgetting that there hasn't been any belt fed development of the round. Bill Alexander has openly stated that he wasn't interested in that road and gave no consideration for accommodating links.
In all honesty, he gets one thing right while not realizing it. To really fix the problem, you're going to have to issue a whole new weapon, not one derived from and compatible with the M16 family. A totally new round with totally new magazines and belts in a totally new rifle and SAW are what is needed. Designing them together would be the ideal way to do it. Being constrained by the dimensions of the M16 magazine is a severe limiter on developing a new cartridge. It makes a lot of economic sense for commercial sales to we armchair heroes, but they are a kludge at best for an issue infantry rifle.
I saw that article on Ace of Spades. Pretty sure I also saw it on ARF com. I thought Grendel used a weak ass 7.62x39 bolt.
ReplyDeleteI can spot the 6.8 mag. I know your system, and have a pile of similar mags at home.
Belt fed 6.8.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5Gfho2qtwY
Grendel uses a dimensionally identical bolt to the 7.62x39, but Alexander uses different processes to make them stronger, either heat treat or material and he was mum about specifics last time I looked. Using a x39 bolt with 6.5 is highly not-recommended, but lots of people are getting away with it; and quite a few didn't.
ReplyDelete6.8 removed enough material for me. Besides, I have enough trouble with the pissing matches between 300 BLK and 6.8 freaks to get into the whole Grendel/6.8 fight. Or 264 LBC.
ReplyDeleteHow dare you refuse to idiotically and immovably take an irrational dogmatic position?
ReplyDeleteHow DARE you, Sir!
The 6.5 fan base is actually what put me with the 6.8 in the first place. Tam said it best, "[Its] fans are such a bunch of goddam furries, trolling the 'nets for any mention of "6.8SPC" so they can start a caliber war, that I wouldn't be caught dead with a 6.5 upper even if it was a frickin' death ray. ;)"
I'd consider the .300 but the last thing I need is yet another caliber around here. Thankfully the .300 peeps seemed to have watched the interminable 6.5v6.8 debates that make the Glock v 1911 discussions seem rational and sane and decided that perhaps they'll just quietly enjoy their round.
Not that the 6.8 crowd is much better about certain issues. I have it in my head to make an 11.5" upper in 6.8. Try finding that barrel. When you ask about it you get lectures on why you don't want a carbine gas system and/or a short barrel. Dude, it's my damn toy, lemme play how I want.