Quote:
Originally Posted by k9870
I believe intermediate cartridges are the way to go, 308 recoils too ahrd for close range full auto, 556 just can't make the long shots. 6.5/6.8 cartridges are looking promising. The AR is over hyped, I have freinds who were told the m16 is the ultimate rifle all through basic and hate the thing. One was told an m4 with ACOG is a better DMR than an m21  |
Funny I have a buddy who owns a G3A3 and at 50 yards he can put two ten round bursts across a human torso target and at 100 yards( in which about 80% of recorded firefights happen) he can put three seven round bursts across three human torso sized targets. The only time he has had trouble with controling a 7.62X51mm NATO weapon is when he fires his HK-21E from the shoulder. In that case the weapon is question has been cronographed at 1,100 rounds per minute...ie, it makes a MAC-10 look tame.
As for the 5.56X45mm While I have relatives who used the Armalite in Oman and Yemen and found the range to be lacking due to the fact that in those area's you did get 1,000m plus engagement distances. My friends in Iraq and Afganistan have sucessfully engaged hostiles at 500m plus with M-16A2s with a Colt Factory 3.5 optic mounted on the carry handle. Basically the 5.56X45mm has had 50 or so years to grow up and work. Heck Jeff Cooper's Apollo Challange was done with a custom Rifle loaded with .223 Remington ammo.
If you are unfamiliar with that challange it was to fire twenty rounds in twenty seconds into a twenty inch circle at 1,000 yards. It was done a couple of years back by a custom AR-15 maker. He said he used the .223 as anything else that had the reach had too much recoil to place everything in that twenty inch circle.
As for the 6.5 Alexander round and the 6.8X43mm SPC. the 6.5mm is not being marketed as a tactical round and the 6.8X43 mm has even more long ranged wind drift than either the 7.62mm NATO or the 5.56mm NATO. That does mean something when one is fighting in mountains and deserts.