Opinions on 6.8 spc

[rnish]

Federal is opening a line just to make 6.8....something like a million+ rounds per year. Also Magpul is going to/is making 6.8 stuff. They got a contract from the Saudi's. The price of 6.8 should come down in 2013.

 

[swinokur]

I'm not sure 300 Blackout will go away. It is a .30 caliber round that can be chambered in an 5.56 receiver and uses the same mags as an AR15/M4. Good compatibility. You can shoot it suppressed or unsuppressed. Plinking ammo can be had for 55-60 cents a round. SAAMI now has accepted it so it's a legit caliber IMHO. If you decide you don't want to keep it, a barrel swap will put you back in the standard AR caliber.

It may do better than some predict. In To be completely transparent, I do own a DD M4V5 300 Blackout. Fine rifle.

 

[Wayne1one]

Federal is opening a line just to make 6.8....something like a million+ rounds per year. Also Magpul is going to/is making 6.8 stuff. They got a contract from the Saudi's. The price of 6.8 should come down in 2013.

This sounds great!! can you provide a link to the source of this info?

 

[Half-cocked]

6.8spc - all the performance of 7.62x39, at only 4X the cost.

 

[nyc71]

I love mine, I would not recommend this caliber for plinking or if you're not planning to reload it. I buy the bullets in bulk mainly the Barnes 85 mpg for mag dump. I suggest you visit 68forums.com.

 

[sailskidrive]

5 years ago the forums were all ablaze w/ talk of the 6.8SPC, two years ago it was piston ARs, now it's the 300BLK.

Personally, I'm a 260 Rem AR fan.

 

[booker]

My opinion, it's ammo manufacturers trying to increase profits. There are many "shills" trying to sell this round to the Army, claiming deficiencies of the 5.56 offerings. Their arguments are weak and based on false precedent.

IMO, the .300 Blackout is an excellent compliment if you need greater flexibility, especially if you intend to go suppressed. If range is what you're after, get a dedicated .308, .50, .338, etc. I just feel the 6.X offerings have muddied the waters without giving the majority of shooters the benefits they would want.

 

[Forest]

Title says it all, guys...

Hopefully one or two of you here have some experience with 6.8 spc and can give me your impression of the performance. Is it a practical goal to shoot for getting a rifle in this caliber, or will it be prohibitive in some way, like cost or availability?

Any input is welcome, thanks in advance

I've been loading and shooting this cartridge for many years now (ETA: staring around 2004-2005).

It's a great cartridge, very accurate, hard hitting, very easy to load with a wide variety of bullets to select from.

If you're looking to hunt Deer or Hogs with your AR-15 this IS the caliber of choice. It's taken Elk out to 400 yards, and one guy even took a polar bear with 6.8 (though I WOULD NOT recommend doing so).

Hunting ammo for the 6.8 costs the same (or less) than hunting ammo for 5.56 or 7.62x51/.308.

For a combat cartridge it creates larger wounds than 5.56 or 7.62x39 and it's great at defeating barriers.

It's a fantastic round for SBRs as it keeps a much larger percentage of it's MV compared to 5.56 when cut down.

Now the downsides.
Realistically you'll need a second set of magazines as standard 5.56 magazines only feed 5-7 rounds at best. The better 6.8 magazines (like PRI) run around $40 each. The CP magazines are cheaper (in the mid $20s) but IMHO are not built as sturdily and don't allow the same load length as the PRIs. But if all you're doing is shooting off-the-shelf ammo the CPs will work for you.

Practice/Plinking ammo is more expensive than the common military calibers, and brass is more expensive than 5.56 (but cheaper than 7.62x39 for some reason). Most of us 6.8 shooters get around the expensive plinking ammo by rolling our own (it helps) or switching to a 5.56 upper for practice.

The cartridge is not for everyone, not is it what I'd select if all you wanted to do is punch paper/tin cans. But if you're looking for something that offers more than the 'traditionals' in an AR-15 sized package it's worth the look.

 

[Semper Noctem]

I've been loading and shooting this cartridge for many years now (ETA: staring around 2004-2005).

It's a great cartridge, very accurate, hard hitting, very easy to load with a wide variety of bullets to select from.

If you're looking to hunt Deer or Hogs with your AR-15 this IS the caliber of choice. It's taken Elk out to 400 yards, and one guy even took a polar bear with 6.8 (though I WOULD NOT recommend doing so).

Hunting ammo for the 6.8 costs the same (or less) than hunting ammo for 5.56 or 7.62x51/.308.

For a combat cartridge it creates larger wounds than 5.56 or 7.62x39 and it's great at defeating barriers.

It's a fantastic round for SBRs as it keeps a much larger percentage of it's MV compared to 5.56 when cut down.

Now the downsides.
Realistically you'll need a second set of magazines as standard 5.56 magazines only feed 5-7 rounds at best. The better 6.8 magazines (like PRI) run around $40 each. The CP magazines are cheaper (in the mid $20s) but IMHO are not built as sturdily and don't allow the same load length as the PRIs. But if all you're doing is shooting off-the-shelf ammo the CPs will work for you.

Practice/Plinking ammo is more expensive than the common military calibers, and brass is more expensive than 5.56 (but cheaper than 7.62x39 for some reason). Most of us 6.8 shooters get around the expensive plinking ammo by rolling our own (it helps) or switching to a 5.56 upper for practice.

The cartridge is not for everyone, not is it what I'd select if all you wanted to do is punch paper/tin cans. But if you're looking for something that offers more than the 'traditionals' in an AR-15 sized package it's worth the look.

I didnt think you were still alive! Where have you been kind sir?

 

[Forest]

My opinion, it's ammo manufacturers trying to increase profits. There are many "shills" trying to sell this round to the Army, claiming deficiencies of the 5.56 offerings. Their arguments are weak and based on false precedent.
.

The round was DEVELOPED by 'the Army' 5th Special Forces group (MSG Steve Holland ) to be exact, with input and interest from the AMU.

They recogonized a need and built the cartridge to solve the problems they perceived with 5.56.

 

[Forest]

I didnt think you were still alive! Where have you been kind sir?

LOL busy. I've had a project at work that has been keeping my attention and what spare time I have has been at another forum where I mod a couple of it's tech areas (to include AR-15 caliber variants).

 

[Forest]

5 years ago the forums were all ablaze w/ talk of the 6.8SPC, two years ago it was piston ARs, now it's the 300BLK.

Personally, I'm a 260 Rem AR fan.

There have been many great calibers to come out over the last 5 years.

The .300 BLK is one of them, and the 6.5 Grendle has seen it's popularity rise now that it's a SAAMI cartridge.

Piston ARs, however, are still the devil.

 

[Semper Noctem]

There have been many great calibers to come out over the last 5 years.

The .300 BLK is one of them, and the 6.5 Grendle has seen it's popularity rise now that it's a SAAMI cartridge.

Piston ARs, however, are still the devil.

 

[BradMacc82]

Well, you'll be glad to hear I sold mine then.


Built a 300BLK with a Noveske barrel with the profits.

 

[Forest]

Well, you'll be glad to hear I sold mine then.


Built a 300BLK with a Noveske barrel with the profits.

Niiice! On both counts.

 

[BradMacc82]

Niiice! On both counts.

Thank you, Lord Chad had a hand in this build, and I love how this thing runs - like clockwork.

Still developing a good handload, but I've already gotten a 1.18" 3-shot group out of it so far. I missed DI, so nice and smooth.

Gratuitous pic -

View attachment 67170

 

[Forest]

Thank you, Lord Chad had a hand in this build, and I love how this thing runs - like clockwork.

Still developing a good handload, but I've already gotten a 1.18" 3-shot group out of it so far. I missed DI, so nice and smooth.

Gratuitous pic -

View attachment 67170

Sweet! That a YHM Phantom mount for their .30 cal can?

 

[BradMacc82]

Sweet! That a YHM Phantom mount for their .30 cal can?

Yes sir, in time, there will be a YHM can on there - gotta keep saving up for it though.

 

[booker]

The round was DEVELOPED by 'the Army' 5th Special Forces group (MSG Steve Holland ) to be exact, with input and interest from the AMU.

They recogonized a need and built the cartridge to solve the problems they perceived with 5.56.

Exactly, perceived is the key word.

Developed by a unit is not developed by the Army. Developed by the Army means it was under direction of the Secretary of the Army, through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology. When individual units start to develop their own kit it drives up costs (taxpayer dollars) and creates a mess for the acquisition, procurement, budget, and logistics folks. It also raises issues of Anti-Deficiency Act violations, as operational units are not authorized nor are their funds appropriated for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation activities. Filling a perceived capability gap with a new development when there are potential alternatives available, that should at least be considered through appropriate formal channels such as operational needs statements. I would enjoy reading the rationale behind the 5th SF having urgent missions so unique from every other unit throughout the DoD that they just had to have their own specific munition to get it done.

If I'm not mistaken, the initial direction and funding actually came out of JSOC and while Remington was in the game for manufacture, there were a couple veterans (including Holland) who had their wives start a Vet/Woman-owned (and therefore preferred) company to build the uppers and magazines. Follow the money and there are some murky waters along the way.

 

[Forest]

Exactly, perceived is the key word.

Except that there is nothing 'perceived' about the improved terminal performance of teh 6.8, and there was an identified issue with the weak terminal performance of 5.56 after passing through barriers (heck 5.56 has issues with some common barriers - which is why it's so great for CQB).

Developed by a unit is not developed by the Army. Developed by the Army means it was under direction of the Secretary of the Army, through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology.

Developed by the army means built designed/built by units of the Army - just like the SPR program.

When individual units start to develop their own kit it drives up costs

When Army paperpushers and program politics get involved costs get raised. You won't find a lower cost program than the one that developed the 6.8. It was designed and developed on a shoe string budges with plenty of 'volunteer time'. Soldiers have a long history of 'problem solving' when they feel it's their ass on the line or they see an problem that is not being addressed.

[qutoe]and creates a mess for the acquisition, procurement, budget, and logistics folks.[/quote]
And here is the real crux of the issue - it's not what is best for the warfighter - it's what is causing a PITA for the paperpushers back home. We see the same issue with the aluminum magazine vs the PMAG. It wasn't about what was best for the trigger pullers, but what made the logisticians look bad.

Filling a perceived capability gap with a new development when there are potential alternatives available,

Hence the problem - there were no potential alternatives available. 5.56 had the range and accuracy but M855 and Mk262 a bit to be desired with terminal performance and barrier penetration - and 7.62x39 not only has reliablity issues with the AR platform but lacks the range & accuracy the soldiers needed.

. I would enjoy reading the rationale behind the 5th SF having urgent missions so unique from every other unit throughout the DoD that they just had to have their own specific munition to get it done.

Their problems weren't unique - they were just unique in having personel capable and willing to do the work. It's not like other groups have not tried out other calibers and/or weapons when they had a need (HK 416 ring a bell?)

If I'm not mistaken, the initial direction and funding actually came out of JSOC

The intial project came from the Enhanced Rifle Cartridge program which was a SOCOM thing - I don't know if the funding was JSOC or the unit.

and while Remington was in the game for manufacture

Remmington came after the development was done. Somebody was needed to mass produce ammo and the case was based on one of their rounds (the .30 Remmington).

there were a couple veterans (including Holland) who had their wives start a Vet/Woman-owned (and therefore preferred) company to build the uppers and magazines.

Way to smear a man who served his country. Care to name the company?

Because the companies that were producing uppers & magazines at that time were Barrett (you know the people that make those neat .50BMG rifles) and PRI (which has been in business since 1979) - which of these companies were setup by those soldiers to make uppers and magazines?

Follow the money and there are some murky waters along the way.

Yep and I see the lots of guys at the Pentagon, Picatinny, and other places taking issue with 'mere soldiers' out performing them (with a beter moustrap and for far less money).

Same thing with the M855A1 vs the Mk318 - the Marines had already developed the Mk318 (and it cost less). When the M855A1 (first attempt failed badley the 'powers that be' pressed for more development money and time to perfect the round). When the Army trigger pullers could have been using the superior Mk318, they were waiting on an improved/more costly/(and let's not forget 'green') M855A1.

Follow the money indeed - don't forget about protecting fiefdoms