6.8 SPC shortcomings - Shooting Sports Forum


Rifles Misc All rifles not covered elsewhere!

Like Tree7Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-19-2010, 17:11   #1
Full Member
 
SevenMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Woods of Wisconsin
Posts: 411
6.8 SPC shortcomings

Does anyone else feel like Remington or whoever developed the 6.8 didn't quite hit it?

I was looking into a 20" AR in 6.8 for some medium range hunting and long range shooting. After scoping out all the different bullet options, the best BC I came up with was .370. So at normal velocities the 6.8 would struggle to stay supersonic past 700 yards.

Don't you think an 87 grain 6mm bullet would have been a much better choice?

I pretty much trashed the whole 6.8 idea. While it would be GREAT for medium range hunting, the short and stubby bullet doesn't do too well at long range.

Imagine an 87 grain 6mm (.243) A-max moving at 2900 FPS! Now that would have been an improvement.

Last edited by SevenMM; 03-19-2010 at 18:40.
SevenMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2010, 17:33   #2
Odd Pachyderm thingy
 
Mr. Snuffalupagus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: someplace sunny
Posts: 1,285
Originally Posted by SevenMM View Post
Does anyone else feel like Remington or whoever developed the 6.8 not quite hit it?

I was looking into a 20" AR in 6.8 for some medium range hunting and long range shooting. After scoping out all the different bullet options, the best BC I came up with was .370. So at normal velocities the 6.8 would struggle to stay supersonic past 700 yards.

Don't you think an 87 grain 6mm bullet would have been a much better choice?

I pretty much trashed the whole 6.8 idea. While it would be a GREAT for medium range hunting, the short and stubby bullet doesn't do too well at long range.

Imagine an 87 grain 6mm (.243) A-max moving at 2750-2800 FPS! Now that would have been an improvement.

the round wasn't developed for you to kill deer or punch paper with... - it was developed to give the AR platform a superior punch at medium range compared to the questionable 5.56x45 NATO round when applied against HUMAN targets wearing soft body armor - or chest packs full of loaded AK mags. and, in this application 6.8SPC does fill the gap between 5.56x45 and 7.62x51 pretty well. If the round was more common - I'd have considered it over the 7.62x39 and .223 rifles I own.
If I really want to reach out and punch something hard and far away, I'll use my .270...
which'll hurl an off the shelf 130 grain projectile at about 3000fps... If I ever got into hand loading I could go with a 90-100 grain bullet and fling lead down range at over 3400 fps... I wonder what that would do to a feral goat?
Herd Sniper likes this.
Mr. Snuffalupagus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2010, 17:43   #3
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Muswellbrook n.s.w. Australia
Posts: 14
Mate, love the 6.8, have three (3) in rem 700P, 26" barrels, Run Speer 90g tnt with AR2207, Shoots .6 at a 100mts. Owned a 20" LTR would'nt shoot for SH-- sent it back. Have taken plenty of Deer, Pigs, Roos and wild Dogs at around 200+ mtr.
A good long range mid size cartridge is the 6.5x55 running a 140 to 160gr. I think Ruger chambered it.
Aussie is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 03-19-2010, 18:31   #4
Full Member
 
SevenMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Woods of Wisconsin
Posts: 411
Originally Posted by Mr. Snuffalupagus View Post
the round wasn't developed for you to kill deer or punch paper with... - it was developed to give the AR platform a superior punch at medium range compared to the questionable 5.56x45 NATO round when applied against HUMAN targets wearing soft body armor - or chest packs full of loaded AK mags. and, in this application 6.8SPC does fill the gap between 5.56x45 and 7.62x51 pretty well. If the round was more common - I'd have considered it over the 7.62x39 and .223 rifles I own.
If I really want to reach out and punch something hard and far away, I'll use my .270...
which'll hurl an off the shelf 130 grain projectile at about 3000fps... If I ever got into hand loading I could go with a 90-100 grain bullet and fling lead down range at over 3400 fps... I wonder what that would do to a feral goat?
In that case it does exactly what it was designed to do. I just think they could have picked a bullet diameter that allowed the use of a longer bullet while keeping a decent velocity.

I have to agree with you though, at normal combat ranges it does pack a punch. I guess I was hoping a new and improved military round would have been capable of shooting accurately out to 800 meters.
SevenMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 19:24   #5
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 254
Steve, the 6.5Grendel is a better long distance round than the 6.8SPC.
There is plenty on the Boards about them, I just wish the US would make a decision, as in 2004 they ran the trials, pick a better round than the 5.56 and move on for all our boys sake.
Something that hits harder than the 5.56 and reaches out to say 300-500yds with better energy, I notice the British are complaining about the 5.56 in Afaganistian and they are using 20" barrels not the 14.5" M4.
Herd Sniper likes this.
KIWIGUNNER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 21:49   #6
Full Member
 
SevenMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Woods of Wisconsin
Posts: 411
I'm aware of the 6.5 and I've given that round some thought as well.

I agree with you though, over in Afghanistan I bet the soldiers wish they had a a round with a better effective range.
SevenMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 22:56   #7
Odd Pachyderm thingy
 
Mr. Snuffalupagus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: someplace sunny
Posts: 1,285
Originally Posted by SevenMM View Post
I'm aware of the 6.5 and I've given that round some thought as well.

I agree with you though, over in Afghanistan I bet the soldiers wish they had a a round with a better effective range.
there is... it's called the 7.62x51 NATO



thats the problem with assault rifles - they just are not meant for reliably engaging targets beyond 400 yards. (ie: center mass one shot stops)
there is always a trade off:
Range for rate of fire and controllability.
stopping power for quantity of rounds carried.

and so on and so on.

the assault rifle was developed to give the common solder the rate of fire and control of a submachine gun at a range well beyond a submachine gun, but well under the effective range of the battle rifle.
Herd Sniper likes this.
Mr. Snuffalupagus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2010, 08:07   #8
Full Member
 
SevenMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Woods of Wisconsin
Posts: 411
Originally Posted by Mr. Snuffalupagus View Post
there is... it's called the 7.62x51 NATO



thats the problem with assault rifles - they just are not meant for reliably engaging targets beyond 400 yards. (ie: center mass one shot stops)
there is always a trade off:
Range for rate of fire and controllability.
stopping power for quantity of rounds carried.

and so on and so on.

the assault rifle was developed to give the common solder the rate of fire and control of a submachine gun at a range well beyond a submachine gun, but well under the effective range of the battle rifle.
Yeah yeah, not everyone carries a .308 around.... but you know that.

The bullet technology and knowhow is out there to make a mobile assault rifle that has a greater effective range. Will they have to make the rifle a bit heavier and reduce the combat load-out? - probably but it can and should be done.

I think my suggestion of a 6.8 case instead pushing an 87 or 90 grain .243 could accomplish that.
SevenMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2010, 04:03   #9
Full Member
 
usmcronin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 726
Originally Posted by KIWIGUNNER View Post
Steve, the 6.5Grendel is a better long distance round than the 6.8SPC.
There is plenty on the Boards about them, I just wish the US would make a decision, as in 2004 they ran the trials, pick a better round than the 5.56 and move on for all our boys sake.
Something that hits harder than the 5.56 and reaches out to say 300-500yds with better energy, I notice the British are complaining about the 5.56 in Afaganistian and they are using 20" barrels not the 14.5" M4.
wow, those bullpups have 20" barrels. They sure didn't seem it in a fam fire. There's nothing wrong with the weapon but after shooting a couple hundred rounds I decided I don't like bullpups.

The 77hpbt hit a bit harder out at distances. I've seen a few one shot drops passed 700, the ACOG helped too.
usmcronin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2010, 21:04   #10
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Muswellbrook n.s.w. Australia
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by usmcronin View Post
wow, those bullpups have 20" barrels. They sure didn't seem it in a fam fire. There's nothing wrong with the weapon but after shooting a couple hundred rounds I decided I don't like bullpups.

The 77hpbt hit a bit harder out at distances. I've seen a few one shot drops passed 700, the ACOG helped too.
Got to disagree with you mate, used a bullpup (Styer) in carbine and rifle, 5.56 only a plastic "popgun", nothing but trouble, none of our top service boys run it. Mr Snuffalupagus was right nothing like a .308. SLR's had an efective range of 600mts.
Aussie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 00:37   #11
Odd Pachyderm thingy
 
Mr. Snuffalupagus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: someplace sunny
Posts: 1,285
Originally Posted by Aussie View Post
Got to disagree with you mate, used a bullpup (Styer) in carbine and rifle, 5.56 only a plastic "popgun", nothing but trouble, none of our top service boys run it. Mr Snuffalupagus was right nothing like a .308. SLR's had an efective range of 600mts.
too right... Personally I think the FN SCAR (H) is a pretty slick unit... sure it's .308 and ammo weighs a ton - but you only gotta hit em' once.
with the 10, 13, and 18" bbl models all weighing in around 8 pounds - and a modern RIS system, pistol grip, and telescoping stock - I think the US Military are fools not to issue a bunch of them.
Mr. Snuffalupagus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 01:30   #12
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Muswellbrook n.s.w. Australia
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by Mr. Snuffalupagus View Post
too right... Personally I think the FN SCAR (H) is a pretty slick unit... sure it's .308 and ammo weighs a ton - but you only gotta hit em' once.
with the 10, 13, and 18" bbl models all weighing in around 8 pounds - and a modern RIS system, pistol grip, and telescoping stock - I think the US Military are fools not to issue a bunch of them.
I dont know what's wrong with this generation, political correctness on the battlefield, 'can't carry enough ammo', it's all the other crap thier lugging around. I don't the FN SCAR, our SLR's weighed 8lb loaded up and i prefer a longer barrel. I see that the US is making .308 in the M16 config, maybe that's the 'go'.
It's nearly ANZAC day here and i've had two nephews in afganistan (sas).I'll ask what they reckon.
Aussie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 05:09   #13
Super Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Denver, IN
Posts: 2,051
Originally Posted by SevenMM View Post
Does anyone else feel like Remington or whoever developed the 6.8 didn't quite hit it?....

So at normal velocities the 6.8 would struggle to stay supersonic past 700 yards........

It's designed to be a 200-300 yard sledge hammer
faawrenchbndr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 16:33   #14
Full Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 34
I think the 6.8 SPC is a great round for what it was designed for. A 30 caliber casing shouldered down and shortened a tad to fit a 6.8mm round into the AR platform with minimal changes (new barrel and bolt). I recently bought a Ruger Mini 14 chambered in 6.8 and plan to use it for hunting deer.

The round was not designed for 700+ meter shots as the military has sniper rifles designed for that. The round fits the average servicemember rifle and has low recoil and does not weigh much more than the current 5.56mm round but carries a much heavier punch.

I personally am a fan of 6.8 but the ammo is difficult to find at the local shops although it can be mail ordered many places. Buy large quanties and stock up.
Herd Sniper likes this.
Squid Master is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 19:13   #15
Full Member
 
SevenMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Woods of Wisconsin
Posts: 411
Originally Posted by faawrenchbndr View Post
It's designed to be a 200-300 yard sledge hammer
And it does a great job at that. Over in afghanistan however 300 yards I'm sure seems like a stones throw away.

I'm was hoping for a more efficient round... something that truly bridges the gap between the 5.56 and 7.62x51.

What they've done with the 6.8 is essentially re-invent the wheel. The 7.62x39 already hits like a sledge hammer at 200-300 yards. With the 6.8 you've still got a relatively bad ballistic coefficient and sectional density - two aspects that are extremely important in the effectiveness of a bullet.
SevenMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 19:29   #16
Full Member
 
SevenMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Woods of Wisconsin
Posts: 411
If they could get a 6.8 case to push a 90 grain 243 @ 2700 FPS out of a 16" barrel AR, you'd have the same M4 rifle but with the capability to accurately shoot out to 1000 yards -Something the 5.56, 7.62x39, and 6.8 absolutely cant do with a 16" barrel.

Not to mention this round I drummed up would have more energy after 350 yards than any of the other three and more energy than the 5.56 at any range.

Last edited by SevenMM; 03-28-2010 at 19:33.
SevenMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 23:46   #17
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Battle Born
Posts: 4
6.8 spc outperforms 7.62x39 russian and fits the standard M16 magwell. You could, in theory, replace all the uppers and magazines on current issue weapons and switch to 6.8 spc right now.
sdcharger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 05:06   #18
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: same as before but 'cleaned up' my info
Posts: 7,924
I'll have to agree with aussie on the 6.5X55 swede. but afaik it's no available in a semi-auto battle rifle.
the m16 was developed so our soldiers could carry more ammo and full-auto capable + lighter than the m14.
more than a few lrrp's and seals carried battlefield pick-up ak's in 'nam for the brush-busting power the round has but past 400 yds it's done in for effective aimed fire. good bush round for deer/hogs though out to 175 or so yards and I've had some success loading 150gr slugs in it which makes it even more effective.
Marlin 45 carbine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 17:57   #19
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 254
SteveMM is on to it, that would be a great combo,
sad to say the 308 will never come back as a MBR, to heavy,to few rounds carried so we must move on no matter how much we love that round.

The current 6.8SPC is pushing a 110g at 24-2500fps out of a 16" barreL, (the 7.62x39 pushes a 123g at 23-2400fps out of a 16" barrel) forget the 2800fps quoted as they are out of a 24" barrel or hand loaded ammo not the comerical over the counter ammo sales, Remmington has never achieved this quoted figure other than in a 24" barrel, so SteveMM idea of a 90g at 2700fps in a 16" should be doable today in 2010.
KIWIGUNNER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 07:10   #20
Full Member
 
SevenMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Woods of Wisconsin
Posts: 411
Originally Posted by KIWIGUNNER View Post
SteveMM is on to it, that would be a great combo,
sad to say the 308 will never come back as a MBR, to heavy,to few rounds carried so we must move on no matter how much we love that round.

The current 6.8SPC is pushing a 110g at 24-2500fps out of a 16" barreL, (the 7.62x39 pushes a 123g at 23-2400fps out of a 16" barrel) forget the 2800fps quoted as they are out of a 24" barrel or hand loaded ammo not the comerical over the counter ammo sales, Remmington has never achieved this quoted figure other than in a 24" barrel, so SteveMM idea of a 90g at 2700fps in a 16" should be doable today in 2010.
Well I'm glad someone agrees with me. I know you New Zealand guys really like the .243 caliber for roe buck and what not. For good reason though, they perform much better than most realize.

But yeah the 90 grain .243 just makes much more sense to me.

Last edited by SevenMM; 04-01-2010 at 07:15.
SevenMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 20:45   #21
Moderator Moderator and Super MemberSuper Member
 
markw76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: range-poor, leftard-rich Portland, Orygun
Posts: 7,547
Personally, I like a 7mm alternative. Nothing wrong with the 6.8, it fits the AR platform without changing much, hits harder than the 5.56 and penetrates cover and thin-skinned vehicles better.

I still drool at the idea of a 7mm-08 of some sort. It'll throw a heavier bullet as required, great ballistics. The problem with the 6.5G is the 6.8 was designed by a military marksmanship unit. Even if it is outperformed by the 6.5, the 6.8 still has the advantage until a fatal flaw is dredged up.

In general, the military has no need for a long-range precision round for the average soldier.



__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
. A good anvil never fears The Hammer. ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ! Semper Gumby كاف
markw76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2010, 15:47   #22
Full Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,162
Originally Posted by KIWIGUNNER View Post
The current 6.8SPC is pushing a 110g at 24-2500fps out of a 16" barreL, (the 7.62x39 pushes a 123g at 23-2400fps out of a 16" barrel) forget the 2800fps quoted as they are out of a 24" barrel or hand loaded ammo not the comerical over the counter ammo sales, Remmington has never achieved this quoted figure other than in a 24" barrel, so SteveMM idea of a 90g at 2700fps in a 16" should be doable today in 2010.
You really need to visit the 6.8 Forum. I can get 2600+ using 115gr bullets. The bigger problem is Remington submitted the wrong design. I can get 2800 with 110s easily with the right brass (SSA) and maybe even hit that with 115gr bullets. I've got two 6.8s in my safe, both with the newer spec chamber and twist rate, 1 in 11". With 1 in 12", I could go faster, but it starts messing with the brass. Small primer SSA brass and H322 make a fast, accurate cartridge out of an AR system rifle.

Jim
jimbobborg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2010, 18:42   #23
Patron Saint of Rye
 
Ontos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 418
Originally Posted by SevenMM View Post
And it does a great job at that. Over in afghanistan however 300 yards I'm sure seems like a stones throw away.

I'm was hoping for a more efficient round... something that truly bridges the gap between the 5.56 and 7.62x51.

What they've done with the 6.8 is essentially re-invent the wheel. The 7.62x39 already hits like a sledge hammer at 200-300 yards. With the 6.8 you've still got a relatively bad ballistic coefficient and sectional density - two aspects that are extremely important in the effectiveness of a bullet.
Then you're looking for 6.5 Grendel.
__________________
First off, let's define "worst case", because my "worst case" scenerio is probably somewhat different than yours.
Ontos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2010, 23:00   #24
Full Member
 
OrenG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Democratic People's Republic of Fail-i-fornia
Posts: 316
I have a friend who keeps going on about how he thinks 6.8 is going to be the cartridge of the future, and my simple retort to that is, the military settled on .223 for a reason, if they need more they go with 7.62 . So in other words, I think it's overrated in some cases and is looked upon as the panacea bullet when it really isn't.
__________________
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
OrenG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 02:36   #25
Full Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 90
6.8 an Update

So over two years have past since this thread was started. Seems like a good time for an update.

Today the 6.8 has evolved to the 6.8 SPC II and most major AR manufacturers off uppers and full rifles in this caliber. Ammo choices continue to grow as more manufacturers choose to offer the 6.8.

Ironically one of the early supporters of the cartridge - Remington no longer offers anything in 6.8.

I think the 6.8 is here to stay. Your thoughts?
__________________
NRA Life Member
silver78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 21:29.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
All information is copyright by Perfectunion.com unless already under copyright.