Manokan Republic wrote:Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:The only good 6 mm's are 6.5 mm Arisaka and 6.5 mm Swede. New 6 mm's are terminally hampered by having to fit in a 5.56 compliant magazine.
If you are surviving a nuclear war you haven't got time to minmax the thing you will expend tens of thousands of in peacetime training. Rifle is fine.
1. This isn't really a major drawback, as many of the cartridges were just fine despite fitting in 5.56mm guns. You can still get improved performance, like higher power, better accuracy and range. 2. The 6.5mm Creedmoor which has actually been adopted by the Special forces and the 6.8mm which is currently testing are not actually designed to fit in 5.56mm magazines and 3. the Ariska is kind of shit, using extremely old gunpowder and not being designed to cycle in things like machine guns. The 6.5mm Swede is marginally better. The 6.5mm grendel actually has roughly the same ballistics as the 6.5mm Ariska, in a much smaller and lighter weight package, being about 30% heavier than a 5.56mm, while the Ariska uses a far larger, 50mm vs. 39mm length case, and being slightly larger around.
There's no real reason to believe that it being designed to fit in a 5.56mm magazine well really hampers performance all that much. The 6.5mm Grendel for example produces 2600 joules with an 8 gram bullet at roughly 820 m/s, and the 6.8mm remington 2700 joules with a 7.45 gram bullet at around 850 m/s. Neither of these cartridges are really bad, usually having around 1 MOA of accuracy, and higher ballistic coefficients, or a G1 BC of .35 for the 6.8mm and .5 or higher for the 6.5mm, compared to about .2 for the 5.56mm. There's no real drawback in performance, so it's not really automatically a negative. Plenty of cartridges were designed to fit in other weapons or even other cartridge cases (I.E. the .270 for the .30-06 and so on), and they were quite successful. In fact the .30-06 actually came from the .30-03, and the .30-03 from the .30-40 Krag, with the .308 coming from the .30-06 albeit it with a dramatically changed case. The idea that a cartridge based on an existing cartridge would automatically end up doing poorly is a bit strange, or that having to fit inside of another magazine well would somehow make it perform dramatically worse. This just isn't the case, and it's just a good idea to make it easily compatible with existing rifles, rather than designing something brand new from the ground up. The 5.56mm itself came from the .223, which came from the .222, which was actually slightly different, mainly in that it was weaker. The idea that this inhibits the cartridge in anyway has sort of been disproven by the test of time. I don't think it's really a good idea to discount a cartridge just because it designed to have similiar dimensions or be able to fire in similarly dimensioned guns as, another cartridge. In fact most of the great cartridges were all derivatives of something else. The .308 itself was a cut down .30-06 case for example, which continues the tradition down the line of rounds based on other rounds. All of these of course did fine.
i do like those rounds, better then 5.56 from what ive read.