I have done a lot of research on various firearm cartridges and read a few things about the 5.56x45 NATO. The United States military swapped the 7.62 NATO for the 5.56 NATO in the 60s due to the fact that it produced less recoil and was lighter so more rounds per soldier could be carried. However I have been reading a few articles and listening to some people in the military and the 5.56mm although accurate has some problems with stopping power... I have heard many stories of US troops complaining about the stopping power of the 5.56mm round but due largely to good marksmenship of NATO troops any weakness of the 5.56mm in stopping power if voided if you get a head/heart shot. However I have been reading and hearing complaints of insurgents being hit by the 5.56mm and not going down.

However the 7.62x39 Soviet that that AK-47 fires is much more damaging due to it being both larger and slower. It is also a much better at cutting through body armor the 5.45mm aka 'poison bullt' is basically the same story. Although the the 7.62mm is slower and less accurate at long ranges it still does more damage than the 5.56mm.

Yes I know the 5.56mm can create some nasty wounds when it tumbles or fragments and I am not saying I would wanna get hit with one, but I would much rather get hit with it than the 7.62mm Soviet. US military officals came out and said that the 5.56mm was designed to wound rather than kill its target for two reasons:

1. you might wanna ask the guy some questions
2. ties up more troops to carry him way to get medical attention

Although that all said and good it is possible for a wounded enemy to fire his AK and kill you. the gap and design trade off between the two rounds (5.56mm vs 7.62mm) has sparked a debate has been going on for a long time. However work began to close that gab and create a round that gave the soldier in question accuracy and stopping power thus solving the problem and allowing everyone to move on to another topic.

Say hello to the 6.8mm Remington SPC and 6.5mm Grendel

6.8mm Remington SPC



6.5mm Grendel


Both rounds are accurate and deadly. Which one do you think it should be? Me personally I think I will go with the Grendel.

6.8 looks a little more normal... the casing on the 6.5 Grendel looks kinda big...

Originally Posted by The Other Guy

6.8 looks a little more normal... the casing on the 6.5 Grendel looks kinda big...

Remington looks similar to NATO 5,56x45mm while Grendel looks like 5,45x39mm...

I'd take the Remington...

I'd take the Grendel. It has a far superior ballistic coefficient that allows it to reach out farther than even 7.62x51mm NATO with a proper rifle. 6.8SPC is primarily meant for closer range, and actually drops more than 5.56mm past 400 yards. The only advantage it has over Grendel is that it would be easier to rechamber our light machineguns to it than 6.5.

I think the 6.5 is the future of military small arms, at least till someone else gets interested in caseless ammunition.

That's a good idea, but they're going to have to make a 50cal assualt rifle one of these days. I know it would be very expensive, but just having one for say, special forces, would be cool.

The Remmington looks more normal than the Grendel. I vote Remmington.

Originally Posted by Cdt Matteo

That's a good idea, but they're going to have to make a 50cal assualt rifle one of these days. I know it would be very expensive, but just having one for say, special forces, would be cool.

The Remmington looks more normal than the Grendel. I vote Remmington.

That weapon would probably end up weighing 30 lbs and carrying around the ammo for that thing would also be heavy as hell thus making it simply not practical to carry into combat. But it may interest you to know that there are 20mm and legend has it 25mm anti-material rifles out their.

Anzio 20mm Anti-Material Rifle



20mm compared in size to other rounds

First, consider that 7.62x39 and 5.56 are battle-tested rounds, and the military's not about to adopt a new cartidge which will not only cause logistics and supply hassles, but will also require a total retooling of infantry weapons- we don't have anything in our arsenal geared for 6.5 or 6.8.

Deerslayer it would be easy to rechamber all the US standard weapons for 6.8SPC. 6.5 could be used in the M16 with very slight modification, though it wouldn't work with the current belt-fed LMGs.

Originally Posted by deerslayer

First, consider that 7.62x39 and 5.56 are battle-tested rounds, and the military's not about to adopt a new cartidge which will not only cause logistics and supply hassles, but will also require a total retooling of infantry weapons- we don't have anything in our arsenal geared for 6.5 or 6.8.

It is a hassle, but it has been done. Specifically when the military when from 7.62 to 5.56.

The question is will they? I have lots of complaints about the lack of "stopping power" of 5.56 munitions -Personally I wouldn't want to be hit by one thats IMHO.