This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 12-Aug by SiverSurfeR
Latest 12-Aug by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 11-Aug by JPeelen
Latest 22-Jun by roguetechie
Latest 10-Aug by autogun
Latest 10-Aug by schnuersi
Latest 5-Aug by mpopenker
Latest 3-Aug by nincomp
Latest 3-Aug by dudutin
Latest 1-Aug by stancrist
Latest 31-Jul by gatnerd
Latest 27-Jul by Guardsman26
Latest 26-Jul by Refleks
I assume this is one of those cases where FN had the gun mostly designed already before the NGSW program wrapped up, so they're obligated to take a look at the gun now? Given that its going to take a few years for XM5's to disseminate, I suppose a stop gap rifle like this could get a small contract in the interim.
so kinda parallel to the ngsw socom was also procuring new weapons and switching to 6.5
firstly for the ar-dmr-sniper role the fn mrgg (prev fn scar)
for the cqb carbine the rattler
for the gpmg role the sig mg338?
for the sniper role the 338 mrad
I am currently working on getting bunch of 6.5creedmoor rifles to our SF guys, we ordered some Haenel CR6.5 . We couldnt get the FN SCARS in any reasonable timeframe as the 6.5CM variant would need to come from US , we also added some 6.5barrels to bolt action orders at AI. We are going for rather short barrel configurations as they are always paired with suppresors , 50m effective range you loose with 16 over 20' barrel is a worthy compromise especialy as you are still gaining some range over 7.62x51
MDM22 is some Frankenstein alright ,3 charging handles, bolt-on forward assist, and SR25 mags .
6.5 Creedmoor is a ready solution, not future vaporware both in terms of guns and ammo. In guns where you can just swap barrel that is all it takes. 6.5creedmoor ammo is manufactured by many manufacturers. Nammo-Lapua already offer AP bullets, we are still waiting for AP ammo to be made .
We are trailing ZCO 420 on the gas guns and Stainer I7 IFS on the Bolt guns , to see if there is merit to scope with ballistics computer
Agree with you 100% on 6.5 mm Creedmoor. An excellent calibre with better range and terminal effectiveness than 7.62 mm NATO in a lighter package and less recoil. The 120 grain EPR-style bullet developed for it is superb. I don't know why the US Army didn't just develop this further. The velocity could easily be increased to 1,000 mps for better body armour defeat in a standard brass cartridge.
Actually I am a bit surprised that 6.5 Creedmoor was chosen over .260 Rem , a design that is far better suited for automatic weapons and also has a bit more boiler room and can push bullets to higher speeds. I guess 260Rem range of offerings was just too small.
The 6.5 mm synergies re: re-barreling 7.62 mm weapons were just too good to pass-up.
Sorry you had to go to Merkel / Haenel instead of FN Herstal. I really like the SCAR. It is my pick of non-AR15 assault rifles.
Our guys have ScarH in 13, 16, and 20 in barrel configurations and these are fine rifles especially once fitted with nonfolding SSR stock( transforms the weapon) but for 6.5CM we couldn't get any not to mention they are getting a bad rep .
*But lets just say that when they tested bunch of guns HK won out , but FN has claws in our military so FN rep and manufacturing contractor made a call and SCAR H was bought instead of HK . Haenel is like evolved HK in many ways.
You can only imagine how deep the claws of FN reach in our Military when you consider we have a FN2000 as a main battle rifle.
Aside from the buttstock Haenel CR6.5 is probably a superior weapon anyways.
The SCAR popped-primer problem is simple to explain.
First, many commercial loadings of 6.5 mm Creedmoor use soft primers, because these are cheaper than hard primers. Since SCAR was designed for military spec hard metal primers, this was always going to be an issue.
Second, a specific SCAR requirement was the over-the-beach-test and therefore the firing pin was designed to ensure it connected positively with the base of the primer in the presence of water.
Third, FN America quality standards seem to be less than its European HQ. It released the 6.5 Creedmoor before it was fully ready. Unforgivable. FN America needs to get a grip of this issue, not least in communicating better with its non-military customers. Overall, I think the SCAR is an unmatched 7.62 mm battle rifle, especially the SCAR 20 / HPR. It has matured very well over the last decade and the extent to which it is used among SF units is a testament to this. (BTW It won the French tender, but its bid was disqualified due to an inexperienced sales executive.)
SCAR is not done yet. It's just getting started.
The velocity could easily be increased to 1,000 mps for better body armour defeat in a standard brass cartridge.
I'm skeptical of that.
These were the Quickload specs I had done awhile back. These were with a lead core bullet; I suspect velocity would be a bit lower with a EPR due to reduced case volume from the longer projectile.
6.5C 123gr@ 62kpsi
16”- 2795fps / 852m/s
20”- 2962fps / 902m/s
6.5C 123gr @ 75kpsi
16" 2960 fps / 902m/s
20" 3124 fps / 952m/s
6.5C 123gr @ 100kpsi
16" 3128 fps / 952m/s
20" 3279 fps / 999m/s
Mr. T (MrT4) said:
Actually I am a bit surprised that 6.5 Creedmoor was chosen over .260 Rem , a design that is far better suited for automatic weapons and also has a bit more boiler room and can push bullets to higher speeds
6.5C was chosen as it had more Ogive space for use with heavier weight projectiles / experimental future projectiles: