Arms Locker banner

21 - 35 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
611 Posts
andy said:
Just change the ammo, and screw the Hague Agreement. we never signed it anyway, and we will NEVER again fight a declared war, against a s"gnatory nation" of the Hague Agreement.
I'd like to compliment your understanding of the Hague Agreement; ammunition specs are usually confused as being part of the Geneva Convention.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,783 Posts
John in AR said:
As far as weapon platform, a gas-trap AR configuration would be close to ideal, but some others are good as well. A major improvement I’d like to see them make is in the gun’s barrel itself. Instead of standard rifling in the barrels, go with polygonal progressive-gain rifling, as ArmsTech uses. This increases velocity, and therefore power, dramatically. For comparison, their 9-inch 5.56 barrel gets slightly more velocity than a 14 ½ inch ‘normal’ barrel on an M4. So a gun with a compact 14-16 inch barrel could offer the same velocity as a 21-24 inch “normal” barrel does now.
John, have you seen any more info and/or independent testing on these? I'm pretty curious about them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,130 Posts
Wylycoyte said:
John, have you seen any more info and/or independent testing on these? I'm pretty curious about them.
I would be interested as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
The Heckler&Koch XM8 which is currently tested by the Army has a gas piston system. One fired 15,000 rounds without cleaning and had no malfunctions. It has been tested in ,223 caliber and in the 6.8X43mm SOCOM cartridge,

If anyone is interested in the XM8 system I will post more indormation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
How about when I can buy one!
Heck, I think that'd be tops, to have a round with a lot more power than the .223, but a rifle that's good up close to reach 'em out distances, and doesn't fart in its own face.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
611 Posts
Gecko45 said:
How about when I can buy one!
Heck, I think that'd be tops, to have a round with a lot more power than the .223, but a rifle that's good up close to reach 'em out distances, and doesn't fart in its own face.

You can. The XM8 is just an "Americanised" G36, the internals are pretty much identical. The civvy version of the G36 is the SL8, it doesn't accept high caps, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
627 Posts
it doesn't accept high caps, though.
The models I saw did, but only by changing the interchangeable mag well to take a different magazine.
They have amodel to convert it to AR15 mags (among others) but it costs like $300, for a plastic mag well...ugh
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
611 Posts
At least they have a formal conversion kit out, before, people would just try to grind out the two offending nubs with...less than satisfactory results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,693 Posts
Wylycoyte said:
John, have you seen any more info and/or independent testing on these? I'm pretty curious about them.

Just a write-up I came across in some LE-oriented gun magazine last year. They chrono’ed the same loads as slightly faster with the ArmsTech 9" (or 9.5?) inch barrel than with a mil-spec M4 14.5” barrel. I got their number from the article and called them last year to see if they offered a 16” version, which would avoid the NFA complications and give probably the velocity we normally associate with a 24” barrel, in a carbine-size gun. They told me it was their intention to offer them eventually, but they were swamped with govt orders for the short barrels, and it would be at least summer ’05 before the 16” versions would be produced.

The gun they tested had a 9” or 9.5” barrel, and an 8” or so quick-attach suppressor, so even though it had the velocity of an M4, as well as a suppressor, it was still only about the length of a normal CAR-15.

I called them again just a month or two ago, and got the same response, except that it’s now at least “fall” of ’05.

Don’t recall their number; they’re based out of Phoenix, I believe. Definitely want one of those if they ever become available in a standard 16” or longer version.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
no, ss109 does NOT even come CLOSE to realistic penetration of vehicles or trees or buildings as does STEEL CORED 30 AK ball. It MIGHT do as well against a single sheet of steel, but I doubt it. When it comes to real world targets, tho, the 223's penetration, while ok, is not even in the same ball park as steel cored 30 AK ammo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
velecity increases or decreases are not linear over that many inches of barrel. You may find that you get little or no increase with the longer barrel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
6.8 will never make it. too high a cost to replace everything, and too much wt and bulk, for WAY too little gain in performance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,621 Posts
223 fan said:
6.8 will never make it. too high a cost to replace everything, and too much wt and bulk, for WAY too little gain in performance.

and your basing your answer on what? recent experance, none that we know of ever. the military will do as they always do replace old systems with new ones and not once will they refer to you for your saged and always correct advice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
677 Posts
6.8 will never make it. too high a cost to replace everything, and too much wt and bulk, for WAY too little gain in performance.
Looks like IGMO is wrong yet again.
At least bore diameter wise.
Unless Bidum and the Con-gress fubar the military budgets.
The Army will be phasing out the 5.56NATO.
So sorry IGMO.
Even the SAW/M249 is going to it.

So much for "The Military Round" eh?
No fret though 5.56 will be a plentiful civilian cartridge just like other former military rounds like .308win & .30-'06 .😁
 
21 - 35 of 35 Posts
Top