I'd be curious out of all the people that voted, how many own the cartridge they voted for? Or even several of them so they had some perspective and ability to cross examine.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well, I read the question as "What's the new best AR15 cartridge?". So, most folks never shoot past 300 yards, many never shoot past 100 yards. AR-15 Pistols are very popular amongst the non-precision shooting public. Hunting with AR15's is Coyote, pigs, and the occasional deer. I conclude the cartridge needs to run well in a 10" truck gun and a 20" rifle, needs to have maximum magazine capacity, needs to be lethal for deer and pigs, and needs to have factory ammo for those as well as plinking. And plinking is the #1 purpose for like 95% of AR15'S.
If cost isn't a factor, the 6.8 SPC fits right there perfectly. The 1% who want/need to shoot past 4 or 500 yards will always have the Valkyrie, Grendel, and ARC. The 99% who don't just want something that hits harder than 5.56, and the 6.8 SPC does just that.
For killing things or just hitting them? I've got 6.5 and 6mm rifles and I still prefer 223 on steel to at least 700 yards. I've killed a few coons and groundhogs beyond 800 with 223 and 6mm and saw no real difference in killing ability.Past 500 seems like a mission for a large platform rifle/AR10
Yep. I've got an 18" AA P2 (DPMS G2) in 6.5 CM, a 16" AA Evo in 5.56, a 12.5" ARP barreled Aero Precision with AA piston in 6.8 SPC, and a 10" home made AA piston 300 blk. I suppress them all with either an Omega 300 or a Griffin 30SDK.Past 500 seems like a mission for a large platform rifle/AR10
Does the 223 even move the steel at 700, and can you hear it?For killing things or just hitting them? I've got 6.5 and 6mm rifles and I still prefer 223 on steel to at least 700 yards. I've killed a few coons and groundhogs beyond 800 with 223 and 6mm and saw no real difference in killing ability.
Also, at 700 my soft armor will probably stop the 223, at 800 it definitely will.Does the 223 even move the steel at 700, and can you hear it?
I usually turn my earpro up all the way to hear impacts at 500 (10-12” circle gong) if the wind is blowing a bit.Does the 223 even move the steel at 700, and can you hear it?
Yes and yes. 55gr much less than 69gr> obviously.Does the 223 even move the steel at 700, and can you hear it?
Found an old video of me shooting my sons 13.7" to 720ish yards. 5 hits out of 8 shots, 4 of them clearly audible, in a pretty stout and switchy breeze to boot.Does the 223 even move the steel at 700, and can you hear it?
For killing things or just hitting them? I've got 6.5 and 6mm rifles and I still prefer 223 on steel to at least 700 yards. I've killed a few coons and groundhogs beyond 800 with 223 and 6mm and saw no real difference in killing ability.
That's probably fair, but I'd still be willing to bet that most people's understanding of a cartridges happy place comes from reading ballistic charts like the one in the OP, not from owning and or pushing the limits of all the cartridges being debated. Charts =/= real life.Just figure it’s happy place is inside 500
Interesting. It takes 500 ft/lbs of energy to reliability penetrate a ballistic Kevlar helmet. How much energy does a 6mm ARC have at 1,000 yards from a 20" barrel? At what range does it drop to 500 ft/lbs from a 14.5" STD M4 barrel?The best overall cartridge for civilians, police or military ? For a new military cartridge out of 12.5" barrels to 20" barrels, for CQB out to around 1000 yds, **maybe** the new 6mm ARC. It checks a lot of boxes.
Strelok says my 12.5" 6.8 SPC has 502 ft/lbs at 575 yards. My 16" 5.56 has 503 ft/lbs at 520 yards. My 18" 6.5 CM has 510 ft/lbs at 1,325 yards. This is with 110 gr VMax, 75 gr HPBT, and 140 gr ELD-M respectively.Interesting. It takes 500 ft/lbs of energy to reliability penetrate a ballistic Kevlar helmet. How much energy does a 6mm ARC have at 1,000 yards from a 20" barrel? At what range does it drop to 500 ft/lbs from a 14.5" STD M4 barrel?
The best overall cartridge for civilians, police or military ? For a new military cartridge out of 12.5" barrels to 20" barrels, for CQB out to around 1000 yds, **maybe** the new 6mm ARC. It checks a lot of boxes.
I think a lot of that is due to its using the bolt and magazine the platform was designed for. I like the Grendels and variants of it but none of the latest and greatest cartridges utilizing non standard parts seem to have the durability and easy reliability of an AR in the chambering it was designed for. Which isn't shocking to me at all.the 300BLK at least delivers what it promises, but high performance it is not. That has been the best "alternative" AR cartridge in my opinion.
Isn’t the 6.8 SPC reliable in an AR? I’ve been thinking of adding one for the heck of it.I think a lot of that is due to its using the bolt and magazine the platform was designed for. I like the Grendels and variants of it but none of the latest and greatest cartridges utilizing non standard parts seem to have the durability and easy reliability of an AR in the chambering it was designed for. Which isn't shocking to me at all.
I'm sure it's plenty reliable for the average civilians use, but shortly after it came out LWRCI and Magpul teamed up to make a proprietary intermediate frame rifle and magazines to "optimize reliability" if that tells you anything.Isn’t the 6.8 SPC reliable in an AR? I’ve been thinking of adding one for the heck of it.
BTW, What does the poll results look like. I can’t see them if I don’t vote and yet I shouldn’t vote considering I don’t have or handled anything on the list to have a say.
That was just to optimize reliability in cheap magazines. The standard AR-15 runs great with 6.8 SPC, much like 5.56, but reliable magazines (Barrett, a couple others) are comparatively expensive.I'm sure it's plenty reliable for the average civilians use, but shortly after it came out LWRCI and Magpul teamed up to make a proprietary intermediate frame rifle and magazines to "optimize reliability" if that tells you anything.
View attachment 7859089
That may be so, but if a gun is picky about magazines or needs to be re-engineered to be at optimum function with cheap magazines it makes it sound like the gun was better off in it's original chambering. I'm not picking on just 6.8, 6.5G and 6ARC are too far from standardized and fully vetted over the long term for me to have enough faith in them to be my "stockpile ammo for the end of the world" guns also.That was just to optimize reliability in cheap magazines. The standard AR-15 runs great with 6.8 SPC, much like 5.56, but reliable magazines (Barrett, a couple others) are comparatively expensive.
Yeah, it's the larger diameter cartridge body. It applies more force to the sides of the magazine causing bulging. Same for Grendel and I assume the ARC. Good quality steel magazines work fine but Magpul plastic would need to be too thick. So, they had, paid, conspired with, I don't know, LWRC to make a larger frame to hold a larger plastic magazine. Maybe that's what it took to get the Saudis to addopt it and buy 10's of thousands of the Six8's.That may be so, but if a gun is picky about magazines or needs to be re-engineered to be at optimum function with cheap magazines it makes it sound like the gun was better off in it's original chambering. I'm not picking on just 6.8, 6.5G and 6ARC are too far from standardized and fully vetted over the long term for me to have enough faith in them to be my "stockpile ammo for the end of the world" guns also.
Everything I hear about PRI, and Barrett is great. I have about 22 ASC mags and they work well but won't drop freely. Surprisingly, the 1 C-Products mag I have works best of all. It holds the most (28 vs 25) and when empty it drops free, zero sticking. I mostly practice tactical reloads so the ASC's not an issue when doing that, but still, grrr.The Six8 didn't take off in the States due to the expensive proprietary receivers and mags. You can't load long in the pmags so no advantage there either.
I've used PRI, Barrett and ASC mags with no issues, hundreds of others do the same. I'd really like to see Lancer drop a 15 or 20rd 6.8 mag.
No, not really. Would you consider a 40 S&W pistol a bad product because it doesn’t work well with a 9mm magazine? It’s the same thing; that’s where the 40 started and it needed different mags from the get go, for the same reason as any of the larger AR15 rounds.That may be so, but if a gun is picky about magazines or needs to be re-engineered to be at optimum function with cheap magazines it makes it sound like the gun was better off in it's original chambering. I'm not picking on just 6.8, 6.5G and 6ARC are too far from standardized and fully vetted over the long term for me to have enough faith in them to be my "stockpile ammo for the end of the world" guns also.
Lol.nailed it
nothing beats it for performance, cost, weight, and application
To some extent, I do consider 40 a bad product but not for the reasons above. I know shooters that have hundreds of thousands of rounds of both 40 and 9mm downrange in pistols based off the same platform. The 40 is absolutely more finicky, about mags and other things, and more prone to parts breakage. Is it because it's in a pistol designed for 9mm or because it's just got more horsepower? I think it could be both. Maybe a purpose built 40 pistol would be more durable and reliable. We might never know, and for a hobbyist shooter it doesn't matter, and those hobbyists that shoot 900 rounds a year always love to champion their favorite gear when they argue with the guys shooting tens of thousands of rounds a year. I feel like that same thing happens in these types of threads frequently.No, not really. Would you consider a 40 S&W pistol a bad product because it doesn’t work well with a 9mm magazine? It’s the same thing; that’s where the 40 started and it needed different mags from the get go, for the same reason as any of the larger AR15 rounds.
I wonder how well a Grendel or ARC would run doing 4 mag mag dumps on full auto, then letting it cool, then repeat until 6,000 rounds have been fired? I know the barrel will be toast, but what about the bolt and the carrier pin? 6.8 does very well.To some extent, I do consider 40 a bad product but not for the reasons above. I know shooters that have hundreds of thousands of rounds of both 40 and 9mm downrange in pistols based off the same platform. The 40 is absolutely more finicky, about mags and other things, and more prone to parts breakage. Is it because it's in a pistol designed for 9mm or because it's just got more horsepower? I think it could be both. Maybe a purpose built 40 pistol would be more durable and reliable. We might never know, and for a hobbyist shooter it doesn't matter, and those hobbyists that shoot 900 rounds a year always love to champion their favorite gear when they argue with the guys shooting tens of thousands of rounds a year. I feel like that same thing happens in these types of threads frequently.
I think of non standard AR chamberings in a similar way. Is a Grendel AR as reliable and durable as a standard 5.56 AR? In my experience and that of plenty of others, no. I would love to put 100k rounds of 6 or 6.5mm downrange like I nearly have with 5.56 to prove my theory that AR's in a long term high volume test work better in the chambering it was designed around but it's not financially feasible for me. If anyone else has I'd love to know.
None of this really matters to the average low volume shooter but I bet it might to the military.
That got kinda rambly, I hope it made sense. I'm not calling any of the AR chamberings bad per se, just saying that 5.56 and by extension 300BO, in my opinion because of it's geometry that allows for standard bolts/mags, seem to be the most easily reliable and trouble free especially with random assortments of parts and cheap mags, while the other rounds are more specialized and require a higher level of parts/understanding/tuning.
I'd love to see it. I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't do well. Lucky for me that's not what I use mine for, and thus why even though I like both of those for my uses I wouldn't make it my "if I only had one rifle" rifle to stockpile ammo for like this thread topic is about.I wonder how well a Grendel or ARC would run doing 4 mag mag dumps on full auto, then letting it cool, then repeat until 6,000 rounds have been fired? I know the barrel will be toast, but what about the bolt and the carrier pin? 6.8 does very well.
H&K USP 40 would like a word.The 40 is absolutely more finicky, about mags and other things, and more prone to parts breakage. Is it because it's in a pistol designed for 9mm or because it's just got more horsepower? I think it could be both. Maybe a purpose built 40 pistol would be more durable and reliable.
You got me, I've got no experience with them. Does it run relatively trouble free for hundreds of thousands of rounds like 9mm in a pistol designed for it does? If it was designed around 40 and runs great then it kinda proves my point.H&K USP 40 would like a word.
Well, it's hard to beat 5.56 but my little heart pounds at the thought of watching $30,000 of ammo getting wasted to prove a point. Lol. The 5.56, 6.8, and 300 blk will do well but for the same reasons 6.5 PRC burns barrels the others will have a tough time.I'd love to see it. I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't do well. Lucky for me that's not what I use mine for, and thus why even though I like both of those for my uses I wouldn't make it my "if I only had one rifle" rifle to stockpile ammo for like this thread topic is about.
Notoriously robust pistols in every caliber they sell them chambered in, but I don’t own a 40SW.You got me, I've got no experience with them. Does it run relatively trouble free for hundreds of thousands of rounds like 9mm in a pistol designed for it does? If it was designed around 40 and runs great then it kinda proves my point.
You and me both.I just wish we could have some AR-15 like standardization in the larger Stoner'esk platform.
That's not bad. I'd still drop to a 20" barrel but it's a solid DMR choice. Probably also an excellent deer, pig and coyote hunting gun. So, if you have a 5.56 for close in coyote and plinking, and you want an upper for deer, long range coyote, or pigs the 6 ARC looks like a good choice.6ARC 22” barrel 109 Berger 2740 MV
View attachment 7859658
I get that you're a 6.8 fanboi, you've made that clear in this thread. You've also made clear that you don't have much of a clue about any of this though, and are promoting the 6.8 because that's the koolaid you chose to drink.Well, it's hard to beat 5.56 but my little heart pounds at the thought of watching $30,000 of ammo getting wasted to prove a point. Lol. The 5.56, 6.8, and 300 blk will do well but for the same reasons 6.5 PRC burns barrels the others will have a tough time.
Dude, that is true for ALL small cartridges. Every single cartridge discussed here shares that same attribute.lack of temp stable powder that delivers speed = to ball powder.
Well I can't argue with any of that except to say my fanboi for the 6.8 ends just past 500 yards. After that I become a 6.5 CM fanboi. And much past 1200'ish I'm totally open to suggestions.I get that you're a 6.8 fanboi, you've made that clear in this thread. You've also made clear that you don't have much of a clue about any of this though, and are promoting the 6.8 because that's the koolaid you chose to drink.
The reality is if you can make a 6.8 run well, you can make a Grendel or any of its variants run well too. They're more alike than different in that regard, but I know you don't get that. Still, the fanboi crap is getting a little thick in your posts and a more astute person would be embarrassed about it.
you're fuking stupid and apparently can't readLol.
Um, a lot of other AR15 rounds beat the 5.56 for performance. That’s the whole point here.
LOL. Or you can't articulate whatever you actually meant.you're fuking stupid and apparently can't read