Move it, 6.5 Grendel. Go'way, 6.8 SPC. Here's the 6.5 MPC

Discussion in 'Reloading' started by nalioth, Apr 19, 2009.

  1. nalioth

    nalioth Active Member

    866
    0
    36
    Oct 13, 2008
    Houston Metro
    As if our armed forces don't have enough on their plates choosing a new rifle.

    Here is the 6.5 MPC ( multi purpose cartridge ).

    This is a .223 case necked up for a 6.5mm bullet.

    Only change needed to run it in existing 5.56mm weapons is a new barrel.


    [​IMG]
    Four different bullets in the 6.5 MPC. Note all are seated to 5.56 OAL to run through M-16 magazines.
    Image courtesy of SSK Industries

    Original Defense Review article.

    The cartridge inventors page on this new cartridge.

    The great google provides.
     


  2. TSU45

    TSU45 Active Member

    410
    0
    16
    Jun 6, 2008
    San Marcos, Tx
    Looks pretty cool, but a 95gr @ 2600fps out of a 12' barrel? Sounds a little stretched.
     
  3. Big country

    Big country TGT Addict

    4,342
    0
    36
    Mar 6, 2009
    Cedar Park,TX
    Wouldn't the new heavier bullet need more powder to push it? I would think it would, but I am buy no means an expert in the field. Why wouldn't they go with some thing like the 308? I'm just asking, this is by no means an attack on the cartridge or the people that made it. I just think the 6.5 in the 223 case would not be as efficient as the 223.
     
  4. FM-793

    FM-793 New Member

    28
    0
    6
    Feb 18, 2009
    SW Houston - Westbury
    I never understood why when they originally considered the M-16, they didn't just go with the .243. Stoner designed it in .308 - seems like it would have been natural. They could have also met their "fast dinky bullet" fetish by loading the 6mm with 55 gr spitzers. They're faster than a .223 coming out of the .243. Plus, since the M60 was the machine gun at the time, brass would not have been an issue.

    I still think that fitting the cartridge around the platform is bass-ackwards. First consideration should be what works for the infantryman in the field. Everybody else should adapt. Of course, that'll never happen.
     
  5. M. Sage

    M. Sage TGT Addict

    Jan 21, 2009
    San Antonio
    The AR-10 was in .308, but AFAIK, the AR-15 wasn't originally designed in .308.

    .308 is fine for long range work, but is way more powerful than the average infantryman can use in most situations. The weight of it reduces combat load, and the size limits mag capacity. The recoil also lowers the rate of effective fire - ask someone who's shot both 5.56 and 7.62x51 rifles in FA: see which caliber was realistic in FA. It also requires a heavier weapon.

    This 6.5 has me interested, but it sounds like they're pushing it awful hard. They're loading nearly twice the weight and keeping velocity close to 5.56 levels! Me thinks barrel life is going to be somewhat short...
     
  6. FM-793

    FM-793 New Member

    28
    0
    6
    Feb 18, 2009
    SW Houston - Westbury
    Don't know about life in the FA - as an infantryman, I experienced both rounds in the field. I keep hearing about how unmanagable the 7.62 is for the average soldier, but we preferred it to the 5.56. From what I understand, it's still the preferred weapon for special ops soldiers in the field. I can understand the argument about the rifles being heavier, but every rose has its thorn.
     
  7. dee

    dee Well-Known

    1,975
    8
    38
    Nov 22, 2008
    Red River Way
    I think I'd rather carry something a lil bit heavier and have the extra power. Although I will say I do love my .223/5.56.
     
  8. M. Sage

    M. Sage TGT Addict

    Jan 21, 2009
    San Antonio
    The rifles and the ammo are heavier. 7.62mm goes at nearly 10 lbs per 100 rounds!

    I wouldn't say that. For long shots, yes. For kicking down doors, the 5.56 seems to be the caliber of choice.

    I wouldn't say that 7.62 is too much for the average soldier, but that kind of power level became standard world-wide back in the days of cavalry that still rode horses. We don't need to shoot horses much these days, so...
     

Share This Page