CrisisDarkerXIV (July 18, 2008 at 3:26 am)

If we've learned anything from the M14, it's that the 7.62 is too uncontrollable and too heavy. The 5.56 is light, controllable and very accurate. This is good for distances between most battles fought in urban areas. If you can't choose either side, go for the best of both: the 6.8 SPC."We don't need yet another caliber muddying up the logistics chain." I think it's a little bit too late for that. And I think it's necessary.

wesleysnipessss (July 8, 2008 at 7:04 pm)

that silencer is amazing

DenizOezdemir (July 7, 2008 at 3:20 pm)

Yes youre right. But watch that video "5.56 Vs 6.8SPC ammo test" there you can see an huge difference betwenn them

WinchesterRanger (June 28, 2008 at 10:49 pm)

He's pulled that trick before - he shoots the 5.56mm low on the target, but the 6.8SPC hits much higher up helping it knock the metal silhouette over. Not saying there's no difference, but it's a cheap trick to impress the dumb viewers.If you need more firepower than 5.56mm (which I don't believe you do given the correct bullet design) just use the old 7.62NATO, we don't need yet another caliber muddying up the logistics chain.

WesternSouthPaw (June 25, 2008 at 2:42 pm)

The 6.5 Grendel is a nice benchrest paper punching cartridge, sort of 6.5 Swedish meets 6mm PPC. For military issue it's too fat, though.For any given size magazine, troops can hold more 6.8 SPC's than 6.5 Grendels, and the 6.8is mighty fine range-wise for actual combat. Snipers get more power from 7.62 NATO, as well, and don't need the 6.5 Grendel there, either.Generally speaking, with the 6.8 SPC you get 30-30 Winchester power out of a cartridge only slightly larger than the 5.56 NATO.

garageflower2002 (June 22, 2008 at 5:14 pm)

I prefer the 6.5 grendel

M4aufColT223 (June 20, 2008 at 5:47 pm)

thanx

Jr55amg (June 20, 2008 at 4:58 pm)

2,625 ft/s

M4aufColT223 (June 16, 2008 at 10:30 pm)

Does the 6.8SPC have 2800fps or?

mefromm2 (June 16, 2008 at 1:09 pm)

THANKS