Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« 11th Circuit upholds restrictions on 18-21 yr olds | Main | Decision striking down MO 2A sanctuary law »

Army's next generation rifle program...

Posted by David Hardy · 10 March 2023 01:23 PM

...appears to be sunk. I don't agree with everything said (I like piston driven guns), but it makes sense. The ammunition seems like no one thought thru its cost or the fact that it requires tungsten from China. I'd add--the entire reason we and everyone else went to assault rifles was because rifles of full military power were uncontrollable in full auto fire. But if you dropped the power by half (from about 2600 ft-lbs to about 1300) it would be controllable. The new cartridge has a muzzle energy of 2200-2600 ft-lbs, so I doubt it would be controllable.

Add a two part cartridge case (head made of steel to withstand the higher pressure) and a projectile that requires tungsten... did anyone reflect that military ammo has to be made in incredible quantities, even in peacetime, let alone if war breaks out?

5 Comments | Leave a comment

Tasso Rampante | March 10, 2023 5:10 PM | Reply

While the conclusion may ultimately jold up, there are a lot of things wrong with this article:

1) Tungsten isn’t required. The supposed bullet design is the same as the M80A1, copper and hardened steel.

2) a lead core bullet in 6.5 creedmoor is not similar to a steel core bullet with respect to armor penetration. Again, look at M80A1

3) rubbing mud in a rifle chamber isn’t a sane test. Its not sane, period.

4) A rifle design isn’t sunk because some talking head said so. The dude has no more legitimacy than I do — which is to say none whatsoever.

Hank Archer | March 10, 2023 5:13 PM | Reply

USA has the tungsten. There are rich tungsten mines in the USA which could be safely reopened, but USA labor costs make buying from China cheaper.

Tim | March 10, 2023 8:51 PM | Reply

Throw it into the military-industrial-congressional-complex dumpster along with SPIW, OICWS, ACR, and sundry other small arms boondoggles.

Fyooz | March 10, 2023 9:59 PM | Reply

Senator Cornyn suggested 10 years ago that US Army convert to either 6.5mm Grendel or 6.8mm SPC, at a fraction of the cost of the XM5. The private sector developed those cartridges at no cost to the US.

A hardened steel penetrator round could have been developed too.

Nomen Nescio | March 12, 2023 9:21 AM | Reply

...who is this guy, and why should his opinion on this subject carry any more weight than, say, my own? didn't we just get through noting how even highly ranked marine corps officers might be stating complete nonsense about guns on the record --- how is this fellow any better qualified?

and if he's so distrustful of piston-driven guns, how does he explain the military records of the several such designs that have served in various nations over the decades?

Leave a comment