Author Topic: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR  (Read 2050 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,402
First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« on: May 19, 2017, 10:17:30 pm »
blog.defenderoutdoors.com by Scott Walker 5/12/2017   http://blog.defenderoutdoors.com/first-the-m9-now-the-m4-army-seeks-replacement-for-ar/

The United State Army made waves a couple months ago when they finally chose the Sig Sauer P320 as a replacement for the long-serving Beretta M9. Many have mused at why the military chose the Sig over the other entrants. If the M9 is out, could the M16 and M4 be next? According to recent reports, the famed Eugene Stoner rifle could be going the way of the M14, M1 Garand, and 1903 Springfield.

The M16 was adopted into service in 1964 after extensive testing. The army was searching for a smaller projectile and lighter gun that could easily be fired in semi-automatic and fully automatic modes. They found that in the M16. Of course, the original adaption of the Armalite Rifle had some issues, but over the years the M16 adapted to meet the needs and use modern materials. These adaptions led to the M16A1, A2, A3 A4 and then the M4 and M4A1, all of which have been the selected service rifle of the U.S. Military at one time or another.

Those days may soon be gone. A recent report from the Army Times broke the news that the military is looking to replace the 5.56x45mm NATO cartridge, and thus, the AR platform. The report details how the military is looking for a larger caliber bullet, something in the 6.5mm to 7mm range, that can reach out further with more lethality than the light .22 caliber 5.56mm.

Reports from Afghanistan and Iraq have shown that at least half of the engagement distances are over 300 meters, where the 5.56mm can lose lethality, especially against armored combatants. The Army still wants something light, so not back up to the 7.62mm class, but something with better ballistics than the .223 Remington. (Perhaps the 6.5 Creedmoor?) As most of our enemies are shooting 7.62mm-based firearms such as former Soviet or Iraqi AKs, SKSs, Druganovs, and PKMs, they actually have a deadlier reach than our troops’.

Being outmatched on the battlefield is not the American way, and in order to keep our warfighters safe, it may be time to hang up the Stoner-designed rifles. With modern technology, materials, and ballistics, perhaps the next generation of service rifles will capture the hearts of Americans like the M16 did. And hopefully we’ll see an influx of surplus .223 Remington/5.56mm NATO ammunition hit the market!

The Army’s search for a new round and rifle combination has been going on since 2014 but is expected to wrap up in the next few months. Eventually, parts of the military’s study will be made available to civilians, though much of it may stay classified. We’ll just have to wait until we find out more!

Offline Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,402
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2017, 10:30:27 pm »

They could step up to the 6.5 Grendel and still stay with the AR platform.


Offline Joe Wooten

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,455
  • Gender: Male
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2017, 02:02:34 am »
That's not good news for those morons who want women in Infantry units. Heavier rifle with bigger ammo means heavier loads to carry.

Offline Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,402
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2017, 02:19:48 am »
Grendel carbines and DMR rifles actually weigh a few ounces less than 5.56mm guns because the bore is bigger and there is less barrel steel to tote up the hill.

What would it take to convert millions and millions of M4 and M16 rifles to 6.5 Grendel? In theory, just a barrel, a bolt, and a magazine. The cartridge produces more recoil than the 5.56, but not so much more that it requires a new buffer or scope/accessory mounts.

“Probably the easiest and least expensive route would be to buy new uppers,” Alexander said. “Sure, you could swap barrels and bolts, but by the time you paid an armorer to do the work, the upper is probably the best route.”

http://www.shootingtimes.com/ammo/6-5mm-grendel-the-round-the-military-ought-to-have/



The 6.5 Grendel (center) has a five-round magazine capacity advantage over the .308/7.62 (right), but gives up five rounds to the .223/5.56 (left).

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #4 on: May 21, 2017, 11:39:10 pm »
Whoever wrote this article doesn't really know much about ARs.  He seems to think that they can only handle 5.56x45 cartridges, which has never been true.  The original AR was chambered for 7.62 NATO, after all.  I agree that going to one or another 6.5 round makes sense.  There are already more than a few ARs being made for such rounds.  I don't think there's any valid reason to assume that moving away from 5.56 would require moving away from the AR platform.
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline IndispensableDestiny

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #5 on: May 22, 2017, 01:35:34 am »
Whoever wrote this article doesn't really know much about ARs.  He seems to think that they can only handle 5.56x45 cartridges, which has never been true.  The original AR was chambered for 7.62 NATO, after all.  I agree that going to one or another 6.5 round makes sense.  There are already more than a few ARs being made for such rounds.  I don't think there's any valid reason to assume that moving away from 5.56 would require moving away from the AR platform.
The Army has two experimental cartridges; the .264 USA and .277 USA.  I expect the new rifles to look a lot like an M4/M16 series on the outside, very different internally.  A short barrel rifle for counter insurgency, a longer barrel for marksmanship that will accept a magazine and a belt.

Offline thackney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,267
  • Gender: Male
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #6 on: May 22, 2017, 02:11:57 pm »
Grendel carbines and DMR rifles actually weigh a few ounces less than 5.56mm guns because the bore is bigger and there is less barrel steel to tote up the hill.

They use a thinner wall barrel?
Life is fragile, handle with prayer

Offline driftdiver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,897
  • Gender: Male
  • I could eat it raw but why when I have fire
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #7 on: May 22, 2017, 02:26:42 pm »
There was another article a couple weeks ago how DoD was looking at some radical designs.   I can't find the link now but they are looking at designs that use different type of ammo.  Instead of the brass case with the bullet out front the round is more like a shotgun shell.   A round cylinder where the bullet or other projectile is surrounded by the propellant.   I can't find the article but it would allow the use of FMJ, shotgun, Flechettes, or just about anything else from the same weapon. 

Fools mock, tongues wag, babies cry and goats bleat.

Offline driftdiver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,897
  • Gender: Male
  • I could eat it raw but why when I have fire
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #8 on: May 22, 2017, 02:27:54 pm »


Telescoped ammunition.
Fools mock, tongues wag, babies cry and goats bleat.

Offline Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,402
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #9 on: May 22, 2017, 08:48:07 pm »
They use a thinner wall barrel?
Yes. If the barrel O.D. stays the same, and the bore dia. increases from .224 to .264, then the barrel wall thickness decreased.

Now my 6.5 is much heavier as the barrel O.D. is larger and the barrel length is 24in.

Offline Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,402
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #10 on: May 22, 2017, 08:51:41 pm »
There was another article a couple weeks ago how DoD was looking at some radical designs.   I can't find the link now but they are looking at designs that use different type of ammo.  Instead of the brass case with the bullet out front the round is more like a shotgun shell.   A round cylinder where the bullet or other projectile is surrounded by the propellant.   I can't find the article but it would allow the use of FMJ, shotgun, Flechettes, or just about anything else from the same weapon. 


Those are not rifle cartridges.  They are 40mm grenades.

Offline Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,402
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2017, 08:56:58 pm »


Telescoped ammunition.

New Experimental Army Rifle Uses "Telescoped" Ammunition

Traditional bullet cartridges have a bullet seated roughly halfway inside a brass shell casing, with gunpowder inside the casing. By contrast, the new rifle uses a 6.5-millimeter polymer-cased telescoped bullet. Telescoped rounds feature a bullet completely encased in a polymer shell, like a shotgun, with gunpowder surrounding the bullet in the shell.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a23094/this-experimental-army-rifle-uses-telescoped-ammunition/

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2016/armament/18325_Phillips.pdf

Offline driftdiver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,897
  • Gender: Male
  • I could eat it raw but why when I have fire
Re: First the M9, Now the M16? Army Seeks Replacement for AR
« Reply #12 on: May 22, 2017, 08:58:28 pm »
Those are not rifle cartridges.  They are 40mm grenades.

They are an example.  The article was about using the same tech for rifles.
Fools mock, tongues wag, babies cry and goats bleat.