More News on the 6.5 Creedmoor: U.S. Military and DHS

[Lefty G-gear]

The 6.5mm Creedmoor is a medium power cartridge often compared to the .260 Remington and 6.5×47mm Lapua.
In October 2017, U.S. Special Operations Command tested the performance of 7.62×51mm NATO (.308 Winchester), .260 Remington, and 6.5mm Creedmoor cartridges out of SR-25, M110A1, and Mk 20 sniper rifles. SOCOM determined that 6.5 Creedmoor performed the best, doubling hit probability at 1,000 m (1,094 yd), increasing effective range by nearly half, reducing wind drift by a third and having less recoil than 7.62×51mm NATO rounds. Tests showed the .260 Remington and 6.5mm Creedmoor cartridges were similarly accurate and reliable and the external ballistic behavior was also very similar. The prevailing attitude is that there was more room with the 6.5mm Creedmoor to further develop projectiles and loads.[27] Because the two cartridges have similar dimensions, the same magazines can be used and a rifle can be converted with a barrel change. This led to its adoption and fielding by special operations snipers to replace the 7.62×51mm NATO cartridge in their semi-automatic sniper rifles, planned in early 2019. In response to SOCOM's adoption, the Department of Homeland Security also decided to adopt the round.[28][29]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5mm_Creedmoor

6.5 Creedmoor VS .308 Winchester

 

[Lefty G-gear]

6.5mm = .264-inch diameter bullet, just as 7.62mm = .308-inch diameter bullet.

VERY INTERESTING...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SVSak1oBCw

 

[just country]

morning, what were bullet weights of the calibers and cartridges
tested. the 308 is norm 172grs. were the testers using handloads
or factory ammo. was the test done with black hills ammo used
by the special ops units? if I remember correctly a nations
military can not use any bullets except with solid solid tips.
Geneva convention.
justme gbot tum

 

[sable tireur]

if I remember correctly a nations
military can not use any bullets except with solid solid tips.
Geneva convention.
justme gbot tum

The Geneva Convention has nothing to do with the design or construction of bullets. That is controlled by the Hague Conventions and the United States is NOT a signatory on this document. It is an idea set forth in the Hague Convention (1899), which bans certain types of ammunition.

 

[Don A Parsons]

Most likely the 140/ 147 ish category since they have good SD/ BC.

Good on them since change is good.

Of course the heavy weights will still be in the mix for distance...

 

[Mike 338]

Not seeing a big downside to a short action 6.5 for a military application. Not sure why the x47 is never considered.

Maybe the downside is guys taking 3 mile shots because the effective range is unlimited.

 

[just country]

morning, sable tireur, why do a large majority of nations use
the same style of bullets designed ?? the USA is
one of the followers? if I am not wrong was not this so
called Hague convention show up before WWII? still
in effect today?? justme gbot tum

 

[BountyHunter]

The Geneva Convention has nothing to do with the design or construction of bullets. That is controlled by the Hague Conventions and the United States is NOT a signatory on this document. It is an idea set forth in the Hague Convention (1899), which bans certain types of ammunition.

The US actually signed article III of the Hague concerning dum dum bullets but it is ONLY applicable between signatories of the convention.

The Geneva Convention has nothing to do with the design or construction of bullets. That is controlled by the Hague Conventions and the United States is NOT a signatory on this document. It is an idea set forth in the Hague Convention (1899), which bans certain types of ammunition.

 

[just country]

morning, Geneva Procotol was considered part of the Hague
Convention & military ammunition.
Hague IV, Declaration III Concerning the Prohibition of the use
of Expanding Bullets, July 29,1899, 26 Martens Nouveau Recueil
(ser.2) 1002, 187 Consol T.S. 459, entered into force Sept.
4, 1900.
The human rights library wishes to express its gratitude to
institute Henry Dunant for its contribution of this document.

It is commonly thought that the requirement for FMJ
ammunition was instituted by the Geneva conventions,
likely from confusing the Geneva conventions with
Geneva protocol (part of the Hague convention).
while it is technically true that FMJ bullets are not expressly
required by either the Geneva protocol or the Hogue convention,
the Geneva protocol is widely considered to a part of the
hague convention and the hague requires the following.
for our members to understand these mentioned documents
b advised this is very good reading.

Iraq and afganistan sp r not part of this agreement.
Firstly, this has NO Relation to the 6.8 verse
6.5G. or any other cartridge, this purely meant to discuss
international rules of war as they relate to the development
and selection of military issued ammunition.
justme gbot tum

 

[Muddyboots]

I guess we need to recognize the effectiveness of the 6.5CM as an antitank round as well.

 

[BountyHunter]

The 1973 Geneva convention articles simply referenced and adopted the Hague rules. Which the US JAGs have ruled at least twice do not apply to hollowpoint match ammuntion which the SOF and Army are now using. The Hague references the British dum dum rounds with no jackets.

 

[sable tireur]

morning, sable tireur, why do a large majority of nations use
the same style of bullets designed ?? the USA is
one of the followers? if I am not wrong was not this so
called Hague convention show up before WWII? still
in effect today??

I was simply pointing out your mistaken use of the term 'Geneva Convention' which has no bearing on pointed, FMJ or hollow point bullets. It is the Hague Conventions which applied to the use of certain weapons and ammunition designs. It's a simple correction not requiring some lengthy dissertation about either set of documents.

 

[RoyB]

I read an article a while ago about the 308 NATO round and why it was adopted. After WWII studies were done on the best caliber for a nato cartridge. The .277 caliber was decided on. USA vetoed the decision....the reason...." we have one billion 30 caliber bullets in inventory...the new NATO cartridge Will Be 308 based...."

 

[Capt RB]

They tested the 140s at 2700 and 147s at 2600 in the SR25 platform in the creed. The 260 was at similar speeds not pressures. They may have been testing the same Rl15 with flash suppressants as used in the 118lr but that info isnt out to the public yet