Future Weapons: REC7 Assault Rifle (formerly Barrett M468) Vid

Barrett says what NATO troops lack is punch and knock down power of the AKM while still keeping the accuracy of the M-16. Their answer... The REC7.

the problem is basically one of kinetics... the 5.56 speedy accurate but not much energy at target...
7.62x39 a heaver slower .30 cal that's not as accurate as the 5.56 but has plenty of energy to knock down...
that's where Barrett comes in with their new 6.8 round



[edit on 25-11-2009 by DaddyBare]

Is this different from the Remington 6.8mm SPC?

I plan on grabbing a 6.8 upper someday but the ammo is still scarce and pricey even after years on the consumer market. Too much of a novelty at this point and the Obama hysteria isnt helping matters any.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


REC7 uses the new 6.8 mm Remington SPC (6.8 x 43) cartridge, a round that is of roughly equivalent length to 5.56 mm ammunition, making it compatible with the M16 and M4 rifle magazines

The REC7 outfitted in a shortened barrel PDW configuration was one of the weapons displayed to U.S. Army officials during an invitation-only Industry Day on November 13, 2008. The goal of the Industry Day was to review current carbine technology prior to writing formal requirements for a future replacement for the M4 carbine.

if it flys you'll find plenty of ammo once it becomes issued

reply to post by DaddyBare


So it is the same 6.8.

It's been floating around in the consumer market since 2002/2003.

In all that time it still hasnt really caught on outside of enthusiasts and folks who love to hunt with their AR's.

Uppers have been widely available for years and the prices are not unreasonable. Looks like this "REC7" is just a 6.8 upper on a typical AR lower.

When did this episode air?

It's like Barret is repackaging old news and trying to sell it to the gov.

I guess what I really want to know is why am I supposed to look at this AR in 6.8 and think "wow" rather than look at any AR in 6.8 from a multitude of AR manufacturers and think "wow"?

[edit on 25-11-2009 by thisguyrighthere]

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


it popped up just this week but you know TV... they could have filmed it months ago and just waited to air???

reply to post by DaddyBare


I saw this approx. a year ago, on Dutch tv! So it's atleast 2 years old I guess.

I also remember this gun being called the "Grendel", somewhere.

reply to post by Point of No Return


6.5 Grendel is different from the 6.8 SPC. They were designed for the same reasons. 6.8 vs. 6.5 is one of those raging debates that has been going on for years. The winner will be whichever the gov dumps money into.

You can get uppers in either caliber.

reply to post by Point of No Return


your getting newer episodes that I am obviously... weapon aside I like their thinking about moving up to a larger caliber... I'm not sure about the only needing to swap out uppers...maybe what they need to do is what the FBI did... announce a performance spec then sit back and see what the wildcatters come up with... remember we got the 40S&W as an adaption of the 10mm both once wildcats.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Point of No Return

 

6.5 Grendel is different from the 6.8 SPC. They were designed for the same reasons. 6.8 vs. 6.5 is one of those raging debates that has been going on for years. The winner will be whichever the gov dumps money into.

You can get uppers in either caliber.

The 6.5 Grendel is better at longer ranges, with some achieving sub 2" groups at 660 yards...I wouldn't mind owning both. I do own a 50 Beowulf from alexander arms [makers of the 6.5 Grendel] and was thinking of doing a thread on the awesomeness of the beowulf.

What exactly is the point of 6.8? Is it supposed to be a compromise between 5.56 and 7.62 or does it have its own abilities?

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
What exactly is the point of 6.8? Is it supposed to be a compromise between 5.56 and 7.62 or does it have its own abilities?

I believe that is exactly what it is...to create a standard M-4 rifle with a slightly larger bullet, roughly 115gr vs. 62gr, to give it more knockdown power...The case isn't that much larger and I don't believe there is much of an increase in range either.

5.56 velocity energy 400yard drop
(62 gr) SS109 FMJBT 3,100 ft/s 1,303 ft·lbf (55gr) -27.8 inches

6.8 SPC
115 gr 2,625 ft/s 1,759 ft·lbf -35.4 inches

6.5 Grendel
90 gr Speer TNT 2,880 ft/s 1,658 ft·lbf *
120 gr Norma FMJBT 2,700 ft/s 1,942 ft·lbf *
130 gr Norma 2,510 ft/s 1,818 ft·lbf *

*The recommended 0 [zero] for a 6.5 Grendel is 600 yards, at 400 yards, out of a 24" barrel they are all +30 to +40 inches high before dropping to zero at 600 yards...+34" to +46" out of a 16" barrel...The heavier bullets maintain over 1000/fps at 1000 yards and have effective energy [killing power] out to 800 yards.

Just to update this
On November 13, 2008, the U.S. Army hosted an invitation-only Industry Day regarding a potential future replacement for the M4 carbine. Nineteen companies provided displays and briefings for military officials. The weapons displayed included the Barrett REC7 PDW, Bushmaster ACR, FN SCAR, Heckler & Koch HK416, Heckler & Koch XM8, LWRC M6A4, Robinson Arms XCR, SIG 556, as well as Colt's own improved version of the M4, the Colt ACC-M (Advanced Colt Carbine-Monolithic).

On July 1, 2009, the U.S. Army took complete ownership of the M4 design.

the thought now is any replacement weapons has to be interchangeable with the current M-4... Barrett and Bushmaster ACR both presented weapons in 6.8 SPC the Bushmaster ACR also came in 6.5 mm grendel flavor...

while there has still been no official word on a new weapon they have order testing in the 6.8 SPC so only time will tell. whatever the decide it looks like for cost savings it would have to be a new upper receiver and not a radical design. 6.8 fits that bill but who will make it or if its ever made is still a toss up...

either way I wouldn't get to excited From DID the last contract approved was

Feb 2/09: Colt Defense LLC in Hartford, CT received a $9.5 million firm-fixed-price 5-year Requirements contract for 18,000 Barrel & Front Assemblies; 13,600 Hand Guards; 7,100 Heavy Barrel Assemblies; 22,000 Receivers and Cartridges; and 200,000 Extractor Spring Assemblies. Work is to be performed at Hartford, CT with an estimated completion date of Sept 28/12. US Army Tank and Automotive Command Rock Island in Rock Island, IL manages this contract (DAAE20-03-D-0191).

DID

unless something big happens nothing will be done until 2012

[edit on 26-11-2009 by DaddyBare]

The costs would be insane...although technically they won't need new upper receivers, just a new barrel and new bolt. The cost per rifle could easily be $300 to a few hundred more depending on what kind of barrels they used. Now imagine that times a million or two rifles...plus the cost of ammo?

Switching to the AR-10 in .308 is another option but then they would be purchasing entirely new rifles...

The cost is probably chump change to the military industrial complex...I doubt we'd see it happen whilst Obama is in office.

reply to post by DaddyBare


I guess it was another show that I saw then, about the Grendel, it was almost exactly the same, with him shooting the iron sillhouettes, and through the car door.

Originally posted by Point of No Return
reply to post by DaddyBare

 

I guess it was another show that I saw then, about the Grendel, it was almost exactly the same, with him shooting the iron sillhouettes, and through the car door.

Same show, different episode...same basically principle...more power out of an M-4 platform

reply to post by AnonymousMoose


Jeah, I know it was the same show, obviously. I meant other episode.

To create a standard M-4 rifle in 6.8 would not be as necessary as putting this on existing M16 actions.

The 6.8 is a range extender and putting it on a short barrel weapon like the M4 would be secondary to using it a a range extender on M16s used in countries like afghanistan.

The change to 6.8 could be done in the field by removing the M16 upper and replacing it with the REC7 upper and sending the M16 uppers back to a field depot to have the barrels changed for the next unit.
The bolt would not need to be changed as the 6.8 has the same cartridge head as the 5.56 NATO. the cartridge is just necked to 6.8 instead if 5.56

While this would help change the M16 from a jungle gun to a desert gun the M16/M4 still has a problem with jamming in long firefight.

If they make the change to 6.8 they also need to change the operating system from gas tube to a piston/gas system at the same time to make the weapon more reliable.
gaspiston.com...
gaspiston.com...
gaspiston.com...

I point out the many advantages of the 6.5 MPC over the other contenders. Only the barrels need be changed. Bolts, receivers, magazines and other systems remain the same. 5.56 cartridge cases need only be modified slightly, losing 2mm in length and having the shoulders moved back, an easy modification during manufacturing.
www.defensereview.com...

reply to post by DaddyBare


I don't like this stuff.
Weapons are dangerous.
They do not lead us to anywhere.
When are people gonna learn..

reply to post by silentassassin


Fair enough I can respect your opinion ... lots of people feel as you do...
However... given your user name..."silentassassin"... your comment strikes me as rather odd...



[edit on 12-12-2009 by DaddyBare]