Re: 6.8 or 300 blackout
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rsilvers</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I lied by saying that 6.8 ammunition is much more expensive? That is a fact. As for magazines - yes - I could have said that not all magazines are $42 - only the ones that I prefer.
Or because I think one should spend the $42 on the magazines recommended on 68 forums. But I should not have tried to make that decision for people. </div></div>
You lied about how much more expensive it is, which is what I said. 60% isnt 40%, and if you want good ammo (don't come on here saying Remington UMC is good ammo, everyone here knows it isn't), then they are priced almost identically. You are correct about the magazine statement though, except for where you said it is "recommended" by the 6.8 forums, which is too wide of a generalization to make. Sure, they DO recommend the $40 magazines, but they also recommend most others, it would be like me coming on here and recommending people to buy an AICS stock because its what the Hide prefers. I will say that the new CPD magazines have been proving themselves to be the best value in 6.8 magazines and have an advertised allowable OAL of 2.320", although its closer to 2.305" I believe, still plenty.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rsilvers</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I am not going to "eliminate UMC" - by far the most popular 300 BLK ammunition with untold millions of rounds sold - because you believe it is priced artificially low. The price is the price and no buyer cares why.
The 64% that I said was true, but it seems like CTD raised the price on 300 BLK (which will help it stay in stock longer) - and you have found 6.8 for less than I thought. So now the latest calculation is that 6.8 is only 44% more expensive. </div></div>
I was pointing out what happens when you eliminate the only 300BLK ammunition that is priced artificially low, then the prices become almost identical. And no, the 64% you said was not true, even without CTD's price increase, it would not be 64%. Hopefully, when Tula (or was it Wolf? I can't remember) begins producing ammunition, that price gap will disappear.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rsilvers</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
No major ammunition company - Remington, Winchester, Federal, Hornady, etc - will ever make higher pressure 6.8 ammunition - so you are picking a Buffalo-Bore like example - which should not be used for mainstream comparison charts. There are people who hot-load 308 also and long-load the bullet past the max OAL, but I am not going to put those specialty loads into a comparison showing the potential of 308 compared to other cartridges. </div></div>
That is because two of the companies you listed have yet to make or release ammunition for the 6.8 yet.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rsilvers</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Also you "can't" just mirror 5.56mm for pressure. The case head is larger on 6.8. I mean, you can, but it would never be accepted as a future standard or have a chance in the military and would be destined to stay a wildcat.
5.56mm is 0.332 inches in diameter on the case head, which is 0.08657 square inches. 62,000 pounds per square inch is 5313 pounds into the bolt.
6.8 has a case head of 0.358, which is an area of 0.10066 square inches. In order for this also to have 5313 pounds into the bolt, you need to limit it to 52,785 psi. So 55,000 psi is already on the high side.
To be clear - 62,000 psi for 5.56mm is the same as 52,785 psi for 6.8.
Moreover, the 6.8 bolt is weaker than a 5.56mm bolt.
If the 6.8 spec was raised to 58,000 psi, it would be like 5.56mm at 68,000 psi.
One cannot use 5.56mm pressure and 6.8 SPC pressure interchangeably, and so that it does not make good sense to load 6.8 over SAAMI max pressure on purpose.
I am not being biased - if SSA hot-loads 300 BLK to higher pressures and with bullets extended past the max OAL, I also won't want to use them in comparison charts. Those are hand loader tricks. We all know how to do them, and we can do them to any cartridge. </div></div>
I should correct what I have said, The 58K max is taken from the max pressure of the standard military M855 ammunition. You took the whole mirror thing out of proportion, but that is due to me not elaborating on where the 58K came from, so I apologize. Back to my point, only two tactical loads are stated as being above 58k pressure in a Spec II chamber (the 95gr. TTSX tactical load and 85gr. E-tip load), yet you still refuse to use other tactical loads, even though they are not stated as being "overpressure".
EDIT: just wanted to say that you wouldn't be receiving such harsh criticism over these sort of subjects if you simply came out stating the virtues of the 300BLK, but you continue to attack the 6.8 in your posts. If you would simply stop doing that, then I think people would be much more respective of your statements on the virtues of the 300BLK, I am not denying that it's a great round, because it is, nor am I disputing any of the numbers you have listed here on it, but you continue to attack the 6.8 and skew its numbers, all I am asking for here is you put an end to this.
