Looks like LMT managed to win the Assault half of the MRGG award. Not sure the logistics of splitting the award between two vendors/platforms makes sense, but that's SOCOM for you. https://soldiersystems.net/2025/08/...nse-for-medium-range-gas-gun-assault-program/
LMT wins MRGG-A
- Thread starter Macht
- Start date
it's been this way for a while but agree, they shouldn't have multiple platforms. LMT should have just won the whole thing but the Navy guys wanted their own flair
Prolly end up switching to G or LMT for everything eventually.
F LMT for their bs patent anyway. Right up there with kahles fov patent
Maybe next someone will patent continuous arca rails and someone else can parent mag range
F LMT for their bs patent anyway. Right up there with kahles fov patent
Maybe next someone will patent continuous arca rails and someone else can parent mag range
Having both I disagree. Geissele should have won both lol
Would be nice to know why they chose LMT over Geissele. If I had to guess, perhaps price? Maybe they wanted the quick change barrel capability of the LMT MRP, since in theory, the shorter 14.5” barrel versions should experience a higher round count than the MRGG-S?
But in a setting where barrel changes go through the armorer anyways, does the time saved really matter compared to the costs of servicing two different platforms? My initial thought is it has to be a big price difference to justify multiple platforms.
It's the government.
Logic is rarely involved in the decision making process.
Logic is rarely involved in the decision making process.
Agree, but it is easier to swap barrels for the armorer, with the LMT. Changing calibers to 308 is also easier. No need to pull off the handguard when swapping barrels. Most US Army Armorers are not like the tool ninjas here on Sniper's Hide, lol.
Regardless, it is probably price more than anything:
https://www.dwilsonmfg.com/LMT-MWS-145-65-Creedmoor-MRGG-A--Deposit_p_431.html
There is also something to be said about the monolithic upper for a 14.5" "assault" battle rifle. Putting a laser on the end of it, along with all the other things SOCOM has to use, the MRP makes more sense when one is not concerned about utmost accuracy. LMT has a track record as well selling the .308 MRP aboard (UK, Eastern Europe). For the MRGG-S contract, a 20" sniper rifle really is a different animal, and how one mates the barrel to the upper receiver, along with a lot of other little things, matters more. A standard LMT MRP cannot do what a Seekins SP-10, other custom AR-10s or the like can do in terms of accuracy. For a 14.5" barreled "assaulter", if it can shoot 1-1.5 MOA with standard "match" ammo, who cares?
Regardless, this whole conversation is pointless, because we don't have the actual data, nor will we ever be given privileges to see the testing data most likely. LOL. I'm sure both rifles performed well, and like you said, it came down to price. For us civilians, we will probably be fine shooting either platform, along with other competitors.
As an aside, parts commonality obviously did not matter, so now we have the US Army using the HK 417 (M110A1 CSASS), a certain US military unit using Seekins SP-10s in the sniper role, many many KAC SR-25 variants still in service along with 6.5 Creedmoor uppers, the US Army wanting to use the Sig Spear MCX in a proprietary caliber, and now SOCOM will be using a Geissele MRGG-S and a LMT 14.5". All of these rifles are using either 308, .277 "Sig Fury" or 6.5 Creedmoor. LOL! Insane. Sounds like a logistics nightmare if and when we have to fight the Chinese Communist party and the Democrats for California and New York.
Forgot to add, D Wilson is offering this, which is probably as good or better than the MRGG-A LMT will sell us: https://www.dwilsonmfg.com/DWM-Custom-Shop-LMT-65-Creedmoor-Rifle_p_430.html
I love my 16" DD5V3. I have no need to upgrade to 6.5 Creedmoor, when the longest rifle range I have access to is 300 yards at the moment.
I love my 16" DD5V3. I have no need to upgrade to 6.5 Creedmoor, when the longest rifle range I have access to is 300 yards at the moment.
And corruption is always involved
Guaranteed it was for reasons that don't matter/aren't applicable to us regular consumers.
These are rifles for socom. Their armorers are generally not retarded like regular army 92Ys.
I wonder if the overgassed lmts provided more reliability running the gun hard and fast without cleaning.
It's absolutley retarded to award two large frame ARs that will be used within the same squad/ODA from different vendors. Yea there will be some parts compatibility but this is poor strategic and logistical planning.
It would make much more sense if you were going to split the vendors to comoditize on one platform and have both make parts for it. But the reality is this is a relatively small volume weapon system and can easily be handled by one vendor. It's not a m16 or m1 where you need to make millions a year for domestic and partner forces.
Both rifles should have been part of same solicitation. Splitting was stupid.
Don't forget most of the units getting these operate on a arms room model. They can picka and choose what weapons to bring based on the mission and need. I don't see 5.56 carbines going away any time soon and if you think guys are doing predominately CQB with a 14.5" 6.5cm or the sig 277 abortion....L O fucking L.
I believe Delta gets a wider range of choices than other SOF units (like Green Berets). They (Green Berets etc) have an “armory” but still are limited in their choices. You hit the nail on the head though when you mentioned logistics. It makes more sense to go with one manufacturer for both rifles. All one would have to do in the event of an emergency is swap uppers. Makes life easier in terms of replacing spare parts, which should be easy enough on the Geissele or the LMT. .
5.56 NATO in military and police use will probably never go away in our lifetimes, even if plasma rifles are fielded.
Yes, SOF armorers are better, but the LMT makes it easier and faster to switch barrels. Everyone I talk to who serves says they are short staffed in many branches (everywhere) compared to 20 years ago during the GWOT. Less time spent on maintenance is a good thing.
I guess we’ll find out more in the coming weeks. If Elon Musk at DOGE could have done anything, he could have helped SOCOM, the Army, Marines and Navy narrow down their choices. I just hope they all work for our troops, that’s all I care about.
And actually, I forgot to add to your point DeathBeforeDismount, what is the purpose then of the 14.5” MRGG-A in 6.5 Creedmoor? To defeat body armor better at short ranges? What theater, besides Afghanistan, will SOCOM be using this rifle and feel the need to lug a shortened battle rifle for CQB situations and need to take a 600-800 yard shot? I guess Syria, Iran, Yemen could present those situations. Eastern Europe and Finland supporting NATO? Taiwan is more jungle like but I guess you can take long shots there. I’m just thinking aloud when the US Army already has the CSASS, SR-25s etc.
We got to see some feedback on this aspect. The A version is just that, an assault version. Higher sustained rates of fire, harsher environments. The LMT is a little more gassed than the Geissele, the quick change barrel came into play. I want to say it had lesser accuracy requirements, they liked the LMT ambi lower (I think because all the part are readily available?)
Do you know if they settled on 147 ELD-Ms?
Attachments
14.5” 6.5CM is so you don’t have too unwieldy of a blaster when suppressed, which it will be probably 90-95% of the time, if not 100%.
Any type of terrain is appropriate for such a weapon for Sniper Sections or organic Snipers.
USASOC elements were already using .260 Rem SR-25s long ago, maybe around 2010-2011 already if I recall. There were also 16” SR-25s in the 1990s and 2000s before the M110K.
In 2003, I transferred a bunch of early 1990s USASOC SR-25s that had been run hard for 10 years and then returned to KAC on an exchange program for newer Mk.11 Mod 0-type rifles with FF RAS, integral brass deflector on the uppers (vs the old bolt-on units), and a bunch of other features.
Some elements in the SOF world have been using every generational improvement of SR-25s since 1993, which was 32 years ago. The basic reality is that a lot of the weapons are in need of overhaul and replacement.
Shot the KAC 14.5 6.5cr back in 2019 at PRE. Was impressed. When I asked the KAC folks why 14.5, I was told something along the these lines. Middle East engagements could easily be 0-800yd. 556 couldn’t handle the far distances and 308 only had superior ballistics out to around 300yd. Additionally they said a 14.5 6.5cr had “acceptable ballistics” out to 1200yd.
Last edited:
I’m not mil or Leo or anything, but is the complaint valid that some ambi lowers tend to release mags accidentally as the rifle bounces on your torso? Or is that not really a thing in use?
There really aren't that many proprietary parts on the LMT, barrel and barrel screws and plate? Virtually no handguards use "standard" barrel nuts. I suppose on the lower you have the ambi side mag release and bolt release.
Both are good rifles, we are really splitting hairs here. The both basically do the same thing. The both have a few proprietary parts. They both shoot a 6.5 creedmoor round out of a 14.5 barrel. They will both shoot approx 1 moa. I'm sure they can put whatever size gas port they want in the contract, I'm sure they'll get whatever gassing they want.
Truth is the specific small arms used in conflicts just aren't that important in military outcomes.
On a personal level, I'd be 100% satisfied with either, and not waste one ounce of consciousness worrying about the differences between them.
Both are good rifles, we are really splitting hairs here. The both basically do the same thing. The both have a few proprietary parts. They both shoot a 6.5 creedmoor round out of a 14.5 barrel. They will both shoot approx 1 moa. I'm sure they can put whatever size gas port they want in the contract, I'm sure they'll get whatever gassing they want.
Truth is the specific small arms used in conflicts just aren't that important in military outcomes.
On a personal level, I'd be 100% satisfied with either, and not waste one ounce of consciousness worrying about the differences between them.
That's not how these contracts work.
While the giessele is absolutely a more accurate platform I doubt it will be chosen over a 14.5 just for mobility sake. It was pretty retarded to do 2 separate solicitations. I would bet in use case the 14.5 would be selected 9/10 over a 20" suppressed.
It should have been one contract with two uppers (14.5 and 20") and a second contract using a 12.5-14.5. 6 arc, which is already seeing work in this communities from what I'm told. That way the uppers could be set up with electro optical without need to rezero. Makes too much sense.
Just wasting tens if not hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. No big deal.
While the giessele is absolutely a more accurate platform I doubt it will be chosen over a 14.5 just for mobility sake. It was pretty retarded to do 2 separate solicitations. I would bet in use case the 14.5 would be selected 9/10 over a 20" suppressed.
It should have been one contract with two uppers (14.5 and 20") and a second contract using a 12.5-14.5. 6 arc, which is already seeing work in this communities from what I'm told. That way the uppers could be set up with electro optical without need to rezero. Makes too much sense.
Just wasting tens if not hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. No big deal.
Was there a can included in the contract with this platform ? Or is it the one in the video ?
Don't forget, SIG made the .277 to shoot US civilians in body armor, at least that what the internet says
On a related note, US Navy just ordered $40 Million worth of 6.5 Creedmoor ammo.
Aug 21, 2025:
Here’s the pre solicitation from 11/25/2024:
6.5mm Creedmoor Special Ball Long Range Ammunition, M1200, DODIC AC58
Here are the published specs for XM1200 AC58 back in 2019:
Specifications: The 6.5mm Creedmoor XM1200 shall be produced with the following components:
Projectile: 140 Grain Berger Hybrid Target.
Primer: Federal GM210M.
Propellant: Hodgdon H4350.
Cartridge Case Material: Brass
Max Cartridge Overall Length: The maximum overall length of the cartridge shall be 2.815 inches.
Dispersion (25 cartridges per weapon- 50 cartridges total): The extreme spread of any individual 5-shot group shall not exceed 1 Minute of Angle (MOA), at minimum 200 yards, indoor. The average extreme spread of 5-shot groups shall not exceed 0.75 MOA at minimum 200 yards, indoors.
Muzzle Velocity: The average muzzle velocity of the cartridges conditioned and fired at 70°F ± 2°F temperature shall be within 2,750 ±50 feet per second (fps) measured at 15 ft. from the muzzle of the weapon. The standard deviation of the velocities shall be not greater than 15 fps.
Planned Acquisition: The Government contemplates an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract for Fiscal Years (FY) 20-24 for this acquisition (five years from date of award). The estimated quantity to be procured for each fiscal year is up to 2.75M at a production rate of 230,000 rounds per month. Award is planned to be made in FY20.
Aug 21, 2025:
Here’s the pre solicitation from 11/25/2024:
6.5mm Creedmoor Special Ball Long Range Ammunition, M1200, DODIC AC58
Here are the published specs for XM1200 AC58 back in 2019:
Specifications: The 6.5mm Creedmoor XM1200 shall be produced with the following components:
Projectile: 140 Grain Berger Hybrid Target.
Primer: Federal GM210M.
Propellant: Hodgdon H4350.
Cartridge Case Material: Brass
Max Cartridge Overall Length: The maximum overall length of the cartridge shall be 2.815 inches.
Dispersion (25 cartridges per weapon- 50 cartridges total): The extreme spread of any individual 5-shot group shall not exceed 1 Minute of Angle (MOA), at minimum 200 yards, indoor. The average extreme spread of 5-shot groups shall not exceed 0.75 MOA at minimum 200 yards, indoors.
Muzzle Velocity: The average muzzle velocity of the cartridges conditioned and fired at 70°F ± 2°F temperature shall be within 2,750 ±50 feet per second (fps) measured at 15 ft. from the muzzle of the weapon. The standard deviation of the velocities shall be not greater than 15 fps.
Planned Acquisition: The Government contemplates an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract for Fiscal Years (FY) 20-24 for this acquisition (five years from date of award). The estimated quantity to be procured for each fiscal year is up to 2.75M at a production rate of 230,000 rounds per month. Award is planned to be made in FY20.
I wouldn’t be surprised if an M80A1-type 6.5CM round wasn’t already tested and in limited use.
I found my 2016 pics of the Grendel EPR rounds. One was an aluminum flasher, the other an EPR.
Similar threads
