• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

What about FN .264 LICC?

S

SixFive-O

Private
Minuteman
Sep 24, 2022
43
36
Minnesota
Don't know how I missed this at SHOT Show 2023, but somebody posted about FN's new .264 LICC and after looking into it, it seems pretty cool.

The .264 LICC (Lightweight Intermediate Caliber Cartridge) is based on the .264 USA, which is a 6.5x48 cartridge developed by the AMU (Army Marksmanship Unit) with a case head of .441, like the 6.5 Grendel; it’s basically a stretched Grendel. A head diameter of .441, like the 6.5 Grendel, 6mmARC, and .264 USA, is the largest that can reliably double-stack within the dimensions of the AR15 magazine well. If you move up to .473 you can’t double-stack in the AR15; you need a redesigned magazine (especially if using polymer mags) and mag well.

FN's .264 LICC (6.5x43 with a 2.5” COAL) has a case head of .473, like the .308 Winchester family of cartridges, as well as the newer 6mm GT. The 6mm GT has a case length of 44mm (1.73"), and a 24" bbl velocity of 3075 fps with a 110gr bullet at 62,100 psi pressure, according to Hodgdon’s reloading data.

FN has not released specs on the .264 LICC, but a 6.5x43 with a 110gr in a 24" bbl should get 3100 fps (add 25 fps for the increased surface area “piston effect”), and a more optimum weighted 115gr should get 3050 fps. Pressures should be around 62k psi, much better than the 80k psi of the dead-end 6.8 NGSW.

Note: 62k psi is still gonna kick too much for the average troop, so a recoil-reducing mechanism like “constant recoil” is a must.

A 6.5mm 115gr hybrd OTM using existing Berger ogives can have a G1 BC of .610. Using the 25 fps per barrel inch rule of thumb starting with a 24” bbl at 3050 fps, a 20” bbl would get 2950, a 16” gets 2850, and a 12” gets 2750.

Ballistics could be pretty good in a compact package no bigger than an AR15, which the Ruger SFAR has proven possible. Cases are two-part and made of stainless steel and are 20% lighter than comparable brass. More compact cartridges like this help maximize the soldier’s basic load over the 6.8 NGSW. Gets 25 rounds in the same length as a 5.56 30-round mag.

YouTube video HERE.

Is FN on to something, or not?
 

Attachments

  • FN_264_LICC_65x43-473-2.jpg
    FN_264_LICC_65x43-473-2.jpg
    225.1 KB · Views: 739
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MSTN and FALex
Looks great. What advantage does it have as a fighting rifle over say 52gr 7n6 where troopers can carry 30 mags in a pack?

7n39 Tungsten load can go through most vests under 200 yards.

This 6.5 cartridge weights 2.5 times more then 7n6 or 2 times more then 62 grain M855A1.

Most fights are under 300 yards in Ukraine and Iraq. Maybe not Afghanistan.

I get it. But would not want to carry 115gr 6.5 LICC or 130gr .277 Fury for high speed low drag maneuver warfare.
 
Roughly, it seems like a 6mm GT necked up to 6.5mm, but with a 30° shoulder instead of 35° and 43mm (1.70") case length instead of 44mm (1.73"). Shorter neck, like the 6.5 Grendel, decreases wastage in mass production and helps with full-auto feeding.

The military has already Been There. Done That.™ with existing cartridges like the 5.45x39 and 5.56x45. They've moved on to 6.8 NGSW which, in my opinion, is a disastrous "bridge too far." Why not split the difference in the military world like the 6mm GT is attempting to do in the competition world?

Seems to be a similar concept to what the SEALs are doing in testing the 6mm ARC in AR15s.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: highbclowgr
SixFive-O said:
Roughly, it seems like a 6mm GT necked up to 6.5mm, but with a 30° shoulder instead of 35° and 43mm (1.70") case length instead of 44mm (1.73"). Shorter neck, like the 6.5 Grendel, decreases wastage in mass production and helps with full-auto feeding.

The military has already Been There. Done That.™ with existing cartridges like the 5.45x39 and 5.56x45. They've moved on to 6.8 NGSW which, in my opinion, is a disastrous "bridge too far." Why not split the difference in the military world like the 6mm GT is attempting to do in the competition world?
Click to expand...



Yes. Some fights in Ukraine, guys are burning the barrels out of MULTIPLE 74s in a single battle. Imagine an M5?? 😁

A 6mm GT with a 62-77 HIGH b.c. bullet would be great at 3200 fps in a 11.5 inch barrel.

Probably get better drop then M855A1 in a 14-20inch.

A 0.5- 0.75 MOA 6ARC in a MK18 or 11.5 KAC SR16 would be the ticket as long as it can go 1000 rounds sustained.
would be my ticket
 
Last edited:
The reason FN changed the case diameter as soon as they got involved is because they already had many rifles using cases with that diameter and they have MG links that size that work. Reports said they could not get the velocity needed from a .441 dia case without increasing powder capacity by making it longer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jstone
It makes sense to go to a case diameter of .473 for all the reasons you mentioned. Simply requires a new magazine (easy) and a new version of an AR (also easy — expensive, but easy).

Can't remember where I heard it or read it, but feedback from testers said they'd rather have a shorter weapon with a fatter cartridge than a longer weapon.
 
I'm guessing he's having his fun trolling and making up ridiculous bullets from the LeMas fiasco of yester year where hysterical claims were made about super lightweight bullets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jstone
SixFive-O said:
I'm guessing he's having his fun trolling and making up ridiculous bullets from the LeMas fiasco of yester year where hysterical claims were made about super lightweight bullets.
Click to expand...

Okay fine. Just regular 109s or 103.
Kind of heavy though to lug around.

Maybe that's why MK262 is so dang good.
Maybe that 77 grain in a Valkrie would be the ultimate ticket. Would just have to be more then .398 b.c.

Even .450 b.c. would be nice.

Low bearing surface. Less likely to separate bullet from casing when the chamber and barrel is hot.

I wonder how the long legged 6mm GTs and 6.5 Creedmores fare under heat. I supposed the 7n6 fares well.
 
highbclowgr said:
No link available. I'm just theorizing out loud.
Click to expand...
But what is the theory based on? You've posted quite a few times in multiple threads about bullets that don't exist. If it was as simple as just making them a good shape, and light, and somehow maintain a high BC, don't you think it would have been done already.?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bfoosh006
TonyTheTiger said:
But what is the theory based on? You've posted quite a few times in multiple threads about bullets that don't exist. If it was as simple as just making them a good shape, and light, and somehow maintain a high BC, don't you think it would have been done already.?
Click to expand...

If I give people on here ideas, it can happen.

USA is a giant market full of useless and useful crap. Including gun stuff.

Hi-Point. PSA. KAC. Barrett. Colt.
 
Speaking of good shape, and light, with a high BC.... At SHOT I pitched a 6.5mm 115gr to Brian Litz of Berger for those who shoot 6.5 Grendel and others who like a light bullet in their Creedmoors. One could copy the .748" hybrid ogive from Berger's existing 153.5gr LRHT. My point was it's time to retire the long-in-the-tooth 6.5mm 120–123gr class of bullets and replace them with modern ogives. Litz was polite and thoughtful and cautioned that one can't put the weight too far back on a long, light bullet cuz it will tend to want to tumble in flight, so one must be mindful of the center of gravity relative to the center of pressure (or whatever it was). I mentioned it could have a short bearing surface like Berger's .30 155gr hybrid bullet. He said, "You've got a point, there, cuz that's an accurate bullet."

Bottom line: The .264 LICC has potential for development into a very nice cartridge along the lines of a 6.5-GT, and for military use a hybrid ogive 115gr can perform at range while keeping velocities up and the total cartridge weight and recoil down (as opposed to a 123gr or 130gr — and if you're gonna go with a 105gr, just go with a 6mm).
 
Ha! Fair enough. I don't know enough about either. At any rate, FN has developed their own long-stroke piston AR along with the cartridge.
 
SixFive-O said:
Speaking of good shape, and light, with a high BC.... At SHOT I pitched a 6.5mm 115gr to Brian Litz of Berger for those who shoot 6.5 Grendel and others who like a light bullet in their Creedmoors. One could copy the .748" hybrid ogive from Berger's existing 153.5gr LRHT. My point was it's time to retire the long-in-the-tooth 6.5mm 120–123gr class of bullets and replace them with modern ogives. Litz was polite and thoughtful and cautioned that one can't put the weight too far back on a long, light bullet cuz it will tend to want to tumble in flight, so one must be mindful of the center of gravity relative to the center of pressure (or whatever it was). I mentioned it could have a short bearing surface like Berger's .30 155gr hybrid bullet. He said, "You've got a point, there, cuz that's an accurate bullet."

Bottom line: The .264 LICC has potential for development into a very nice cartridge along the lines of a 6.5-GT, and for military use a hybrid ogive 115gr can perform at range while keeping velocities up and the total cartridge weight and recoil down (as opposed to a 123gr or 130gr — and if you're gonna go with a 105gr, just go with a 6mm).
Click to expand...


Yep. Gotta gave a low bearing surface for a military round. Barrel burn is real.

115gr still seems heavy. Is the U.S. Military changing their battle doctrine?

Enemy would have fire superiority with M193 up close by double. M995 up close is great too.

How did the 6.5 Licc perform on the 2000 round meltdown test?

Double the weight of 62 gr.

6.5 Licc would be great for an open field....but not as good as 0.25 MOA 750gr AMAX.

Little Army people cannot shoot the 6.5L or .277 Fury good enough. Too much recoil.
 
On the plus side a short bearing surface reduces chamber pressure. On the minus side it can allow the bullet to tilt as its entering the rifling, degrading accuracy. As with most ballistic issues, best to strike a balance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: highbclowgr
POF did the AR15-sized 308 six years before Ruger with the Revolution. The DI version came a bit later as did the Rogue. But all three were out years before Ruger released their version. But yeah the new FN looks bad-ass. There's a good photo of it in another thread.

Definitely find the discussion interesting but I almost feel like cartridge/calibrer development has become minutiae at this point. It may be rocket science but we pretty much figured that shit out in the 20th century.
 
  • Like
Reactions: highbclowgr
Pretty much figured it out. Agreed. Yet now they give troops the 6.8 NGSW. So, yeah, no. They haven't figured it out.
 
The .264USA was interesting because it would fit an AR-15 magwell. The 6.5FNLICC needs an AR-10 magwell, suddenly it’s a lot less interesting because of 6.5 Creedmoor, 6GT and host of other options existing in the this space already.

In my opinion the best use for this cartridge is to entice creation and adoption of a standardized small frame AR-10. However the rifle would still be the object of interest much more than this cartridge.

People want an AR-15 size rifle (and recoil) with AR-10 power and range. They couldn’t care less about making another short 308win-based cartridge with a smaller diameter bullet.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LRRPF52
Vynz said:
The .264USA was interesting because it would fit an AR-15 magwell. The 6.5FNLICC needs an AR-10 magwell, suddenly it’s a lot less interesting because of 6.5 Creedmoor, 6GT and host of other options existing in the this space already.

In my opinion the best use for this cartridge is to entice creation and adoption of a standardized small frame AR-10. However the rifle would still be the object of interest much more than this cartridge.

People want an AR-15 size rifle (and recoil) with AR-10 power and range. They couldn’t care less about making another short 308win-based cartridge with a smaller diameter bullet.
Click to expand...

7 lb 338 RCM AR10 with counter rotating buffer assembly when?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Vynz
Vynz said:
The .264USA was interesting because it would fit an AR-15 magwell. The 6.5FNLICC needs an AR-10 magwell, suddenly it’s a lot less interesting because of 6.5 Creedmoor, 6GT and host of other options existing in the this space already.

In my opinion the best use for this cartridge is to entice creation and adoption of a standardized small frame AR-10. However the rifle would still be the object of interest much more than this cartridge.

People want an AR-15 size rifle (and recoil) with AR-10 power and range. They couldn’t care less about making another short 308win-based cartridge with a smaller diameter bullet.
Click to expand...
The 264 USA would not fit in a AR15 magwel, the OAL was 2.6".
Chris Murray developed the 7mm UIAC based on the 7.62x45 czech as a lwmg round, the AMU took his design and necked it down to .277 and .264. When they turned the 264 USA over to FN, FN changed to a 6.5 GT more or less. FN doesn't care about what civilians want, they are interested in military contracts which means producing something that performs within the specs of military needs.
At the moment the military is concerned about defeating LIV armor, they have already done all the testing to find what works best at what weight and the lowest possible velocity. That is why they asked manufactures specifically to design rifles to fire a 130gr .277 bullet at 3000fps.
There is a professional military forum where this topic has been going on for a year, I check to see if the FN cartridge is part of another program.
ETA- The 264 LICC was part of an earlier program from 2016, they have since moved on to the 6.8x51 to defeat LIV armor.
The very name of the program is straight out of a 2016 briefing presented to NDIA’s Armament Systems Forum by IWTSD’s SME Jim Schatz entitled “A Path to Overmatch: Next Generation Individual Weapon System” in which he envisioned a new weapon firing a lightweight cartridge in .264 or .277.



Looks to be Shell Shocks case design (unconfirmed)



(note projectiles listed as 103-125gr; the CU OTM projectiles are 109 and 120gr)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Vynz
Constructor said:
They are testing a 338 HMG now but it isn't a RCM---
Click to expand...


That would be better in .375 Fury then .338 NM.

Blackhawk down people always bitching about penciling through skinny deer.

Why not woodchuck them then. There you go.

No COAL to fret about. Keep the weight and Form Factor lower.

.338 NM is good too though.

Can put more onto a C17 Globemaster. It's dimensionally smaller.
 
Last edited:
Vynz said:
The .264USA was interesting because it would fit an AR-15 magwell. The 6.5FNLICC needs an AR-10 magwell, suddenly it’s a lot less interesting because of 6.5 Creedmoor, 6GT and host of other options existing in the this space already.

In my opinion the best use for this cartridge is to entice creation and adoption of a standardized small frame AR-10. However the rifle would still be the object of interest much more than this cartridge.

People want an AR-15 size rifle (and recoil) with AR-10 power and range. They couldn’t care less about making another short 308win-based cartridge with a smaller diameter bullet.
Click to expand...
This does not need an AR10 magwell, it’s an intermediate sized magwell and rifle designed for this cartridge. It is between an AR15 and AR10, thus the custom magazines.
 
"Also, SIG is proposing a hybrid case 6.5 mm Creedmoor +P+ loaded with a 102 gr EPR bullet launched at 3400 fps... only ~74 in. of bullet drop at 600 yards!"
Hybrid case design like the 6.8x51.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bulletsmith and highbclowgr
Constructor said:
"Also, SIG is proposing a hybrid case 6.5 mm Creedmoor +P+ loaded with a 102 gr EPR bullet launched at 3400 fps... only ~74 in. of bullet drop at 600 yards!"
Hybrid case design like the 6.8x51.
Click to expand...
I remember reading somewhere Sig was going to make all these high pressure options incompatible with existing chambers to prevent 80kpsi oopises. Is that the case for this as well?
 
Vynz said:
I remember reading somewhere Sig was going to make all these high pressure options incompatible with existing chambers to prevent 80kpsi oopises. Is that the case for this as well?
Click to expand...
Most seem to think so, they believe all military type cartridges developed from now on will be based on these 2 piece case designs or poly and some go as far as saying it will prevent civilians from obtaining true modern military firearms.
 
When 6.8 NGSW falls on its face, the U.S. military will still be looking for a modern military assault rifle and LMG cartridge, but 1) more compact, 2) normal pressures and recoil, 3) Level IV body armor penetration at range — all of which will require a smaller caliber than the 6.8 NGSW.

Could be why FN is still pitching their .264 LICC and rifle as recently as SHOT Show 2023.
 
SixFive-O said:
When 6.8 NGSW falls on its face, the U.S. military will still be looking for a modern military assault rifle and LMG cartridge, but 1) more compact, 2) normal pressures and recoil, 3) Level IV body armor penetration at range — all of which will require a smaller caliber than the 6.8 NGSW.

Could be why FN is still pitching their .264 LICC and rifle as recently as SHOT Show 2023.
Click to expand...


Military has found a profitable industry of window shopping.

Any gun bans in Canada and USA will stifle creativity and discovery.

We are fighting hard in Canada. People have already died.
 
SixFive-O said:
When 6.8 NGSW falls on its face, the U.S. military will still be looking for a modern military assault rifle and LMG cartridge, but 1) more compact, 2) normal pressures and recoil, 3) Level IV body armor penetration at range — all of which will require a smaller caliber than the 6.8 NGSW.

Could be why FN is still pitching their .264 LICC and rifle as recently as SHOT Show 2023.
Click to expand...


M4 with M995 works fine. So does M110 with M993.
 
Since FN's case is a two-part stainless steel, it's not based on the Shell Shock case, which is a two-part aluminum base with a stainless steel case wall cylinder. Could be made by NovX, since their two-part case uses both a stainless steel base and cylinder.

However, if pressures are gonna be a relatively "normal" 62k psi like the 6mm GT, then there's no need for the strength of stainless. There's also no need for the more complicated and expensive two-part case, unless that's the only way to make a stainless case? But we've had steel cases forever, so I'd be surprised if stainless can't be extruded like other steel cases.

Unless Hodgdon's loading data for the 6mm GT, for some strange reason, can't correlate to a 6.5mm GT/.264 LICC and give at least 3,000 fps with a 6.5mm 115gr from a 24" at 62k psi (7.62x51 M80 147gr, .420 G1 BC, milspec ammo gets 2,800 fps from a 24" barrel), then I don't see a need for a non-brass case. If it's for the 20% weight savings, that's cool; I get that. But if FN is trying to put 80k psi pressure in the .264 LICC, then that's the same mistake as the 6.8 NGSW.
 
SixFive-O said:
Since FN's case is a two-part stainless steel, it's not based on the Shell Shock case, which is a two-part aluminum base with a stainless steel case wall cylinder. Could be made by NovX, since their two-part case uses both a stainless steel base and cylinder.

However, if pressures are gonna be a relatively "normal" 62k psi like the 6mm GT, then there's no need for the strength of stainless. There's also no need for the more complicated and expensive two-part case, unless that's the only way to make a stainless case? But we've had steel cases forever, so I'd be surprised if stainless can't be extruded like other steel cases.

Unless Hodgdon's loading data for the 6mm GT, for some strange reason, can't correlate to a 6.5mm GT/.264 LICC and give at least 3,000 fps with a 6.5mm 115gr from a 24" at 62k psi (7.62x51 M80 147gr, .420 G1 BC, milspec ammo gets 2,800 fps from a 24" barrel), then I don't see a need for a non-brass case. If it's for the 20% weight savings, that's cool; I get that. But if FN is trying to put 80k psi pressure in the .264 LICC, then that's the same mistake as the 6.8 NGSW.
Click to expand...


Why are the requirements based around beating body armor? Most don't even have it in Ukraine, Syria, and Iraq.

Building a cartridge around those requirements seems kind of moot.

I don't know.
 
hlee said:
Reading ain’t high on his to-do list.
Click to expand...


I know this is a requirement.

I have read the 6.8 NGSW program requirements.


Looks like we are going back to heavy loadouts.

China is just going to copy the 6.8 NGSW program.
 
highbclowgr said:
China is just going to copy the 6.8 NGSW program.
Click to expand...

It’s not really that simple. Chinese military personnel have a different body habitus than the average American military personnel. Just adopting a copy of what works for us won’t be a good solution for them.
 
SixFive-O said:
These are U.S. military requirements. Read up on the whole 6.8 NGSW program and it'll help a lot of things in this thread make sense.
Click to expand...

How the **** is a 98 lb female or 120lb trans male supposed to handle the recoil and lug all that heavy ammo around?

FBI and Police women couldn't handle .40 cal or 10mm.

They can barely handle 9mm under stress.

How is the U.S. Military going to get these idiots to lug around a giant heavy assed weapon system and heavy ammo?

A British or Russian Platoon could carry 600 rounds in 52 gr A.P. loadout with C8 or AK74m & swarm these morons.

I don't understand the program.

How is Forest Gump and Bubba going to be mobile and effective?
 
Vynz said:
It’s not really that simple. Chinese military personnel have a different body habitus than the average American military personnel. Just adopting a copy of what works for us won’t be a good solution for them.
Click to expand...

I get that.

You are saying Americans would lug around that heavy assed shit in North Central Congo or in Vietnam or Central America. 50 Celcius with 80% humidity? Doubt it.

Not a effing chance. 😁

Muh body armor.

6.8 NG is a goddamn specialist weapon system and or cash grab for the acquisition beaurocrats. As usual.
 
From the photos I don’t understand how the non-reciprocating charging handle works. It looks like the slot it travels in has some sort of cover running the whole length - but there doesn’t seem to be a place for it to extrude out the back along the stock. Any one else understand how they keep this area of the firearm sealed but still contained with in the reciever?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
300 PRC
Replies
145
Views
28K
rustyinbend
rustyinbend
aam
243 Load Data
Replies
1
Views
14K
Tactical Taz
Tactical Taz
G
  • Sticky
338 Norma
Replies
53
Views
15K
Jakeweb09
Jakeweb09
H
My "Ultimate" Long Range AR - 6mm Super LR
Replies
22
Views
9K
kstraughen
K
HTR707
Today's State of the Art in 6.8 X 43 mm SPC
Replies
79
Views
25K
RUTGERS95
RUTGERS95
Top Bottom
Back