>>20516
Gilliam 8002 IV++ plate says hello, motherfucker!
https://www.gilliamarms.com/products/model-8002-max-heavy-tungsten-rf3-silicon-carbide-ceramic-armor-plate?

>>20511
Just shoot them in the dick.

>>20612
The Chinese now have plates protecting the dick! and the balls! You can now protect your bloodline with a whole ass 10x12!
https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256807798585543.html?

5.56 didn't cut it in GWOT either, when guys high on opium would take shots. Many demanded higher calibre rounds to take them out. 5.56 exists because US was scared that the .270/.280 British was going to become the general round, so they had to kill it and they killed it by making the 5.56 and forcing everybody to use it. You're all welcome to look up the dodgy Garand deals and shit around it. Now we've come full circle, except 6.8 Sneedmore and Fury are not really the .270/.280 British taken to the levels they could have been had they been adopted back then and worked on.

>>20614
>5.56 didn't cut it in GWOT either
Yes it did, you mercury poisoned boomer retard.

>>20614
>it's a zoomer spouting garbled boomer fuddlore disproved longer than I've been alive
Read the 2003 powerpoints on M855 green tip stopping power, especially in M249s. Soldiers rated it very, very good. After all, it fragmented most of the time, which was instantly better than a generic M80 FMJ icepick from their M240s. And now M855A1 and M80A1 exist which fragment 100% of the time within their velocity bands.

>>20616
M855 was a nonsensical downgrade from M193 thoughbeit

>>20511
5.56 out a 22in barrel with a hardened steel core would absolutely cut it, better than .308 or .30-06. The primary factor in armor penetration is projectile velocity.

>>20618
Botpost. Velocity only applies directly to steel armor. Larger penetrators are more effective versus PE and ceramic type armor. See >>20518

>>20619
The density and tensile strength of the core is also an issue. I'm not saying its the best option available I'm saying it performs better against most targets than the other widely available options without the sacrifices most of those require. Once again the primary factor is velocity, then comes everything else and frankly you can apply most of those other factors to a variety of ammo simply by changing the internal structure and composition of the bullet.

The army will just have to deal with the fact that making barrels long once more is a better option than bullshit high chamber pressures.

>>20615
>pic
>comparing soft-tissue fleshwounds to wounds where bullets clearly strike bone and shatter everything to shit
Retarded.

I've seen more than enough forensic documents, photos, and autopsy reports to know that the specific caliber used in any one of these photos isn't relevant.
Any one of these wounds could have been caused by everything from .22Hornet or .30carbine to .375H&H.
The exact cartridge used doesn't really matter when discussing rifle wounds to humans. In 90% of real life practical scenarios they all perform more or less the same.
What matters far more in these situations is if the projectiles hits soft tissue and ice-pics straight through, or if they hits bone and shatter everything to shit.

Excluding fancy (militarily prohibited) varmint ammo that can do some funky shit, pretty much all intermediate and full-power rifle calibers will have similar effects on humans.
Humans simply aren't large enough, don't have enough meat for factors like exact bullet diameter, BC, twist rate, stability, tumbling, etc to matter.
Even the most unstable and tumble-prone high velocity shit doesn't perform much better than plain old m43 ball against human flesh and bone.
Not enough to actually matter in the grand scheme of things.
Any given rifle ammo in current military use is more than deadly enough.

The military has other, far more pressing concerns in mind when selecting cartridges.

>>20620
You're still thinking everything is steel. If you want to pop plates actually used by militaries worldwide outside of desperado situations, you need larger cores.
Yes, velocity matters, but a 7.62x51mm 148gr hardened steel AP will massively outperform a 5.56x45mm 62gr hardened steel AP even if the 5.56 has a substantial velocity advantage.
7.62x51mm M61 AP for example is well beyond all non-tungsten 5.56 AP and even sidegrades M995. 7.62x54R B-32 API is also steel and many B-32 API plates can also defeat M995 or even better APs like 5.45 7N39, depending on the precise ceramic.

>>20620
For reference, M995's nominal velocity is 3,400ft/s and even at that spec it loses to many Level IV plates and later-revision ESAPIs rated specifically to beat .30-06 M2AP at 2,910ft/s. Despite a nearly 500ft/s advantage, the 5.56 AP is inferior.
If a Level IV is boron carbide or steel, however, then unique failure mechanisms emerge which make M995 superior.

>>20616
That there's M14brained boomers demanding .277 Furry when M855A1 and M80A1 exist is astonishing. Truly the dementia has set it hard.

>>20547
>professionals are shooting for the face from the start, and everyone will be spamming shots over your whole body nonstop until one or the other side dies.
What a depressing world you live in. You must not even have a cloak.

>>20611
Like anyone would buy from an UNQUALIFIED garage tier alcoholic. Harumph.

>>20624
I'm camp HICAR, but there's no denying XM1186 and XM1184 mog M855A1 and the cancelled 5.56 ADVAP in terms of penetration.
Is the juice however worth the squeeze? I don't think so. Just make a HICAR-XL in 7.62x51mm and run M1158+ with a nice 300-400ft/s bonus for the rare occasions you need to bust turbo XSAPIs. You can still use regular 7.52x51 and take advantage of enhanced terminal ballistics all the same from + spec HICAR ammo too. A beefed up M80A1 or +P TMK should be nasty.
>>20625
UNEQUAL ball knowledge.

>>20626
Listen you /gq/ autist. Gilliam has now moved from his GARAGE to his WAREHOUSE and now offers WAREHOUSING SERVICES for other companies that don't have legit business addresses *cough* fucking Adept *cough*

>>20628
WAREHOUSE is just a garage without a HOUSE attached to it. What a MISNOMER.

>>20629
That is UNEQUAL. It is a SECURE commercial facility in NORTH CAROLINA.
>Gilliam Arms offers secure indoor warehousing and drop-shipping services to fellow ballistic armor manufacturers from our climate-controlled facility on the Crystal Coast of North Carolina. Whether you're a domestic manufacturer looking to position inventory closer to your East Coast customers, or an international supplier in need of a U.S.-based fulfillment partner, our conditioned warehouse space provides a clean, temperature-stable environment purpose-suited to ceramic plates, UHMWPE backers, soft armor panels, and finished hard armor. Stored goods remain in your inventory; we provide the four walls, the climate control, and the hands-on-d*ck.
https://www.gilliamarms.com/pages/for-manufacturers?

>>20627
Militaries have a whole lot of practical concerns that don't seem obvious from an outside perspective.
Performance against flesh or armor plating matters less to them than you'd think.
One recent example would be the Swedes. They were debating if they should stick to 5.56 or switch to 7.62 NATO for their standard select-fire infantry rifles.
A select-fire AR-10 variant was originally favored due to impressive-looking specs and good performance on paper.
After a year of testing, the 7.62 AR-10 battle rifle project was on life-support, everyone was favoring a 5.56mm carbine, which did get selected as the new standard service rifle despite originally being intended as a PDW for POGs.
During testing it turned out each rifle had strengths and weaknesses that weren't immediately evident when just comparing ballistics data on an chart. Shocking, I know.
For example:

Training recruits to get proficient with the 7.62 rifles took up to 3 times longer than training troops to shoot the 5.56 rifle.
Even then, the vast majority of troops who'd received all this extra training never got close to the novice 5.56 shooters in terms of actually landing shots on their intended targets under simulated combat conditions.
The increased training time and more expensive ammo meant that training with the 7.62 rifle was around 6 times more expensive per recruit, and said recruits would be much slower to get into action, and miss almost every shot in an actual combat scenario.

Choosing the 5.56 meant that troops would be cheaper, they'd be more plentiful, they'd all carry far more ammo, and they'd all have far better odds of actually hitting what they were shooting at.
Despite performing far worse against armor, troop carrying the "sissy little poodle-shooters" would be far more effective in combat than their costly and numerically inferior 7.62 counterparts, who'd be blowing their limited supply of expensive high-testosterone AP rounds directly into the dirt.

>>20631
And that's part of the reason why I'm camp HICAR and not camp NGSW. Just take 5.56, beef it up, and split the difference between normal 5.56 and real fuckin' NATO. I agree with your sentiments on all counts.
I'm in favor of a "HICAR 5.56 / .338 Norma" mix which is what USSOCOM is currently doing. If you need anti-materiel work the advantages of .338 Norma are undeniable versus even 7.62x51mm or .300 Winmag and it's much easier to move than a .50. Modern XM1224, XM1214, and M1162 / M1163 provide a solid selection of ammo for anti-materiel, multi-purpose, normal AP, and normal ammo. Last I checked XM1224 has the muscle to defeat even many .50 caliber plates like the 8.8lb / 1.44" thick one the Chinese are now selling commercially.
Regular situations can get by with M855A1+ (which will clear basic DBP87 or even DBP10-rated Chinese plates, and the Special-type Type 56 7.62x54R API rated ones if you can get two hits reasonably tight - in other words, just magdump the fuck) and if you really need to fight dudes in CQB wearing especially stout and/or high coverage armor and can't just spam frags like the Ukrainians then roll the 97gr SIG shit.
SOCOM does have other rounds. They have a 6mm ARC AP which is supposedly very good and then fancy stuff in .300 PRC and other calibers.

Pic related is the current state of play for Chinese armor, absent a couple items like plates from Adept, Gilliam, and a few models only sold domestically in China by guys like Norinco.

>>20631
For infantry, being able to send a higher volume of fire for longer periods is more important than individual hit effectiveness.

7,62 rounds weight nearly double 5,56 rounds, which means soldiers can carry half as much ammo, have less rounds per magazines, need to resupply twice as often and so on. It's a whole logistical cascade. Considering about 90% of shots will be area suppression, cover fire, or just blind mag dumping in the general direction of the enemy some 300m away, having more ammo matters way more than being able to penetrate level IV armor in one hit.

>>20627
>I'm not a fan of 6.8x51 but would be fine with 7.62x51

I can't wrap my head around this logic, 6.8 is superior to 7.62x51 in every metric.

>>20634
6.8 is very high pressure and caused increased parts wear for very little benefit. and the benefit it does have is already done my existing cartridges.

>>20635
>parts wear

Negated by proper design and materials.

>for very little benefit
>and the benefit it does have is already done my existing cartridges

Oh you are just being retarded, got it.

>>20636
>Negated by proper design and materials.
no, it doesn't. the barrels are burning out faster than they should, and there's no way to stop it.
>Oh you are just being retarded, got it.
no, that's you for not knowing what you're talking about.

>>20637
>the barrels are burning out faster than they should, and there's no way to stop it.

It's called modern materials and rifling designs.

>that's you for not knowing what you're talking about

Ironic given you think having long barreled velocities in short barrels as well as not having the ballistics of a potato is not a benefit.

>>20638
>It's called modern materials and rifling designs.
no it's not. modern materials aren't magic, they still wear out.
>having long barreled velocities in short barrels as well as not having the ballistics of a potato is not a benefit.
it's not a benefit if your barrel is burnt out in 4000 rounds.

you're a retard and you don't know what you're talking about.

>>20634
Because there is a huge existing 7.62x51 stockpile of ammo and guns and if push comes to shove 7.62x51 can fit a larger penetrator

>>20639
I swear the burnout time gets shorter every time you little niggers post.

>>20637
Barrel wear is not really an issue for the US military. Barrel wear is only an issue for civilians who don't want to spend 3000$ on a new rifle every 5000 shots. For the army barrels and rifles are considered consumable items and many of them will need replacement before the barrel wears out anyway.

The real issue is reliability. More pressure needs heavier materials to handle it, increased risk of case rupture or mechanical issues.

>>20641
Unfortunately >>20639 is correct. Yes, you can throw modern materials at the problem to slow wear down but it's not a silver bullet.

>>20643
No anon 6.8x51 barrels do not burn out in 4000 rounds.

>>20644
They do however wear faster, which is the point.
Unrelated, I swear these threads are engagement bait because I see none of you people in the generals.

>>20642
>Barrel wear is not really an issue for the US military
yes it is, dumbass. you can't have your rifles wearing out prematurely in the middle of combat.
>>20644
keep coping, sigger.

If the US is logistically pressed in a total war against China it is not going to be able to keep up with 6.8 demands and will have to fall back on the 5.56 and 7.62 stockpiles.
The whole 6.8 thing is stupid and HICAR mogs it by being reverse compatible.

>>20645
>They do however wear faster, which is the point

Ah yes 9500 rounds instead of 10000 rounds, that 500 rounds totally outweighs a lighter + more compact gun while having flatter trajectories that retain velocity better.

>>20511
If theyre doing the whole bi-metal case thing anyway at like 90k psi why not just extend 5.56 case by like 5mm, make it 90k psi, heavier projectile with more case capacity and giga fucked psi?

>>20649
HICAR is using Federal's PEAK alloy single piece case.

>>20646
>you can't have your rifles wear out prematurely in the middle of combat

Real life are not videogames where rifles suddenly become unusable after X amount of shots retard. Accuracy degrades over time and even a shot out barrel will deliver 5-6 MOA which is still acceptable accuracy for most general infantry applications.

>>20648
That's tertiary, the existing 7.62 stockpile is more important and the M7's costs could have been better spent on HICAR but 7.62 for DMRs.
>>20651
It's still a logistical issue as barrels wear out.

>>20652
sunk cost fallacy and you are glossing over how if the M8/M250 have a fractionally shorter barrel life that that causing logistical issues would mean something was already seriously wrong

>>20653
Several million rounds of ammo =/= sunk cost. The M7 / M8 are however sunk costs.

>>20634
Performance is not meaningfully better, while costing a lot to implement, and will wear out barrels much quicker.
This is worse than people who think .224 Valkyrie should replace 5.56mm because it's a tiny bit more optimal.

>>20654
Yeah it's called higher pressure 7.62x51, lol. You got stock in SIG or something?

>>20654
If only they kept this mindset with .30-06

>>20658
Which 7.62x51 actually provides meaningful improvement on, Mr. Cohen.

>>20657
That's not how it works, lil nigger.