An interesting bit of information just surfaced. This information comes from Patrick Fisher, the the acquisition program manager for ammunition for Special Operations Command. When addressing an audience at the National Defense Industry Association Armament Systems forum in Indianapolis on Monday he indicated that last October they tested the SR-25, M110A1, and Mk20 chambered in .308, 260 Rem and 6.5 Creedmoor to determine which provided the best capability. This was not just a theoretical test but apparently a test for actual acquisition. They settled on the 6.5 Creedmoor and will begin swapping barrels on their 7.62x51mm NATO rifles with 6.5 CM barrels starting next year. Of course, their standardized load will also be acquired at the same time.

This was done to offer an effective stop gap setup while the Army continues to test and seek their replacement cartridge for the 7.62x51mm NATO and its rifle systems by 2021. They have settled on a specific loading for the 6.5 CM, but no details were offered. Using the 6.5 CM offers a very easy caliber conversion for all their 308/7.62 rifles but yet offers a considerable improvement on long range capability and even a reduction in recoil. Considering that most of SOCOM is using M2010s and other 300 WM rifles as their primary sniper rifles, we are assuming all of their other 7.62 sniper rifles, which primarily consist of the ones they tested last year, will be getting the barrel swaps.

Incidentally, the Department of Homland Security (DHS) has decided to make the same switch to 6.5 CM as SOCOM. This is all interesting news and we’ll keep you posted.

Sniper Central



Joseph Smith

Must we reinvent the wheel? I can understand the need for change in small arms when technology and modernity demand it, smokeless powder, repeaters, etc., but is the 7.62 Nato round SO obsolete that a new cartridge is needed?


The ballistics of the 6.5CM are significantly better than the 308, and rival that of the 300WM, but yet out of the same rifles as the 308 and less recoil. It is a big jump. Necessary? No, but highly desirable.


When it’s your life on the line you want the best you can get


This prompted me to look at the energy of a 140gr 6.5 vs a 175gr 308 at 600+ yards. It’s way closer than I’d have expected.

I hadn’t thought about downrange energy since my 6.5 CM only gets used for ringing steel and as an expensive hole punch. Going to 6.5 CM makes sense with to the lack of energy loss compared to a 175SMK.


This seems a no brainier for me.
The NATO round is flanked by superior performing offerings that mirror each other in ballistics.
The situation will dictate what caliber to use, 300wm or 6.5cm, and the trajectory remains nearly identical. Glad to see the military is thinking.
My problem is I would have to rechamber my ¼moa .243 Winchester to 6.5cm or buy another rifle!
I just don’t see the 308 as necessary as it once was.



Looks like the idea of providing Ruger Precision Rifle options is making sense.

Platt Brabner

I am a big fan of the .300 WM and 7 MM with the heaviest bullet they can handle using G-7 tables. Planning the same for my latest AR-10 in 6.5 CM.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *