Why the M7 and 6.8x51mm are Bad Ideas

Published on December 6, 2025
Duration: 1:14

Ian McCollum of Forgotten Weapons critically analyzes the M7 rifle program and the 6.8x51mm cartridge, arguing that the perceived need for extended range and armor penetration in Afghanistan is a flawed premise. He suggests modern tactical solutions like drones are more effective than re-arming infantry with heavier calibers and rifles.

Quick Summary

Ian McCollum of Forgotten Weapons critically analyzes the M7 rifle and 6.8x51mm cartridge, arguing their adoption is based on a flawed doctrine derived from Afghanistan experiences. He suggests modern tactical problems are better solved with drones than heavier rifles, and high chamber pressure isn't the sole solution for armor penetration.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction to M7 Critique
  2. 00:13Afghanistan Engagement Gap
  3. 00:34Drones as Tactical Alternative
  4. 00:51Defeating Next-Gen Body Armor

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is the M7 rifle and 6.8x51mm cartridge considered a bad idea by Forgotten Weapons?

Ian McCollum argues that the M7 program's doctrine is flawed, stemming from Afghanistan experiences where 5.56mm M4s were outranged. He believes modern tactical issues are better solved with drones than heavier rifles, and high chamber pressure isn't the sole answer for armor penetration.

What tactical problem led to the development of the 6.8x51mm cartridge and M7 rifle?

The primary driver was the perceived need to extend infantry engagement range, as US troops with 5.56mm M4s were reportedly outranged by enemy forces in Afghanistan. The M7 also aims to defeat advanced body armor.

What alternative tactical solution does Ian McCollum propose instead of the M7 rifle?

McCollum suggests that one-way attack drones, deployable from vehicles like a Humvee, are a more effective and modern solution for addressing long-range suppression and engagement challenges than re-arming every soldier with a heavier rifle.

What are the main criticisms of the 6.8x51mm cartridge's approach to armor penetration?

While the 6.8x51mm cartridge is intended to defeat advanced body armor, McCollum suggests that relying solely on high chamber pressure is not the ideal or most comprehensive solution for this problem.

Related News

All News →

More Tactical & Gear Videos You Might Like

More from Forgotten Weapons

View all →