Does anyone know why Remington developed the 6.8 SPC, but why they don't chamber a ri

Remington didn't develop it at all. The Special Forces and Army Marksmanship Unit did, and Remington stepped in to help get a SAMMI industry standard accepted for it.

The blueprints they got - they didn't draw them up - had a digital programming glitch on them. The drawings were a translation of what the originators wanted, and somehow the lead and angle weren't correctly shown. Remington has taken the blame for that ever since.

Not really fair, considering they just accepted at face value what was given them.

Why didn't Remington pursue it a lot more at the time? Did they even offer a AR type action? Their focus was on conventional, traditional hunting rifles, and in the early 2000's, the AR was still just a niche tacticool market. Let's not forget, their management had gotten where they were by pretty much ignoring the military market since WWII.

What has been their response since then? The .30AR? Special upper and bolt. Next up, the .300 Whisper, which the suppressor guys they bought, AAC, sold to them. Now it's the .300 Blackout, but it's still just a .30 in a 5.56 case, and that's really been kicking around since before 1984. It's been a niche round for AR shooters trying to make major in Three Gun when AR's were more than frowned on. Once they were allowed, 5.56 has done the job.

Basically, it goes back to management - the focus has been on something .30 cal, and it's likely market research telling them that. The American shooter seems to want it, but really, he's the least knowledgeable to ask, and steeped in tradition, not change. The auto industry made the same mistake, dragging their feet with their product line, all the while the Japanese took the market away.

Remington helped, Remington got slapped down for it, Remington doesn't see the market well, and it's not Remington's type gun or ammo anyway. The 6.8 is all AR right now, they aren't trying to play the Mil/LEO game. Once they old coots get retired, or fired, then the new managers will play, and we'll see some movement.

If they're still in business.
 
Another point to add- the 6.8 was born of the old & all but obsolete .30 Remington Ctg. Which I believe is not much more than a rimless .30-30 and possibly a shorter neck. Of course when the SF and AMU got done with it- it didn't have much resemblance at all to the .30 Remington except for the base diameter and the primer size (which has gone through changes- some large, some small).
 
It was called the 6.8 Remington SPC because it was designed on the old obsolete .30 Remington case, which back in it's day was brought out by Remington to compete with the 30-30 Winchester. It never really caught on.
Hornady, for one, has dropped the Rem designation altogether and just call it the 6.8MM SPC.
 
Not really the same thing, but Remington dropped the ball on the .260 Remington. Great cartridge, used by long range and competitive shooters to great effect. Remington debuted it, chambered a couple model 700's for it, produced some hunting ammo for it, and then literally dropped the ball.

Remington could have made so much out of the .260 Rem, but for whatever corporate reason, they didn't.

Had never heard the story of how Remington did a half-baked job on the 6.8, but it makes sense given some of Remington's history.
 
Last edited:
I concur. The 6.8 is moribund due to so many other, better uppers now available and the 260 is a great round that Rem flubbed pretty badly.
 
Remington could have made so much out of the .260 Rem, but for whatever corporate reason, they didn't.
Click to expand...

^^ This ^^^

Even right now, as other manufacturers are quickly ramping up their offerings in this caliber- including the barrel makers- Remington is still sitting on the sidelines, without so much as a single offering (far as I know) in this, their own caliber.

I would love to be able to ask Remington "WHY?"...
 
Ok well I learn something new everyday. That's why I love this forum because there is always people that know a lot more than me, thanks for the info.
 
The 6.8 is moribund due to so many other, better uppers now available
Click to expand...
I doubt you would find anyone at 6.8 forums that would agree. 6.8SPC is a very popular round. There is always something "better" by someones standards, regardless of what round you are talking about.
 
Last edited:
I have a Remington 700 Titanium in 260. It may be the best overall balance of a long range 308 case based cartridge.

As for Remington and the 6.8 - they did chamber some rifles. Now they just have DPMS and Bushmaster do it - as it is more of the market of those brands as Remington is less of an AR company.

Remington Military is heavily into ARs, but they are for the military market, and the military market is not asking for 6.8.
 
As already pointed out, Bushmaster and DPMS chamber the round.....they are Remington too, as well as Marlin, H&R and a few others.
 
A couple of years ago, the 30AR was set to take over the world too. I suspect the black rifle market has been taken over by noobs intent on preparing for the Zombipocolypse and not by real hunters or competition shooters :)
 
I'm not sure that Creek Henry doesn't have it right! Every time I go to the range, I see 2-10 guys with ARs, about half of whom are having problems. Virtually every problem is either cleaning or lube related. They go through 8-10 mags almost as fast as they can, then complain because they are getting jams, and "this thing is brand new, I've only had it a couple months!"

When I help them clear it, lube it up and explain it needs to be cleaned after a range session, they act like cleaning a gun is a foreign concept.

I have yet to see a 6.8 at the range, have only seen 1 AAC Blackout that a friend bought and then sold. In the scheme of things, 6.8, 6.5, and Blackout are all TINY pieces of the pie compared to 5.56/.223!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top