Reply #66: not so much, it would have taken [View All]

a great amount of resources to get production of the new type of ammunition up and running, plus the U.S. and NATO had just standardized on the 5.56x45mm a short while before, and I'm guessing the rifle was probably quite expensive. I don't believe the U.S. military sends its brass in for reloading, but we certainly do a good job policing it up off the firing line.

Plus the round itself was an extension of the small caliber high velocity concept which caused us to switch from the 7.62x51 NATO, or .308 Winchester, to the 5.56x45 NATO, based of off and almost identical to the .223 Remington. The idea is that a smaller caliber rifle uses lighter ammunition and so each soldier can carry a larger number of rounds while simultaneously reducing overall weight on the soldier (really just enabling the soldier to carry more gear in the space/weight that used to be rounds). It also makes training new soldiers easier, since the smaller caliber rounds recoil less and so soldiers are less likely to develop bad habits such as flinching in anticipation of firing. It is a very real phenomenon, when I am firing my revolver I have definitely dropped the hammer on an empty chamber and flinched badly before.