6.5 Grendal

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bustin</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cjgemm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For the common joe 28 factory loadings for the 6.8...6 for the 6.5G
100fps higher muzzle velocities from the 6.8 out of the same length barrel and the same weight bullet.
Many more choices of hunting bullets in the usable weight range and at the distance and velocity they will reliably expand.</div></div>

Too Bad BC doesn't mean anything cause every time I run the numbers a 6.5 pill 10 grns heavier than same bullet in .277 from same MFG starting out 200 fps slower have damn near the same energy at any given yardage.

Too bad there arent a whole lot of common Joe's here.

But then again this is Snipershide: For the Serious Tactical Marksman.

ETA: I'll give you that the 6.8 has more factory loads for it, but to be fair, there are plenty of <span style="font-weight: bold">contributing vendors</span> on this site that will load ammo for you tailored to your rifle.
</div></div>
BC doesn't mean much out to 300yds and thats what I'm saying the 6.5 isn't better than the 6.8 out to 300yds because it starts slower so at 300 they are almost dead even. Niether really have the velocity to take animals ethically past 350. That is 308-260 range for maybe another 100 yds. Now sniping at 500yds with a 556 to wound some guy and let him roll around on the ground thats fine. Hate to tell you but I'll bet 95% of the guys here aren't snipers...they're wantabees.
Not that there aren't some here just most aren't.</div></div>

They don't start slower. In equal weight bullets and equal length barrels/gas tubes, they start the same. Unless one or the other is downloaded. </div></div>
Ok load your 6.5 with 110gr bullets up to 2750 fps out of a 16" barrel, we can get 2800 but I just want to see what the brass looks like when loaded to 2750. A 130gr to 2500 out of a 16"

 

[Beef_Supreme]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

So why is it again that the Grendel is no good for hunting past 300 yards? I'm lost on that one..........

 

[B-boy]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Check out 65grendel.com for all ur Grendel questions. Some game as been taken out as far as 400+ yards with the Grendel Not saying that I've done it just reporting other Grendel Aficionados claims.

 

[Tactical30]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I have shot my Grendel out to 1k numerous times.

It will easily hold 1-MOA out to 1,000yrds in MY rifle I built with 123gr. Lapua Scenars, Win748, CCI #450 Primer, AA/Lapua Brass. If I remember correctly my DOPE was around 32 MOA.

Anyone who says the Grendel cant shoot at 1K has never shot one or owned one.
IMO the best LR AR-platform setup for LR shooting.

I have another thread on here somewhere with my build. Its the FDE and BLK one with the VLTOR MUR upper with 18"with bbl and PRS stock.

 

[cjgemm]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bustin</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cjgemm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For the common joe 28 factory loadings for the 6.8...6 for the 6.5G
100fps higher muzzle velocities from the 6.8 out of the same length barrel and the same weight bullet.
Many more choices of hunting bullets in the usable weight range and at the distance and velocity they will reliably expand.</div></div>

Too Bad BC doesn't mean anything cause every time I run the numbers a 6.5 pill 10 grns heavier than same bullet in .277 from same MFG starting out 200 fps slower have damn near the same energy at any given yardage.

Too bad there arent a whole lot of common Joe's here.

But then again this is Snipershide: For the Serious Tactical Marksman.

ETA: I'll give you that the 6.8 has more factory loads for it, but to be fair, there are plenty of <span style="font-weight: bold">contributing vendors</span> on this site that will load ammo for you tailored to your rifle.
</div></div>
BC doesn't mean much out to 300yds and thats what I'm saying the 6.5 isn't better than the 6.8 out to 300yds because it starts slower so at 300 they are almost dead even. Niether really have the velocity to take animals ethically past 350. That is 308-260 range for maybe another 100 yds. Now sniping at 500yds with a 556 to wound some guy and let him roll around on the ground thats fine. Hate to tell you but I'll bet 95% of the guys here aren't snipers...they're wantabees.
Not that there aren't some here just most aren't. </div></div>

I have never said the 6.5 was better than the 6.8, only that the reason the 6.5 can hang is because of the BC of the bullets. Go ahead and lower the BC numbers in a calculator and watch velocity and energy fall off before 300 yards.

Never claimed to be a Sniper either, only that this forum is a step above most when it comes to topics like this.

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Beef_Supreme</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So why is it again that the Grendel is no good for hunting past 300 yards? I'm lost on that one.......... </div></div>
My opinion from shooting a 6.5 since 2005 some of the heavier bullets are designed to open at 260 Remington velocity.
Out past 300yds they are going slow enough from the smaller case that they do not always expand as they were designed to.
Sure you can shoot an animal past 300 yds with a 22LR but it doesn't mean you'll find him. As far as I am concerned it's about making ethical kills on game animals. Like I said before of you want to shoot a human and let him roll around on the ground and suffer go ahead thats ok. I've been hunting deer and hogs since the mid 70s and don't like losing animals to rot in the woods.
I found a 8X8 elk, antlers longer than I am tall and larger at the base than my forearm, the tips of the antlers eaten away by rats and what ever else could chew om them after the meat was gone. The arrow still sticking through the rib cage.
Most people never see an 8x8, it's a shame he rotted in the woods. I'm not saying every shot will be perfect but you can increase the odds by knowing the limitations.
I grew up shooting over bean fields 4-500yds shots were normal 30-06 to start, 270s 25-06 and 300mags. Wedidn't lose many, where can a deer go in a 600 acre bean field? I'll bet most whitetail are shot at under 100yds for that the 6.8 and 6.5 work fine but there are other calibers that work much better out past 300. 450 is still my max with a 260 and thats almost 300fps faster than a 6.5 G or 6.8. I set my own range, it's my choice. With over 30 years of hunting experience I know what bullets work at what vel and what range. A lot of it is about shot placement but do you think you can hit the spine of a deer or hog walking at 500yds everytime? I can shoot 1/2moa at targets most of the time but I don't think I can hit the spine of a moving animal at an unknown distance with wind everytime.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Bustin,

I think it's a shame when these kind of posts denigrate into "I hate your round/my rounds better".

Personally, I think the 6.8 is a fine round and so is the 6.5G.

When you talk about hunting limitations past 300 yds. I think there's some common sense there too. Like I said, when I used to explain the Grendel to people, I'd get the, "I can't wait to shoot a deer at 1200/1400." It gets a little frustrating trying to tell people there are limitations and they continue not to see them. In so far as what you are getting at, I agree, the window gets narrower and narrower as range extends. No need to attempt an iffy 300+ yd. shot on a deer with either cartridge. Why not wait for one you know you can get 'ethically' within your reasonable shooting range. But, the same goes for people with bigger cartridges who won't spend the time behind their rifles to know them inside and out, what the ballistics are.

As a member of my gunclub I do 8 work hours every year. Part of those work hours includes 'Deer Rifle Sight-In'. I get looked at like a dumbass every year when I ask how much people practice long range (300 yds. -so not really long range), by those who want to shoot long range. Why don't you break that rifle out 2-3 times before you come here to zero. "I don't have to, I can make the shot...blahbluhblahblahblah." You know it, probably. You've heard guys braggin' on shots only a fool would take. Well, I agree. Only take the shots you are sure of. If it's past what the round has energy for, don't take it. But, many need to shoot that range before they see it (shouldn't be done).

 

[Beef_Supreme]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

This has been a most interesting thread indeed. I appreciate everyones' participation and opinions, it is indeed intriguing.

 

[sititunga]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Beef_Supreme</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So why is it again that the Grendel is no good for hunting past 300 yards? I'm lost on that one.......... </div></div>

I think if you ask any ethical big game hunter, 300 yards is on the edge of being ethical with what ever caliber you are using.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sititunga1</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Beef_Supreme</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So why is it again that the Grendel is no good for hunting past 300 yards? I'm lost on that one.......... </div></div>

<span style="font-weight: bold">I think if you ask any ethical big game hunter, 300 yards is on the edge of being ethical with what ever caliber you are using.</span></div></div>

I would totally disagree with that statement. When and where ever a hunter should get as close as he is capable of making the shot. In some cases there isn't enough cover or concealment for him to get any closer than that or even farther out. It's up to the hunter to decide the factors that would have him take a shot. I would rather let one go than take a shot that I wasn't 90% sure of. I damn sure won't 'just let one fly'. Most 30-06 and Mauser based cases carry enough energy to ethically kill an animal out to several hundred yards. <span style="color: #3333FF">{edit: With .308 based cases not far behind.}</span> Can the shooter do it? Is there a mitigating factor that a shooter who could do it, shouldn't do it.

Conversely, I've mentioned I work the 'deer rifle sight-in' at my rifle club every year. There are a lot of people who come out who I would definitely limit to 100 yd. shots. Yet we have a bunch of people who come out and want to 'just see where it hits' at 300. Unless they can show good grouping and follow instructions from the 200, I won't take them to the 300.

So, it varies according to the shooter. I feel the 6.5 Grendel has enough energy to take elk out to 300 yds. and deer out to 500 yds. If you the shooter can make the shot then so be it. Ethics is a personal choice based on ability. I damn sure wouldn't want somebody who had to have his hand held by a guide, taking those shots.

<span style="color: #6600CC">Edit II: The 6.8 using a similar bullet (partition) is right on par with the 6.5</span>

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Id agree 100% if you were talking about a 260/6.5 creedmore, but I think those yardages are too long to rely on for a good kill with a 6.5 or 6.8. They just run out of steam to efficiently kill a large buck. IMHO

 

[Downzero]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I don't know why everyone thinks that some massive amount of power is necessary to kill a deer. They're not that tough of an animal.

 

[at4rxj]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I don't think anyone said necessary to kill... Just ETHICALLY kill.

I'd rather take a shot on an animal that will drop it within a few yards of the shot than one that will run for a couple hundred yards... Both will die, but what happens between the shot and death is what's in question.

A competent person with a 6.5 or 6.8 at 300yds is better off than a inexperienced guy with a 300mag that practices once a year and shoots at anything that moves.

 

[sititunga]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: at4rxj</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't think anyone said necessary to kill... Just ETHICALLY kill.

I'd rather take a shot on an animal that will drop it within a few yards of the shot than one that will run for a couple hundred yards... Both will die, but what happens between the shot and death is what's in question.

A competent person with a 6.5 or 6.8 at 300yds is better off than a inexperienced guy with a 300mag that practices once a year and shoots at anything that moves. </div></div>

I agree, however you can shoot a deer clean through the heart and it will run, more times than not.

 

[Downzero]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I really don't see what the moral issue is. I wouldn't want to cause the animal unnecessary suffering, but that concern is much more closely related to shot placement than the distance to the target.

Even a 1 MOA rifle should have no problem taking a deer beyond 300 yards if the shooter knows what he's doing. That's really not a long way.

If anything, the ethics of shooting a deer with a slug are far more questionable beyond 50 yards than the possibility of someone taking a deer with a rifle at 301 yards. I suspect that I could much more reliably kill a deer with a 6.5 Grendel at 301 yards than I could with a deer slug at 60 yards. It's not like a 1 ounce slug has amazing ballistic performance.

 

[He Shoot Me]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

6.8's are for girls with small penis's... All 6.5G owner's know this is a fact.

To the question of what is the maximum range one can "ethically" take game at matters not to the average 6.5G owner....

We shoot all our deer in the eye.

-Pat

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: He_Shoot _Me</div><div class="ubbcode-body">6.8's are for girls with small penis's... All 6.5G owner's know this is a fact.

To the question of what is the maximum range one can "ethically" take game at matters not to the average 6.5G owner....

We shoot all our deer in the eye.

-Pat </div></div>
I'll bet you are a member of the Grendel forum.

 

[He Shoot Me]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

LMAO...maybeee

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bustin</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: He_Shoot _Me</div><div class="ubbcode-body">6.8's are for girls with small penis's... All 6.5G owner's know this is a fact.

To the question of what is the maximum range one can "ethically" take game at matters not to the average 6.5G owner....

We shoot all our deer in the eye.

-Pat </div></div>
I'll bet you are a member of the Grendel forum. </div></div>

 

[kvwpwr]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I wanted an ar15 that I could hunt hogs with. I chose the 6.8 because I can get higher velocities out of a shorter barrel which means I was able to build my rifle very light. When carrying it around the weight makes a difference. Ive also used it to shoot steel at 565 yds with no problem. 90gr are going 2900+, 115gr going 2580 out of my 16" arp upper

Now I'm looking for something out of an AR platform that can hit paper and steel at 1000 with mild recoil so my wife can shoot it. I've decided on 6.5gr. but it's gonna be a big, long(24"), heavy(varmint contour) stick that nobody will want to carry through the woods so i can squeeze all the velocity i can out of it.

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: He_Shoot _Me</div><div class="ubbcode-body">6.8's are for girls with small penis's... All 6.5G owner's know this is a fact.

</div></div>
I'm not sure you should admit that all Grendel owners check out 6.8 owners size..being a fact and all LOL

 

[He Shoot Me]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bustin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: He_Shoot _Me</div><div class="ubbcode-body">6.8's are for girls with small penis's... All 6.5G owner's know this is a fact.

</div></div>
I'm not sure you should admit that all Grendel owners check out 6.8 owners size..being a fact and all LOL </div></div>

Only a 6.8 owner would make this assumption...Truth is; it's their wives and girlfriends that tell us it's so.

-Pat

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: 6.5 Grendal


Mostly because of lack of expansion, and the ability to penetrate if you hit a large bone due to lack of speed and weight. I think both can do up to around 400 , but shooting farther than that I feel your chances of recovering the deer dwindle pretty fast.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I really don't see what the moral issue is. I wouldn't want to cause the animal unnecessary suffering, but that concern is much more closely related to shot placement than the distance to the target.

Even a 1 MOA rifle should have no problem taking a deer beyond 300 yards if the shooter knows what he's doing. That's really not a long way.

If anything, the ethics of shooting a deer with a slug are far more questionable beyond 50 yards than the possibility of someone taking a deer with a rifle at 301 yards. I suspect that I could much more reliably kill a deer with a 6.5 Grendel at 301 yards than I could with a deer slug at 60 yards. It's not like a 1 ounce slug has amazing ballistic performance. </div></div>

 

[Cody Petersen]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Ive been thinking about getting a 6.5 and this thread is definitely making me want one. Thanks for all of the info on here!

 

[Norskone]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Been reading this forum for what seems like forever finally thoguht I would post. So hear goes.... I get why most everyone want's to put a range limit for this round or that round but really it's up to each hunter how far he/she want's to take it. Well with in reason.

As far as the 6.5 and 6.8 go I think they are both great. I took this buck at just over 400 with a grendel he went about 20 feet. Buck Not that one deer is proof of anything but if I had the same shot again.....Bang!

 

[country888]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I have a grendel & enjoy shooting it very much! Im not going to nock the 6.8 at all! They are both great rounds in their own right for what they were developed for.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

The quick and dirty on these two cartridges:

They have the same capacity. They both fit in an AR. One shoots 6.8 mm bullets with naturally high BC's, but nothing made super high BC. They have about 20% more capacity than a 5.56, therefore about 20% more power. Depending on how you want to use that, it ranges from light bullets moving fast to heavy bullets moving slow. But, bullets the 5.56 could never push.
The 6.8 has one drawback and that is the case is too long to seat High BC bullets in the case and shoot them from an AR magazine.

The 6.5 Grendel shoots a bullet one caliber smaller but has high BC bullets built for it. Until you get to a range where high BC matter's, these two cases are about as "the same" as you can get. The natural BC of the bullets (weight vs. diameter w/standard ogive) is as close-close as one can get. The advantage for the 6.5 Grendel is it's 4mm shorter (and a little fatter) so that when it does get a high BC bullet stuffed in it, they can be fired from a magazine. There are high BC bullets made for the .277/6.8mm but they are a smidge heavy for that case to push them very fast. And, as noted, they don't fit in an AR platform unless you want to single feed.

If you never plan to go super long range with these, it won't matter if you buy a 6.8 or a 6.5.

Edit:

One thing that hinders both of these cartridges is short barrels. Short barrels keep them from getting the velocity they can attain. In a short barrel with these it's a tradeoff of how much energy vs. how flat of a trajectory do you want. Both have big trajectories with their heaviest, high BC bullets. Both shoot pretty damn flat with the lightest bullet in each of their respective calibers.