6.5 Grendal

[mdesign]

Realistically...is this chambering going to be around for a while or does it look like it will become "obsolete" and hard to get brass for?

I would like to get an upper in this caliber for my AR-15 so could double as a deer rifle but not so much if this cartridge is going away in a few years.

It has all the makings of a nice game cartridge...better for hunting than a 300blk IMO.

 

[frog5215]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

The .300BLK is a worse game the .762x39 (130gr bullets to 2400-2500 fps), the .300 BLK is a smaller case.
The 6.5 Grendel is a game and target round. My 6.5 runs 2500fps in 120 Nosler BP. I figure 200-250 yr, a subsonic (.300 BLK bullets like a stone- 1000fp).

Without a can, the is no reason a .300 BLK.

 

[drakeky]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Now that Alexander Arms released the rights and it is now a SAMMI cartridge, it is here to stay. I love mine so far. Got a wicked 85 grain sierra load and working up a 107 gr. sierra load now and will work up a deer load after that. So far great results and very little recoil. Love shooting it. Hornady makes brass for it too now so its here to stay.

 

[nleaders]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I don't think this chambering is going anywhere. I think it will only grow in popularity. I love the round, and it is much, much more capable in the hunting role than the 300BLK... at least more versatile. 300BLK will launch some really heavy projectiles and do tons of damage, but I would hesitate shooting at game beyond 150 yards. I would happily shoot 6.5 to 300 or 350. I have the utmost confidence that the round will be around for a long, long time.

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I think its here to stay, but I think AA shot themselves in the foot for way too long and the 6.8 has taken a much much stronger foothold and will continue to dominate the grendel in sales and manufacture support.

 

[raider1v1]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

its here to stay. everyone has access to the specs now and can manufacture it. hornady makes the high end ammo, wolf makes the low end ammo. wolf is even coming out ith a steel case version for people who want cheap ammo and dont reload.

i have an AA that i love! its got about teh same recoil as my 223, and its much more accurate. you can shoot low weight bullets like the 90gr speers i have loads for all the way up to 130 iirc and still fit them in the standard ar magwell.

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Doesn't seem like many manufacturers ammo or rifles are jumping on the Grendel band wagon. It seems to me like there are more companies making off spring chambers than the Grendel chamber. There are only 6 factory loads for the Grendel.
Most say the chamber neck is too large and causes the case necks to split early. the original 6.5CSS and 264LBC chamber correct that problem.

 

[pyplynr]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I don't see brass availability as a problem. You can always make it from 7.62 x 39 brass.

<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nAgTF7G7m7w"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nAgTF7G7m7w" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

 

[at4rxj]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

What kind of range will most of your hunting be?

I built a 6.8 awhile back as a hog gun... It's a great deer cartridge as well, though at distance the Grendel shines. What's good about the 6.8 is it allows you to stick with a shorter barrel.

 

[sititunga]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

If Bill Alexander had released the rights to the Grendel early in it's development this would be a much more popular round today. It turns the AR15 platform into a 850 yard capable rifle. There is no doubt in my mind that the Grendel will survive and grow in popularity.

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sititunga1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If Bill Alexander had released the rights to the Grendel early in it's development this would be a much more popular round today. It turns the AR15 platform into a 850 yard capable rifle. There is no doubt in mind that the Grendel will survive and grow in popularity. </div></div>
Agree, in trying to make more profit he hurt himself.

 

[StrykerSDM]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

It wasn't Bill. It was the controlling interest in the company, the financiers many arms makers had to turn to over the last few decades. They made poor decisions about keeping that round trademarked. Bill's a good guy, he's all about performance in that AR platform. I tested the Beowulf for him while I was in the army and demo'd it to the War College --got to keep the custom 16" upper, and he shoehorned a KAC FF rifle length rail on it too! Last time I talked to him he told me had something in the works... Something new!

I too don't think the Grendel is going anywhere. It is currently the highest performance round you can get in the AR. I'd go so far as to say it is THE round for the AR. It optimizes everything, and that accurate round does well in the AR platform. So I can only see it gaining in popularity as it becomes more available, particularly ammo and brass.

Chances are I'll probably build another M4 someday down the road but this one will be a Grendel and not a 5.56. Hopefully with a 14.5" Satern fluted one pound barrel. I have a built by me 20" Satern barreled AR that groups sub-MOA. Amazing. I love this round, I just can't say enough good about it really.

I didn't know there were lighter than 100gr. bullets for the Grendel. 85gr. huh?

I've been using those 100gr. AMAX bullets to great effect, but I have to load them to a much shorter COL than what Hornady recommended in order to chamber --only bullet like that with that problem. But others have had this problem too, so nothing new. Great bullet though! So far I've had much better results using Hornady AMAX than I have SMK's... Go figure. I get the best groups so far using the 100gr. AMAX, but haven't tried the 120 BT's and Bill recommended a bullet too but I forget who makes it.

 

[sititunga]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: StrykerSDM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Last time I talked to him he told me had something in the works... Something new!

I too don't think the Grendel is going anywhere. It is currently the highest performance round you can get in the AR. I'd go so far as to say it is THE round for the AR. It optimizes everything, and that accurate round does well in the AR platform. So I can only see it gaining in popularity as it becomes more available, particularly ammo and brass.

</div></div>

I hope Bill doesn't keep us in the dark too long as to the something new he has in the works.

I hope he brings to market an AR15 chambered in the 6mm BRX.

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: StrykerSDM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It wasn't Bill. It was the controlling interest in the company, the financiers many arms makers had to turn to over the last few decades. They made poor decisions about keeping that round trademarked. Bill's a good guy, he's all about performance in that AR platform. I tested the Beowulf for him while I was in the army and demo'd it to the War College --got to keep the custom 16" upper, and he shoehorned a KAC FF rifle length rail on it too! Last time I talked to him he told me had something in the works... Something new!

I too don't think the Grendel is going anywhere. It is currently the highest performance round you can get in the AR. I'd go so far as to say it is THE round for the AR. It optimizes everything, and that accurate round does well in the AR platform. So I can only see it gaining in popularity as it becomes more available, particularly ammo and brass.

Chances are I'll probably build another M4 someday down the road but this one will be a Grendel and not a 5.56. Hopefully with a 14.5" Satern fluted one pound barrel. I have a built by me 20" Satern barreled AR that groups sub-MOA. Amazing. I love this round, I just can't say enough good about it really.

I didn't know there were lighter than 100gr. bullets for the Grendel. 85gr. huh?

I've been using those 100gr. AMAX bullets to great effect, but I have to load them to a much shorter COL than what Hornady recommended in order to chamber --only bullet like that with that problem. But others have had this problem too, so nothing new. Great bullet though! So far I've had much better results using Hornady AMAX than I have SMK's... Go figure. I get the best groups so far using the 100gr. AMAX, but haven't tried the 120 BT's and Bill recommended a bullet too but I forget who makes it. </div></div>
It was Bills company for a long time before he sold part of it, he was the one that decided to make special muzzle brake threads and a special bolt so you would have to go back to him to buy all the parts. And trademarked the Grendel name without telling Arne his then partner.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sititunga1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If Bill Alexander had released the rights to the Grendel early in it's development this would be a much more popular round today. It turns the AR15 platform into a 850 yard capable rifle. There is no doubt in my mind that the Grendel will survive and grow in popularity.</div></div>

It turns the AR-15 into a 1000 yd. capable rifle. Provided the owner of the rifles spends the money on components to make that successful.

I agree though, had he allowed a little more input in the beginning he might have had this round out sooner and with less of the issues that come along with it.

 

[sititunga]

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: sititunga1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If Bill Alexander had released the rights to the Grendel early in it's development this would be a much more popular round today. It turns the AR15 platform into a 850 yard capable rifle. There is no doubt in my mind that the Grendel will survive and grow in popularity.</div></div>

It turns the AR-15 into a 1000 yd. capable rifle. Provided the owner of the rifles spends the money on components to make that successful.
</div></div>

It's a marginal 1000 yds performer. Even with the best made AR with the finest barrel it's a real lob to get it there.

 

[bustin]

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: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sititunga1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If Bill Alexander had released the rights to the Grendel early in it's development this would be a much more popular round today. It turns the AR15 platform into a 850 yard capable rifle. There is no doubt in my mind that the Grendel will survive and grow in popularity.</div></div>

It turns the AR-15 into a 1000 yd. capable rifle. Provided the owner of the rifles spends the money on components to make that successful.
</div></div>

It's a marginal 1000 yds performer. Even with the best made AR with the finest barrel it's a real lob to get it there. </div></div>
agree, it's a great paper puncher to 300 and not bad to 600 ...with the right barrel and trigger puller

 

[sititunga]

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: sititunga1</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><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: sititunga1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If Bill Alexander had released the rights to the Grendel early in it's development this would be a much more popular round today. It turns the AR15 platform into a 850 yard capable rifle. There is no doubt in my mind that the Grendel will survive and grow in popularity.</div></div>

It turns the AR-15 into a 1000 yd. capable rifle. Provided the owner of the rifles spends the money on components to make that successful.
</div></div>

It's a marginal 1000 yds performer. Even with the best made AR with the finest barrel it's a real lob to get it there. </div></div>
agree, it's a great paper puncher to 300 and not bad to 600 ...with the right barrel and trigger puller </div></div>

I'd give it a lot more credit than that. It's very consistent to 800-850 yds. And it will perform at 1000 yds, but the conditions have to be right. What it lacks is ummph once you get past 850 (IME), but the bullets, either the 108 or 123 Scenars, are real wind buckers in their class.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Okay, maybe I'm spoiled or saw the writing on the wall when I got my first one and proved it, then my second one and proved it. Proving it meaning it's a 1k gun as sure as you are betting. I beat a .308 175 SMK launched at 2600 fps (std match velocity) @ 1k. I didn't beat a .308 pushing 155 Scenars hard (a standard F/TR class load). Just to give you a relative idea of where it stands. A custom loader with 175 SMK's could probably beat it too.

At sea level the 6.5 Grendel will get you to 1k, competitive with .308/7.62 standard long range loads. It won't even come close to kicking any ass against the newer class of 6mm's, 6.5mm's and .7mm's that are taking everything @ 1k. Not to mention Sarvers .300 Hulk when you need all out power to buck the wind.

Edit:

This is my point about the 6.5 Gendel making the AR-15 an effective 1000 yd. rifle. If you compared it to an AR-15 in .223 or 5.56 I think you'd find the smaller case/bullet lacking. While the 6.5 Grendel is certainly comparable to the better standard .308/7.62 loadings.

Edit II:

In reference to my first and second Grendel uppers, they were both 24" barrels with full rifle length gas systems.

 

[Fried Chicken Blowout]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think its here to stay, but I think AA shot themselves in the foot for way too long and the 6.8 has taken a much much stronger foothold and will continue to dominate the grendel in sales and manufacture support. </div></div>

Anyone that thinks the 6.8 is on par with the 6.5 Grendel is kidding themselves. Yes they may be eating some of the market, but lets face reality... The 6.5 would dominate if fact played into peoples decisions more then internet hype.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: FCB</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think its here to stay, but I think AA shot themselves in the foot for way too long and the 6.8 has taken a much much stronger foothold and will continue to dominate the grendel in sales and manufacture support. </div></div>

Anyone that thinks the 6.8 is on par with the 6.5 Grendel is kidding themselves. Yes they may be eating some of the market, but lets face reality... The 6.5 would dominate if fact played into peoples decisions more then internet hype.</div></div>


The 6.8 case is too long to fit into an AR-15 platform with long/high BC bullets. It would work for any short action <span style="color: #3333FF">{bolt gun}</span> to load long bullets. The other thing that has to happen is for people to see how much 'ballistic potential' is left on the table with 6.8mm (.277" bullets) If they were given the same super long ogives and boat tails they too would be accepted as a bona-fied long range caliber.

In any case in short range head to head, the 6.5 isn't going to do any better or worse. Both rounds are about as equal as you can get in that class. It's only when 6.5 bullets exceed 6.8 bullet for BC, does the 6.5 Grendel shine.

 

[mdesign]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: at4rxj</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What kind of range will most of your hunting be?...
</div></div>

400 yds and under. I am looking at this round as a way to make my AR15 a multi purpose carbine. I can run a 5.56, 300 blk or the 6.5 by just changing the upper.

Who should one go to for a barrel? Probably a 16" medium weight.

 

[Unknown]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

The 6.5 Grendel, and 6.8 SPC both shoot bullets of around 123 grains, and at about 2550-2600 FPS. That is of course a generalization and of course, there are different loads for both rifles. However, when comparing similar weight projectiles, both rounds have a similar enough velocity that I doubt any human or animal would be able to tell much difference inside of 300 yards.

The much higher BC of the Grendel's bullet means that after passing 300 yards, the Grendel's performance begins to improve markedly compared to the 6.8 SPC. The Grendel will loose velocity more slowly than the fatter 6.8 bullet.

However, the 6.8 does have advantages too... The Army marksmanship team has found that when they compared the 6.5's 123 grain bullet and a 30 caliber 123/125 grain bullet at the same velocity, the 30 caliber bullet has less recoil. As a result, the Army has started using a short 30 cal round for much of their 3 gun matches. This principle will also apply to the 6.8 bullet, but of course to a lesser extent.

I am a true Grendel fan, but realize that either round has it's benefits and limitations. I wanted a round that would perform accurately well past the limitations of the 5.56 bullets, and the Grendel gave me exactly what I was looking for. My 123 grain Scenar bullets at 2550 FPS easily remain supersonic past 1000 yards. The bullet will do fine for punching paper, or tagging a piece of steel at 1000 yards. However, I do not think it would be ethical to shoot at game with the Grendel at those distances simply because I think I might be able to hit it. The Grendel's remaining energy at 1000 yards is simply insufficient for ME to consider using it on game at that distance.

I would be completely comfortable using the Grendel (with a bullet designed for game) on deer sized animals at lesser ranges though.

I have tried 24, 19.5 and 18 inch Grendel barrels. For me, I think the best compromise barrel is one around 20 inches. A barrel of that length allows the case to develop sufficient velocity without being too long and awkward.

When people keep in mind that the Grendel is really what I would term an intermediate cartridge, it can be very useful. For shooting at game at extended distances I think that I would like to move to a case with a capacity/performance of at least the 7.62x51 or larger.

A previous posting asked about where to go for a barrel for the Grendel. I understand that Alexander arms recently came out with a number of different barrel profiles. If I could choose any barrel, I would buy a light to medium weight, 20 inch fluted barrel and mount it with a tube for-end. I think that a slim to medium barrel with fluting would give excellent balance, accuracy, heat dissipation, and sufficient velocity.

Alexander arms also has a number of other really interesting barrel profiles and lengths, so they should have just about anything you can imagine. And they have these barrels available in a number of different quality levels.

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sititunga1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">


I'd give it a lot more credit than that. It's very consistent to 800-850 yds. And it will perform at 1000 yds, but the conditions have to be right. What it lacks is ummph once you get past 850 (IME), but the bullets, either the 108 or 123 Scenars, are real wind buckers in their class. </div></div>
OK are you saying you would use a Grendel to shoot F class when the rest of the guys are shooting 7mm mags and 6.5-284s?

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: FCB</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think its here to stay, but I think AA shot themselves in the foot for way too long and the 6.8 has taken a much much stronger foothold and will continue to dominate the grendel in sales and manufacture support. </div></div>

Anyone that thinks the 6.8 is on par with the 6.5 Grendel is kidding themselves. Yes they may be eating some of the market, but lets face reality... The 6.5 would dominate if fact played into peoples decisions more then internet hype. </div></div>
The guy that makes the 6.5 barrels said he makes about 100 every 4 months...whats that 25 a month? wow they are burning up the sales there. There are 6 factory 6.5 loads. There are 28 factory 6.8 loads. Fortunately for hunters everyone else isn't a sniper.
BC doesn't play much of a part in terminal performance when the range is apx 300 yds and the higher BC bullets start off 100fps slower.

 

[sititunga]

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: sititunga1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">


I'd give it a lot more credit than that. It's very consistent to 800-850 yds. And it will perform at 1000 yds, but the conditions have to be right. What it lacks is ummph once you get past 850 (IME), but the bullets, either the 108 or 123 Scenars, are real wind buckers in their class. </div></div>
OK are you saying you would use a Grendel to shoot F class when the rest of the guys are shooting 7mm mags and 6.5-284s? </div></div>

Given a well put together AR and good barrel it's a very tight and capable firearm, but it's not an F class gun.

 

[sititunga]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

There are a lot of other companies out there now chambering the Grendel. The inertia the Grendel failed to achieve in the early days was because of the rights issue. The 6.8SPC on the otherhand had the biggest gun marketing machine on the planet behind it. Maybe the question we should be asking is why hasn't the popularity of 6.8SPC taken off in droves.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

bustin,

I'll agree that one of the issues now facing the 6.5 Grendel is that everybody who heard about it, called it the 'wonder-round'. Well, it's not. It's an intermediate cartridge that can attain supersonic speeds past 1000 yds. Due to the use of high BC bullets. That why I say it puts it in the same class as upper end .308 cartridges. On a lot less recoil, weight powder, etc. As noted, extreme .308 loads, like Palma and handloaded F/TR can beat it. But not by much.

If you were to compare performance against guys shooting 7 mags and 6.5-.284's you'd see guys going away from those cartridges all the time. You're seeing a lot of cut down/necked down .308 class cartridges. Against the ballistics alone, yes the bigger cases rule. But recoil, not getting to use a brake (in some cases) barrel burn out, excessive use of powder, and muzzle blast (when you can use a brake) are all reasons people are going away from them. Then, on any good day when you see the flat shooting little 6mm's performing at long range, you'll see the 6.5 Grendel performing very well also. On windy days, the heavy high BC bullets are going to rule. That would be the upper end of the 7mm's and .30 Cals.

I would also say that if going into battle with it, I wouldn't feel undergunned against someone with 7.62x51 or 7.62x54R, and definitely not 7.62x39.

You also may know there is a caveat to the 123 class bullets it shoots so well. Due to the increase in volume of the case over a 5.56, you have to be careful not to over-pressure the gas port. This can happen if you get too slow of a powder pushing these, but not quite enough load to set it off rapidly enough. You actually have to increase your load in the cold to keep from getting case swipe. The temperature volatility of 2520 is proving you either need to download it to ineffective levels or load it for summer and winter (it's a bit more pronounced here in MN). But, I've found a load pushing 123's faster than 2630 and getting no case pressure signs. That is 29 gr. of IMR8208XBR behind any 123 gr. bullet in a small primer case (Lapua/Hornady)
I'm sure the same thing exists with the 6.8, but I haven't worked with it in the upper end loads with a gas gun enough to say one way or the other. But, due to it's capacity and similar weight projectiles, I'm sure it's there.

 

[at4rxj]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: FCB</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think its here to stay, but I think AA shot themselves in the foot for way too long and the 6.8 has taken a much much stronger foothold and will continue to dominate the grendel in sales and manufacture support. </div></div>

Anyone that thinks the 6.8 is on par with the 6.5 Grendel is kidding themselves. Yes they may be eating some of the market, but lets face reality... The 6.5 would dominate if fact played into peoples decisions more then internet hype. </div></div>

Depending on the range and goal of the build, I strongly disagree. At distance, yes, the 6.5 shines. For a hunting role, I feel the 6.8 has advantages over the 6.5.

Your results may vary.

 

[sititunga]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Sandwarrior,

Bill A and Arne recommend the 108 Lapua for 1k. Interestingly I have found that JBM's website has changed some of its BC values with regard to the 123 and 108 - which might be something to do with the inclusion of Litz's data. Anyway the last time I ran numbers for a 1k shoot I found my supersonic distance had been reduced for the Lapuas and that it appeared that the 123 SMK was now the more efficient flyer than the same weight Scenar.

I'd be interested to see some of your load data if that's OK.

 

[cjgemm]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: at4rxj</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: FCB</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think its here to stay, but I think AA shot themselves in the foot for way too long and the 6.8 has taken a much much stronger foothold and will continue to dominate the grendel in sales and manufacture support. </div></div>

Anyone that thinks the 6.8 is on par with the 6.5 Grendel is kidding themselves. Yes they may be eating some of the market, but lets face reality... The 6.5 would dominate if fact played into peoples decisions more then internet hype. </div></div>



Depending on the range and goal of the build, I strongly disagree. At distance, yes, the 6.5 shines. For a hunting role, I feel the 6.8 has advantages over the 6.5.

Your results may vary.

</div></div>

Which are?

 

[at4rxj]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Better performance from shorter barrels, ammo slightly more available off the shelf and has a better selection (though neither is really great), and more aftermarket support (mags, barrels, etc).

I'm not saying the grendel is a crap round, saying my 6.8 is better than your 6.5, or anything like that. I hope the 6.5 sticks around and becomes more popular as I think it genuinely helps to extend the range of the AR. I did research before deciding 6.8 (and granted a lot of that was awhile back) and purely as a hunting setup, felt it fit my needs better. I wanted a 16" barrel, lightweight, and am very happy with it. Most of my hunting is 200yds or less, and if I feel I'll be shooting at an animal farther I'm not going to pick up my AR, be it 6.8 or 6.5.

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<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">Originally Posted By: at4rxj</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: FCB</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think its here to stay, but I think AA shot themselves in the foot for way too long and the 6.8 has taken a much much stronger foothold and will continue to dominate the grendel in sales and manufacture support. </div></div>

Anyone that thinks the 6.8 is on par with the 6.5 Grendel is kidding themselves. Yes they may be eating some of the market, but lets face reality... The 6.5 would dominate if fact played into peoples decisions more then internet hype. </div></div>



Depending on the range and goal of the build, I strongly disagree. At distance, yes, the 6.5 shines. For a hunting role, I feel the 6.8 has advantages over the 6.5.

Your results may vary.

</div></div>

Which are?

</div></div>
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.

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sititunga1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There are a lot of other companies out there now chambering the Grendel. The inertia the Grendel failed to achieve in the early days was because of the rights issue. The 6.8SPC on the otherhand had the biggest gun marketing machine on the planet behind it. Maybe the question we should be asking is why hasn't the popularity of 6.8SPC taken off in droves. </div></div>
Actually if you look around there are only 4-5 chambering the Grendel, Les Baer stopped, Satern stopped, Sabre... well they got busted.
There are more chambering something other than a Grendel 6.5 CSS, 6.5 Sporter, 6.5x39, 264LBC, 6.5AR.
Call the guys that make the 6.8 and 6.5 barrels and ask them the ratio. Because you aren't in the business of selling barrels you don't really see what sells. The 6.8 has turned into a hunters caliber. Could almost call it a Texas caliber.

 

[mdesign]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

at4rxj - trying to follow what you're saying regarding the 6.5 and 6.8.

My sole motivation for looking into the 6.5 is for a option to use on my carbine for deer hunting not to exceed 400 yds. The round fits well in the AR15 platform...does the 6.8 do the same?

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

sorry to but in but Yes the 6.8 works on the AR15 platfom.

 

[mdesign]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

Which of the two is the easiest to load for? I don't want something that is temperature sensitive and touchy to make work. My 5.56 does everything I ask but it really needs a bigger bullet for shooting deer.

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mdesign</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Which of the two is the easiest to load for? I don't want something that is temperature sensitive and touchy to make work. My 5.56 does everything I ask but it really needs a bigger bullet for shooting deer. </div></div>
Checkout www.68forums.com when you have time. There are several factory loads that shoot sub moa and more load data there than you will believe.

 

[at4rxj]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I'm not a huge reloader, but threw together a last minute load (with no development) before hunting season using the 95gt ttsx. I have no experience with the 6.5.

The 6.5 and 6.8 both fit and work reliably on the AR platform. Pick one, join the forum for it and bad-mouth the caliber you didn't choose, and you'll never regret your decision either way... lol

My 6.8 to make this more fun:

 

[cjgemm]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<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.

 

[at4rxj]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<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>


Hold on now...
What Grendel loads are you looking at, comparing a 16" barrel to a 16" barrel, that have a 200 fps higher velocity than the 6.8? I'm not arguing, I'm genuinely asking because I've never seen that when you compare the same barrel lengths. If you want to get into 18-24" barrels, then yes, the 6.5g shines... no doubt about it. Again, if I'm wrong, please show me. I'm basing my 6.8 info on my build, which is a good representation of the current "standard." I shoot a 95gr TTSX at 2750 fps minimum, from a 16" barrel for hunting, available both handloaded and as a factory load.

Bustin makes another good point about the bullets (specifically the barnes 95gr ttsx in my opinion) being designed to open up at the velocities coming from the 6.8 ARs... They're not just bullets of the same diameter that happen to fit in the magwell...

 

[vmpglenn]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: at4rxj</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>


Hold on now...
What Grendel loads are you looking at, comparing a 16" barrel to a 16" barrel, that have a 200 fps higher velocity than the 6.8? I'm not arguing, I'm genuinely asking because I've never seen that when you compare the same barrel lengths. If you want to get into 18-24" barrels, then yes, the 6.5g shines... no doubt about it. Again, if I'm wrong, please show me. I'm basing my 6.8 info on my build, which is a good representation of the current "standard." I shoot a 95gr TTSX at 2750 fps minimum, from a 16" barrel for hunting, available both handloaded and as a factory load.

Bustin makes another good point about the bullets (specifically the barnes 95gr ttsx in my opinion) being designed to open up at the velocities coming from the 6.8 ARs... They're not just bullets of the same diameter that happen to fit in the magwell...

</div></div>

I read that post as saying the 6.5G starts out 200fps slower than the 6.8, but the superior BC makes up for the difference at shorter ranges and gives 6.5G the advantage at longer ranges.

 

[vmpglenn]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: at4rxj</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not a huge reloader, but threw together a last minute load (with no development) before hunting season using the 95gt ttsx. I have no experience with the 6.5.

The 6.5 and 6.8 both fit and work reliably on the AR platform. Pick one, join the forum for it and bad-mouth the caliber you didn't choose, and you'll never regret your decision either way... lol

My 6.8 to make this more fun:
<snip></div></div>

Are you using a PMAG to shoot 6.8?

 

[cjgemm]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vmpgsc</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: at4rxj</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>


Hold on now...
What Grendel loads are you looking at, comparing a 16" barrel to a 16" barrel, that have a 200 fps higher velocity than the 6.8? I'm not arguing, I'm genuinely asking because I've never seen that when you compare the same barrel lengths. If you want to get into 18-24" barrels, then yes, the 6.5g shines... no doubt about it. Again, if I'm wrong, please show me. I'm basing my 6.8 info on my build, which is a good representation of the current "standard." I shoot a 95gr TTSX at 2750 fps minimum, from a 16" barrel for hunting, available both handloaded and as a factory load.

Bustin makes another good point about the bullets (specifically the barnes 95gr ttsx in my opinion) being designed to open up at the velocities coming from the 6.8 ARs... They're not just bullets of the same diameter that happen to fit in the magwell...

</div></div>

I read that post as saying the 6.5G starts out 200fps slower than the 6.8, but the superior BC makes up for the difference at shorter ranges and gives 6.5G the advantage at longer ranges. </div></div>

Yep, .277 being faster. JBM is free online. Enter some data and see for your self.

 

[at4rxj]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vmpgsc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Are you using a PMAG to shoot 6.8? </div></div>

No... Lol. It's just a foliage pmag for pictures.

Good eye. It works with about 5 rounds, but that's pretty much pointless.

 

[at4rxj]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<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">Originally Posted By: vmpgsc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I read that post as saying the 6.5G starts out 200fps slower than the 6.8, but the superior BC makes up for the difference at shorter ranges and gives 6.5G the advantage at longer ranges. </div></div>

Yep, .277 being faster. JBM is free online. Enter some data and see for your self. </div></div>

My mistake. I apparently hadn't had enough coffee.

Again... I'm by no means saying the 6.5 is crap. I think they're both a viable hunting round, and went with the 6.8 for the reasons above.

If someone wants to send me a 6.5 barrel and bolt, I'll be happy to compare then side by side and post results.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

I think they are both great rounds. And great rounds for the AR. but both have their issues there. Yes, the 6.5 has the high BC rounds. But, I think I've lost about a half a head of hair trying to figure out how to get decent velocity and it not be fussy. I've found that now.

And due to it's larger bore diameter the 6.8 is more efficient (by a small margin than the 6.5. But overall, in equal bullet weights the two are almost identical in performance. And that is they put a LOT more energy on target than a 5.56.

For a lightweight but powerful enough hunting round, I say pick your sugar, put it in your coffee, stir it and enjoy.

 

[bustin]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

<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.

 

[sandwarrior]

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>

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.

 

[Beef_Supreme]

Re: 6.5 Grendal

This is GREAT stuff I'm loving it.......... keep it coming guys! LOLOL!!!