Lets start it again: 6.5 Grendel or 6.8?

[dakarhunter]

Here's a video of me measuring the MAX COAL of a 120gr Nosler BT in my Grendel II AR Stoner barrel. Midwayusa, and Brownells have switched to Grendel II's. They both switched to the Grendel II out of safety concerns over the compound throat. You can also get Grendel II's from Underground Tactical and Maxim Firearms and of course Satern barrels.

Here's some max COAL of various bullets. If its over about 2.305 the bullet will need to tolerate a jump. The 123gr AMAX and 123gr SST both like the jump. If it's 2.305 or under the bullet can be loaded to just of the lands. The reason that the compound throat was chosen is that the 108/123gr Scenar which was decided was critical for target shooting and military adoption back in 2005 was not jump tolerant. So they choose the lother walter compound throat. It allowed the 108/123gr scenar to be loaded to within .005 of the lands and produced good accuracy that of course crippled the shorter nose spitzer hunting bullets. The 123gr SST does well in the compound throat which is why 95% of Grendel Hunters use it and not the rest of the 6.5mm hunting bullet line up. Those Internet PR guys for AA (its obvious who they are isn't it) are going to earn there pay checks in the coming months attacking the Grendel II. They don't have facts so they'll just make personnel attacks and attempt to derail discussions. I hope the SAAMI Grendel guys don't try to get the same velocities and blow up there guns yikes!!

Grendel II max COAL (AR Stoner Grendel II)
95gr Hornady Vmax COAL= 2.275
100gr Nosler Partition COAL=2.266
100gr Nosler BT COAL= 2.306
120gr Hornady Amax COAL= 2.257
120gr Nosler BT COAL= 2.307
120gr Barnes TTSX COAL=2.330
120gr Barnes TSX COAL=2.295
123gr Hornady SST COAL=2.342
123gr Nosler CC COAL=2.285
129gr SP Interlock COAL=2.275
129gr Hornady SST COAL=2.360
140 Nosler BT COAL= 2.32
140gr Nosler Partition COAL=2.303

 

[BravoSierra]

Hows temperature sensitivity with the Lever?

 

[dakarhunter]

Hows temperature sensitivity with the Lever?

Not sure on that one i kept my rounds in a cooler out of the sun while working up loads.

 

[dakarhunter]

While Paul (LRRPF52) has been busy denying what I've been saying about short nosed bullets being forced deeper into the case sacrificing velocity. I've been chuckling because its in the Grendel Reloading Manual Vol I and hes listed as one of the authors!! How does he explain that? You don't have to be a ballistic expert to understand less case volume means less powder and less velocity. Its common sense. Once again here is a list of those bullets that are sacrificed for the better accuracy from the 108/123 scenars that hunters don't use. We want sub MOA accuracy and 150fps faster than SAAMI velocites to ensure bullet expansion and flatter shooting and more wind resistance. Thats what we get with the Grendel II.


Nosler 100gr Ballistic Tip
Hornady 120gr Amax
Sierra Pro-Hunter 120gr Spitzer
Nosler 120gr Ballistic Tip
Speer Hot-Cor 120gr Spitzer
Remington Core-Lokt 120gr Pointed soft point
Swift A frame bonded 120gr Semi Spitzer
Barnes 120gr TTSX
Nosler Partition 125gr
Hornady Interlock 129gr Spire Point
Nosler Accubond 130gr Spitzer
Sierra GameKing 130gr Hollow Point
140gr Nosler Partition
140gr Nosler BT

Excerpt from the Grendel Vol I reloading manual.

"There is, however, a small price to be paid for this accuracy-enhancing feature. Bullets with short noses need to be seated deeper than magazine-length to keep the bullets cylindrical section from interfering with the initial taper of the throat. This feature favors many of the popular bullets with high ballistic coefficients. "




of course thats carefully worded PR spin. This is why they keep falsely claiming mag length is 2.26in instead of 2.3in because they don't want people to see how much deeper than mag length they actual are having to seat the bullets.

Heres a pic with a 129gr SP interlock which is considered a classic deer round next to a 123gr SST. The Grendel II does well with both while the SAAMI grendel prefers the SST which has a pointer nose cone. The 129gr SP isn't even listed in the Grendel Vol II reloading for hunting guide. The reason is obvious they can't get a good velocity became it has to be loaded to deeply to make it worth it.

 

[Bevan]

how about the 123 amax. that's a good bullet for 6.5G. or the 100 Amax. 100 berger? does it even exist still?

 

[dakarhunter]

how about the 123 amax. that's a good bullet for 6.5G. or the 100 Amax. 100 berger? does it even exist still?

The 123gr Amax works well in the Grendel and the Grendel II.

 

[corym468]

While Paul (LRRPF52) has been busy denying what I've been saying about short nosed bullets being forced deeper into the case sacrificing velocity. I've been chuckling because its in the Grendel Reloading Manual Vol I and hes listed as one of the authors!! How does he explain that? You don't have to be a ballistic expert to understand less case volume means less powder and less velocity. Its common sense. Once again here is a list of those bullets that are sacrificed for the better accuracy from the 108/123 scenars that hunters don't use. We want sub MOA accuracy and 150fps faster than SAAMI velocites to ensure bullet expansion and flatter shooting and more wind resistance. Thats what we get with the Grendel II.


Nosler 100gr Ballistic Tip
Hornady 120gr Amax
Sierra Pro-Hunter 120gr Spitzer
Nosler 120gr Ballistic Tip
Speer Hot-Cor 120gr Spitzer
Remington Core-Lokt 120gr Pointed soft point
Swift A frame bonded 120gr Semi Spitzer
Barnes 120gr TTSX
Nosler Partition 125gr
Hornady Interlock 129gr Spire Point
Nosler Accubond 130gr Spitzer
Sierra GameKing 130gr Hollow Point
140gr Nosler Partition
140gr Nosler BT

Excerpt from the Grendel Vol I reloading manual.

"There is, however, a small price to be paid for this accuracy-enhancing feature. Bullets with short noses need to be seated deeper than magazine-length to keep the bullets cylindrical section from interfering with the initial taper of the throat. This feature favors many of the popular bullets with high ballistic coefficients. "


View attachment 42363

of course thats carefully worded PR spin. This is why they keep falsely claiming mag length is 2.26in instead of 2.3in because they don't want people to see how much deeper than mag length they actual are having to seat the bullets.

Heres a pic with a 129gr SP interlock which is considered a classic deer round next to a 123gr SST. The Grendel II does well with both while the SAAMI grendel prefers the SST which has a pointer nose cone. The 129gr SP isn't even listed in the Grendel Vol II reloading for hunting guide. The reason is obvious they can't get a good velocity became it has to be loaded to deeply to make it worth it.

View attachment 42382

The 2.26" mag length comes from the SAAMI Spec for Grendel Ammunition.

100fps is insignificant for a hunting round. It's a difference of 50 yards of theoretical max effective range.

The truth is if you failed to bring food home, the problem isn't 100fps, the problem is the hunter.

 

[dakarhunter]

The 2.26" mag length comes from the SAAMI Spec for Grendel Ammunition.

100fps is insignificant for a hunting round. It's a difference of 50 yards of theoretical max effective range.

The truth is if you failed to bring food home, the problem isn't 100fps, the problem is the hunter.

Depending on the bullet shape it may or may not be 100fps faster or even beyond 100fps approaching 200fps as is the case with the 120gr Nosler BT and 100gr Nosler BT. The 123gr SST isn't going to enjoy a large increase like that in velocity with the Grendel II. Loads for the 123gr SST depending on powder will probably be comparable with the SAAMI throat. My testing so far indicates that the accuracy node at least with LEVR is probably going to be in the 2650 to 2700fps range. More testing will determine that. Bullets that will see a significant increase in velocity will be the shorter nose coned bullets. The 125gr Nosler Partition should come alive in the Grendel II. VLD bullets need to be loaded to the lands for accuracy and that is beyond the max mag length of 2.305 so they probably will be poor choices for the Grendel II.

No grendel mags then are SAAMI complaint because ASC allows loading to 2.289, C Products to 2.3 and PRI to 2.305. I'm combining a C Products shell with the guts of a ASC that seems to be a good combination. The best over all choice is PRI but they are 45 bucks a piece yikes!!

 

[DavidAR10]

I found plenty of 6.5G references here, also more recent: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a566748.pdf

Another always picked last in debate class.

 

[dakarhunter]

Another always picked last in debate class.

Steve Satern uses a Grendel at Camp Perry i believe. LRRPF52 likes to talk a lot of crap about Steve but unlike LRRPF52 Steve has made thousands of Grendel barrels and knows what he's talking about while LRRPF52 is just an internet know it all who sales foam filled boxes and talks crap on internet forums.

 

[BravoSierra]

No grendel mags then are SAAMI complaint because ASC allows loading to 2.289, C Products to 2.3 and PRI to 2.305. I'm combining a C Products shell with the guts of a ASC that seems to be a good combination. The best over all choice is PRI but they are 45 bucks a piece yikes!!

have you successfully combined the ASC and the C Products?

 

[dakarhunter]

have you successfully combined the ASC and the C Products?

Yeah thats what i use a c products shell with a ASC follower and spring. ASC sells the followers and springs on there website seperately. The C products shell lets you load to 2.30 (but reliably feeds at 2.295in. It has a better coating than acs as well. The follower in C products is just cheap.

 

[bustin]

The only "cult" on the Grendel Forum is treating people with respect, and making technical contributions. It's extremely rare that anyone is banned. You and Woohoo/Bustin/Constructor/Harrison are 2 of maybe 4 people in the entire forum's history, and H has been banned twice. This latest time was for openly stating that the only reason he posts there is to "smear buggers" and the "entertainment value", in addition to making personal threats out of the blue via PM.

He's a great machinist and barrel maker, but he flips out on you out of left field, with no explanation. Can't figure it out really, don't have time to.

It's been the same with the Grendel forum from the beginning. Anytime anyone says anything that is different from what Bill A or any of you guys with their heads up his ass say they get banned. In 2007 I tried to tell some of the guys there that there are ways to get more performance from the cartridge. Must have been 10 guys jumping up and down screaming we would all blow ourselves up if we went .1 gr above Bills As published loads yada yada yada. 7 years later look, where we are now. I'm using the same chamber I was then which is close to the 264LBC chamber. 5R rifling and the same bolts I was producing then and I'm still shooting 100-150fps faster than Bills posted loads. It took some of you guys 7 years to get there. We could have had better barrels, bolts and more performance 7 years ago but that would have made AA look bad. You're his head cheerleader and biggest name dropper.
BTW, I emailed Kyle Lamb after you said you knew him personally, he said he didn't know you. I don't know him other than doing quite a bit of business with Viking a few years ago. I don't think people would believe me more if I drop his name or if my dad was a rocket scientist. Keep rolling though, it's entertaining.

 

[dakarhunter]

It's been the same with the Grendel forum from the beginning. Anytime anyone says anything that is different from what Bill A or any of you guys with their heads up his ass say they get banned. In 2007 I tried to tell some of the guys there that there are ways to get more performance from the cartridge. Must have been 10 guys jumping up and down screaming we would all blow ourselves up if we went .1 gr above Bills As published loads yada yada yada. 7 years later look, where we are now. I'm using the same chamber I was then which is close to the 264LBC chamber. 5R rifling and the same bolts I was producing then and I'm still shooting 100-150fps faster than Bills posted loads. It took some of you guys 7 years to get there. We could have had better barrels, bolts and more performance 7 years ago but that would have made AA look bad. You're his head cheerleader and biggest name dropper.
BTW, I emailed Kyle Lamb after you said you knew him personally, he said he didn't know you. I don't know him other than doing quite a bit of business with Viking a few years ago. I don't think people would believe me more if I drop his name or if my dad was a rocket scientist. Keep rolling though, it's entertaining.

I would not exceed AA loads with a compound throat. The longer parallel throat of the 264 LBC and Grendel II is a bit safer with pressure. I actually think some of the AA loads are hot when using the compound throat.

BTW, I emailed Kyle Lamb after you said you knew him personally, he said he didn't know you. I don't know him other than doing quite a bit of business with Viking a few years ago. I don't think people would believe me more if I drop his name or if my dad was a rocket scientist. Keep rolling though, it's entertaining.

He he to funny. Maybe Kyle bought one of his foam filled boxes.

 

[BravoSierra]

Thanks, I'm gonna go through my mags and see what I have.

 

[dakarhunter]

Lets start it again: 6.5 Grendel or 6.8?

Thanks, I'm gonna go through my mags and see what I have.

Let me know how it goes!
Remember just because a round will fit does not mean it will feed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dakarhunter]

I just got off the phone with an company that will be introducing a Grendel mag soon that will have a max COAL longer that ASC or C products. Can't say who yet but we should hear about them in a month or so.

 

[BravoSierra]

That will be epic. I like my Larue's for the .260. Allows me to load out to 2.855, where the Magpuls allow me to load to 2.82. Hopefully, the mag with larger internal length will be similar!

 

[dakarhunter]

That will be epic. I like my Larue's for the .260. Allows me to load out to 2.855, where the Magpuls allow me to load to 2.82. Hopefully, the mag with larger internal length will be similar!

No because its restricted by the magwell so its going to be just a little longer.

 

[corym468]

I just got off the phone with an company that will be introducing a Grendel mag soon that will have a max COAL longer that ASC or C products. Can't say who yet but we should hear about them in a month or so.

The new company releasing mags is E Lander.
Good News Comes in Pairs

You didn't get off the phone with anyone, you were lurking the grendel forum.

 

[dakarhunter]

The new company releasing mags is E Lander.
Good News Comes in Pairs

You didn't get off the phone with anyone, you were lurking the grendel forum.

Nope theres another

 

[BravoSierra]

Either way, if i can load to 2.295" and it feed reliably, I'm all for it. Just checked my mags. A few C products, those are the ones I shoot with, and about 12 that are ASC still in wrap.

 

[dakarhunter]

Either way, if i can load to 2.295" and it feed reliably, I'm all for it. Just checked my mags. A few C products, those are the ones I shoot with, and about 12 that are ASC still in wrap.

The new Grendel mag is going to be 100% US made the one knuckle head is talking about is a import from the middle east.

 

[corym468]

The new Grendel mag is going to be 100% US made the one knuckle head is talking about is a import from the middle east.

An import from Israel. I'd much rather buy imported from Israel over imported from California, New York, or any of these other communist, hippie sanctuary states.

 

[dakarhunter]

Lets start it again: 6.5 Grendel or 6.8?

Wow it's easier to buy an own an Ar in California than Israel. Not that the mags will be made it Cali I'm not saying.

 

[dakarhunter]

Either way, if i can load to 2.295" and it feed reliably, I'm all for it. Just checked my mags. A few C products, those are the ones I shoot with, and about 12 that are ASC still in wrap.

Just put an Asc follower in your c products mag and it will feed to 2.295.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[346ci]

I think he's going to bring it back. best freebore length for OAL? - Hunting with the Modern Sporting Rifle (AR-15/AR-10)

I stand corrected as the .264 ARP is alive again. While the Creedmoor has scratched my 6.5 bullet itch, H bringing the .264 pipes back out is good news for the AR15 crowd.

I still have my eyes on one of the Nexgen uppers in .260

 

[Regalkismet]

Steve Satern uses a Grendel at Camp Perry i believe. LRRPF52 likes to talk a lot of crap about Steve but unlike LRRPF52 Steve has made thousands of Grendel barrels and knows what he's talking about while LRRPF52 is just an internet know it all who sales foam filled boxes and talks crap on internet forums.

Sounds alot like a description of xcountryrider to me.

 

[SRSDriver]

Let us know when it's public, and when a gun store in wyoming has them. I need a grendel mag that doesn't bow and will drop free, all my grendel mags seem to swell and have to be pulled.

The new Grendel mag is going to be 100% US made the one knuckle head is talking about is a import from the middle east.

 

[waveslayer]

Let us know when it's public, and when a gun store in wyoming has them. I need a grendel mag that doesn't bow and will drop free, all my grendel mags seem to swell and have to be pulled.

AA has a new Mag in stock made by someone. Can't remeber. 25 rounders in stock

 

[BravoSierra]

If its AA, i thought those were the elanders. I don't think thats what dakarhunter was talking about?

 

[waveslayer]

If its AA, i thought those were the elanders. I don't think thats what dakarhunter was talking about?

You are correct they are the elanders. I couldn't remeber the name

 

[LRRPF52]

It's been the same with the Grendel forum from the beginning. Anytime anyone says anything that is different from what Bill A or any of you guys with their heads up his ass say they get banned. In 2007 I tried to tell some of the guys there that there are ways to get more performance from the cartridge. Must have been 10 guys jumping up and down screaming we would all blow ourselves up if we went .1 gr above Bills As published loads yada yada yada. 7 years later look, where we are now. I'm using the same chamber I was then which is close to the 264LBC chamber. 5R rifling and the same bolts I was producing then and I'm still shooting 100-150fps faster than Bills posted loads. It took some of you guys 7 years to get there. We could have had better barrels, bolts and more performance 7 years ago but that would have made AA look bad. You're his head cheerleader and biggest name dropper.
BTW, I emailed Kyle Lamb after you said you knew him personally, he said he didn't know you. I don't know him other than doing quite a bit of business with Viking a few years ago. I don't think people would believe me more if I drop his name or if my dad was a rocket scientist. Keep rolling though, it's entertaining.

I've known Kyle since 2003, helped fill his first open course, competed with him in 3-gun in NC, and see him every year at SHOT. Regardless, he said they found 6.8 to be dangerous in their testing, which you still won't address. Instead, you resort to focusing on me, rather than the points I have made. The logical fallacy is that if you can discredit the person, then the argument goes away.

Regardless of what you claim, it is extremely rare for someone to get banned from the Grendel Forum, and you pulled it off twice. You also managed to get banned from AR15.com, hence the multitude of screen names for different forums, and your cover handle there of yankindachain doesn't hide your word arrangement habits and not so stealthy attempts to sell your products.

The important thing here is that The Unit has more engineering resources than most small shop AR coat tail riders of the Stoner design, and they found the 6.8 to be dangerous. The real name dropping has been on the 6.8 side, exaggerating that 5th Group, SF, and SOCOM were behind it, when it was in fact an ill-advised project between 2 main personas, one from a civilian who worked at the AMU and pulled some interesting stunts that didn't go over so well.

The name-dropping started by going around claiming it was "super secret, hush hush, SF", etc., when it never had any real official sanctioning. This was used as a false advertising campaign from the start, and I personally witnessed it at my level in 2002-2003. Something just didn't smell right the way guys were promoting it back then, but I was still interested in a .277 bore AR15. When a fat National Guardsman tells me to my face that he can't tell me about the parent case because it's so freaking secret, then spills the beans in the same conversation, you know something dodgy is going on.

Then they went to the floor of SHOT and used the same advertising methods, while telling everyone not to pay attention to this other caliber, the 6.5 Grendel. Nobody had heard of either, so the silly 6.8 marketing back-fired.

Then after the Blackwater shoot, where 6.8 refused to even shoot against the Grendel, a campaign to discredit the Grendel went into overdrive by those who were financially vested in the 6.8, starting with the hunting argument. They knew there was no credibility in comparing downrange performance, so this idea that the 6.8 is somehow a better hunting caliber was latched onto, and you were one of the main culprits making statements like this:

"If you want to punch paper, then the Grendel is for you. But if you want to hunt medium game, there is no better cartridge for the AR15 than the 6.8..."

For those of us who are familiar with the 6.5 Swede and 6.5 Mannlicher-Schönauer's performance on game, we knew it wasn't substantiated, and the Grendel's track record on game has proven to be superior than the 6.8's. In the end, you put your eggs in a certain crate, and doubled down, but the facts speak for themselves.

Trying to increase the pressures isn't going to help any, given the AR15's barrel tennon diameters. Structural engineering probably didn't deal a lot with pressure containment vessels, and has more to do with PSI ratings of materials under compression, torsion, etc. You need to re-visit your pressure containment and MDS's on steels for thick wall chambers, especially on your BR barrel extensions meant for cartridges with a .473" case head diameter that you stuffed into an AR15. Hoop stress will kill those guns if you run the pressures in the SAAMI region for those cartridges.

 

[LRRPF52]

I would not exceed AA loads with a compound throat. The longer parallel throat of the 264 LBC and Grendel II is a bit safer with pressure. I actually think some of the AA loads are hot when using the compound throat.



He he to funny. Maybe Kyle bought one of his foam filled boxes.

The .5 degree initial angle adds ~300psi additional pressure, which you call unsafe, showing how little you know about all this again. It's unsafe if you run a reamer until it's worn, then try to shoot factory ammo through it. You should stay away from firearms really. Take up spelling for a start, then work on grammar.

Your presence on the Hide detracts from the technical nature of the forum. We could be having a productive conversation, but your baggage doesn't allow it.

 

[bustin]

I've known Kyle since 2003, helped fill his first open course, competed with him in 3-gun in NC, and see him every year at SHOT. Regardless, he said they found 6.8 to be dangerous in their testing, which you still won't address. Instead, you resort to focusing on me, rather than the points I have made. The logical fallacy is that if you can discredit the person, then the argument goes away.

Regardless of what you claim, it is extremely rare for someone to get banned from the Grendel Forum, and you pulled it off twice. You also managed to get banned from AR15.com, hence the multitude of screen names for different forums, and your cover handle there of yankindachain doesn't hide your word arrangement habits and not so stealthy attempts to sell your products.

The important thing here is that The Unit has more engineering resources than most small shop AR coat tail riders of the Stoner design, and they found the 6.8 to be dangerous. The real name dropping has been on the 6.8 side, exaggerating that 5th Group, SF, and SOCOM were behind it, when it was in fact an ill-advised project between 2 main personas, one from a civilian who worked at the AMU and pulled some interesting stunts that didn't go over so well.

The name-dropping started by going around claiming it was "super secret, hush hush, SF", etc., when it never had any real official sanctioning. This was used as a false advertising campaign from the start, and I personally witnessed it at my level in 2002-2003. Something just didn't smell right the way guys were promoting it back then, but I was still interested in a .277 bore AR15. When a fat National Guardsman tells me to my face that he can't tell me about the parent case because it's so freaking secret, then spills the beans in the same conversation, you know something dodgy is going on.

Then they went to the floor of SHOT and used the same advertising methods, while telling everyone not to pay attention to this other caliber, the 6.5 Grendel. Nobody had heard of either, so the silly 6.8 marketing back-fired.

Then after the Blackwater shoot, where 6.8 refused to even shoot against the Grendel, a campaign to discredit the Grendel went into overdrive by those who were financially vested in the 6.8, starting with the hunting argument. They knew there was no credibility in comparing downrange performance, so this idea that the 6.8 is somehow a better hunting caliber was latched onto, and you were one of the main culprits making statements like this:

"If you want to punch paper, then the Grendel is for you. But if you want to hunt medium game, there is no better cartridge for the AR15 than the 6.8..."

For those of us who are familiar with the 6.5 Swede and 6.5 Mannlicher-Schönauer's performance on game, we knew it wasn't substantiated, and the Grendel's track record on game has proven to be superior than the 6.8's. In the end, you put your eggs in a certain crate, and doubled down, but the facts speak for themselves.

Trying to increase the pressures isn't going to help any, given the AR15's barrel tennon diameters. Structural engineering probably didn't deal a lot with pressure containment vessels, and has more to do with PSI ratings of materials under compression, torsion, etc. You need to re-visit your pressure containment and MDS's on steels for thick wall chambers, especially on your BR barrel extensions meant for cartridges with a .473" case head diameter that you stuffed into an AR15. Hoop stress will kill those guns if you run the pressures in the SAAMI region for those cartridges.

There's about 50 6BRXs and almost as many 6.5Brs and 6.5BRxs with a .473 rim diameter out there running since 2009. 95smk at 3200fps from a 22" barrel . None have been damaged. They are running high pressure, not enough to damage the cases but hot enough to slightly flatten CCI 450 primers.That's real world shooting right there not YOUR my dad was a rocket scientist BS calculations.
Kyle says he doesn't know you. You must not have made much of an impression. The 6.8 will stand on it's own as everyone is finding out exactly what it will do, regardless of you opinion.
I started my account here under Constructor and used my work email address. This painter foreman on the job thought he would try a little intimidation to get me off his back and stuck his finger in my chest one day and I kicked him upside the head. They couldn't have their engineer/Supts kicking people in the head so they let me go. I couldn't remember my password or retrieve it so I started another account here in 2008. Of course I get banned from the Grendel forum I am near enemy #1 there. Argued with Bill, John and everyone else on arfcom long before you came around. Your comments over the last year or 2 are very pointed in my direction. You think Bill made the best thing that could ever be made in the AR15 platform and no one else should even try to make anything that performs better. You try to make anything that comes close to the performance look bad. You want to protect Bill A and the grendel. Wipe the jizz off your chin. Bill A didn't engineer the Grendel Arne was shooting a 6.5 in a PPC case long before Bill ever thought about it and more than likely got the idea from Arne. If the 6.8 is dangerous the Grendel is more dangerous according to your own calculations every Grendel barrel made out of stainless is unsafe. Use the correct yield or tensile strength values of annealed stainless at 28-32 rockwell and you will see they don't meet the safety factor. The mil uses 4150 11595e to just meet the safety level with a 5.56 using your calculations. The other mistake you made is not using the barrel extension as part of the calcs. It does add strength to the barrel tenon and should be used. As far as unsafe There have been no 6.8 bolts break but how often do we hear about Grendel bolts breaking? It seems every few weeks there is a new post on the grendel forum about bolts breaking so which is really the unsafe one?
There are 6mmBRs, 6BRXs, 6.5BRs, 6.5BRXs, 30RARs, 6.5RARs, 7mmBRs, 270AR and every caliber wssm made for the AR15. I've heard of one wssm scattering a barrel but I don't know all the details. Everyone is shooting away unknowing that YOU have said all of those are unsafe. Maybe you should send a notice to all of the weapon manufacturers out there and let them know that you know more than they do. I'm sure they would stop production immediately.

 

[corym468]

There's about 50 6BRXs and almost as many 6.5Brs and 6.5BRxs with a .473 rim diameter out there running since 2009. 95smk at 3200fps from a 22" barrel . None have been damaged. They are running high pressure, not enough to damage the cases but hot enough to slightly flatten CCI 450 primers.That's real world shooting right there not YOUR my dad was a rocket scientist BS calculations.
Kyle says he doesn't know you. You must not have made much of an impression. The 6.8 will stand on it's own as everyone is finding out exactly what it will do, regardless of you opinion.
I started my account here under Constructor and used my work email address. This painter foreman on the job thought he would try a little intimidation to get me off his back and stuck his finger in my chest one day and I kicked him upside the head. They couldn't have their engineer/Supts kicking people in the head so they let me go. I couldn't remember my password or retrieve it so I started another account here in 2008. Of course I get banned from the Grendel forum I am near enemy #1 there. Argued with Bill, John and everyone else on arfcom long before you came around. Your comments over the last year or 2 are very pointed in my direction. You think Bill made the best thing that could ever be made in the AR15 platform and no one else should even try to make anything that performs better. You try to make anything that comes close to the performance look bad. You want to protect Bill A and the grendel. Wipe the jizz off your chin. Bill A didn't engineer the Grendel Arne was shooting a 6.5 in a PPC case long before Bill ever thought about it and more than likely got the idea from Arne. If the 6.8 is dangerous the Grendel is more dangerous according to your own calculations every Grendel barrel made out of stainless is unsafe. Use the correct yield or tensile strength values of annealed stainless at 28-32 rockwell and you will see they don't meet the safety factor. The mil uses 4150 11595e to just meet the safety level with a 5.56 using your calculations. The other mistake you made is not using the barrel extension as part of the calcs. It does add strength to the barrel tenon and should be used. As far as unsafe There have been no 6.8 bolts break but how often do we hear about Grendel bolts breaking? It seems every few weeks there is a new post on the grendel forum about bolts breaking so which is really the unsafe one?
There are 6mmBRs, 6BRXs, 6.5BRs, 6.5BRXs, 30RARs, 6.5RARs, 7mmBRs, 270AR and every caliber wssm made for the AR15. I've heard of one wssm scattering a barrel but I don't know all the details. Everyone is shooting away unknowing that YOU have said all of those are unsafe. Maybe you should send a notice to all of the weapon manufacturers out there and let them know that you know more than they do. I'm sure they would stop production immediately.

Wow you really have no concept of physics, engineering, or posting in a readable fashion.

You know I had seriously looked into getting one of your barrels from time to time, because of the praises I read online. However, with the the lack of understanding of what you're doing I'll pass.

When pushing a design to the limits of the materials used, it's common to design in a failure mode. This is often done in tools with a pin that will fail before anything else, pressure vessels are designed to leak before burst, etc.... This is done because the effects of these failure modes are not catastrophically hazardous. Therefore you have a design that fails without injuring someone. The Grendel and a bolt failure should be looked at in this manner.

I haven't seen the data LRRPF52 is talking about, so I can't say if it's dangerous or not. I know very little of the 6.8 design, so I won't remark on the 6.8.

However I will say, if a design can yield a barrel then that design is catastrophically hazardous. Essentially you have a pressure vessel that will burst before leak. This failure mode and a Grendel bolt breaking is not comparable. They're several orders of magnitude different.

Any competent engineer would have designed that AR with a bolt that would yield before the barrel did.

 

[bustin]

Wow you really have no concept of physics, engineering, or posting in a readable fashion.

You know I had seriously looked into getting one of your barrels from time to time, because of the praises I read online. However, with the the lack of understanding of what you're doing I'll pass.

When pushing a design to the limits of the materials used, it's common to design in a failure mode. This is often done in tools with a pin that will fail before anything else, pressure vessels are designed to leak before burst, etc.... This is done because the effects of these failure modes are not catastrophically hazardous. Therefore you have a design that fails without injuring someone. The Grendel and a bolt failure should be looked at in this manner.

I haven't seen the data LRRPF52 is talking about, so I can't say if it's dangerous or not. I know very little of the 6.8 design, so I won't remark on the 6.8.

However I will say, if a design can yield a barrel then that design is catastrophically hazardous. Essentially you have a pressure vessel that will burst before leak. This failure mode and a Grendel bolt breaking is not comparable. They're several orders of magnitude different.

Any competent engineer would have designed that AR with a bolt that would yield before the barrel did.

Thanks, I worked as a structural and field engineer for 25 years more or less. I can tell you aren't one along with your buddy. I don't know if you know but Alexander didn't engineer his bolts, Stoner and team did. I re-engineered the bolts we produce to increase the strength by 28%. Paul says the 6.8 is unsafe but more Grendel bolts break with factory loads held to 52,000 psi by a long shot so which is more unsafe? Sounds like the Grendel is running at max capacity with no safety margin. So which cartridge has a larger safety factor, a Grendel in a 28 rockwell stainless barrel or a .473 diameter cartridge in a 4150 11595e 60 rockwell barrel? Has any Grendel barrels been subjected to 70,000 psi proof loads? I'm sure Paul can find a photo of the proof loads if they have. They need the proof load decal on the box. We batch test our 6.8 barrels and bolts with Hornady 70,000psi proof loads and I have the Hornady proof loads to prove it.
There are many ways to skin a cat. You guys seem to think the Alexander way is the only way but you're wrong. There are plenty of barrels chambered in 264LBC or Grendel II that seem to work just fine. Many of them have a standard freebore design throat and are very accurate. Many of them have 5/8-24 threads and seem to shoot and retain muzzle devices just fine. I really don't care how anyone else does it but when guys like you say it's the only way, I'll step in to show you it's not. There's nothing wrong with a 6.5 in a PPC case the thinking that there is only one way is whats wrong with the Grendel.
Why did Alexander make muzzles with 9/16" thread? Why did he trademark "Grendel"? Why did he use an odd dimension bolt? So everyone would have to come to him to buy parts.
Him and his college buddy Lietner Wise are just alike, they had a plan. Protect the clan, at all cost.

 

[corym468]

Thanks, I worked as a structural and field engineer for 25 years more or less. I can tell you aren't one along with your buddy. I don't know if you know but Alexander didn't engineer his bolts, Stoner and team did. I re-engineered the bolts we produce to increase the strength by 28%. Paul says the 6.8 is unsafe but more Grendel bolts break with factory loads held to 52,000 psi by a long shot so which is more unsafe? Sounds like the Grendel is running at max capacity with no safety margin. So which cartridge has a larger safety factor, a Grendel in a 28 rockwell stainless barrel or a .473 diameter cartridge in a 4150 11595e 60 rockwell barrel? Has any Grendel barrels been subjected to 70,000 psi proof loads? I'm sure Paul can find a photo of the proof loads if they have. They need the proof load decal on the box. We batch test our 6.8 barrels and bolts with Hornady 70,000psi proof loads and I have the Hornady proof loads to prove it.
There are many ways to skin a cat. You guys seem to think the Alexander way is the only way but you're wrong. There are plenty of barrels chambered in 264LBC or Grendel II that seem to work just fine. Many of them have a standard freebore design throat and are very accurate. Many of them have 5/8-24 threads and seem to shoot and retain muzzle devices just fine. I really don't care how anyone else does it but when guys like you say it's the only way, I'll step in to show you it's not. There's nothing wrong with a 6.5 in a PPC case the thinking that there is only one way is whats wrong with the Grendel.
Why did Alexander make muzzles with 9/16" thread? Why did he trademark "Grendel"? Why did he use an odd dimension bolt? So everyone would have to come to him to buy parts.
Him and his college buddy Lietner Wise are just alike, they had a plan. Protect the clan, at all cost.

WTF??? I'd suggest reading comprehension for dummies. Go back and reread my post, slowly this time. 25 years of experience and then you got fired for kicking someone upside the head. Righttttt :/ LMFAO

This painter foreman on the job thought he would try a little intimidation to get me off his back and stuck his finger in my chest one day and I kicked him upside the head. They couldn't have their engineer/Supts kicking people in the head so they let me go.

I never said it was the only way to do it. I simply said it was a non catastrophic failure mode.

As a Marine when meeting other Vets I'll commonly throw out military terms, locations, etc... to see if they're legit or if it's some guy full of shit. I think a lot of us do it in light of all the stolen valor POSs.

In my last post I used some very common and elementary engineering terms, that you seemed to have completely missed. However, I'm the one that's clearly not an engineer. :?

If you really are an Engineer could you please share your alma mater. I plan to start a grad program in the near future and would like to avoid it.

 

[godofthunder]

Would someone please explain to me how the 6.8 is an "unsafe" round? Not being an ass or anything, I'm genuinely curious. I've been shooting one for a little over a year now and have had no issues with factory ammo or reloads. I've not had any flattened primers, no ejector marks, no loose primer pockets, and the life of my brass has been good (going on my seventh round of loads with some brass). Why would companies like SSA and Wilson sell "tactical" rounds that are loaded hotter than SAAMI spec ammo if it was unsafe in the SpecII chamber? If the 6.8 SPC is so dangerous, why is there not more information out there stating so?

 

[Bevan]

this is hilarious but can we get some straight facts without the personal baggage, namedropping and bullshit

 

[bustin]

Would someone please explain to me how the 6.8 is an "unsafe" round? Not being an ass or anything, I'm genuinely curious. I've been shooting one for a little over a year now and have had no issues with factory ammo or reloads. I've not had any flattened primers, no ejector marks, no loose primer pockets, and the life of my brass has been good (going on my seventh round of loads with some brass). Why would companies like SSA and Wilson sell "tactical" rounds that are loaded hotter than SAAMI spec ammo if it was unsafe in the SpecII chamber? If the 6.8 SPC is so dangerous, why is there not more information out there stating so?

You know it's not, it's just Lrrpf52 throwing crap against the wall to see what sticks. Kind of like Robert Whitley does in the courtroom...cast a shadow of doubt. They want everyone to think the Grendel is the best cartridge in the AR15 and anything any bigger is dangerous.

Let me ask you Cory, being a military guy if you are using a Grendel in battle and the bolt breaks what do you do other than pick up an AK laying on the ground? What is more dangerous, a rifle system(firearm and ammo) that breaks bolts or one that does not? No one I know has ever seen or heard of a 6.5 or 6.8 scattering a barrel.
Paul can't prove anything about the 6.8 being unsafe he's just quoting something Kyle said which ended up online. Kyle called me after I sent him the email about Paul. We talked for a few and he implied he didn't do a lot of testing with the 6.8 just shot it some.
Many don't know the history of the 6.8 and the mistakes made by Remington and PTG early on that nearly killed the 6.8.
Cris Murray really developed the round, tested it along with others and sent Remington some information. Remington thought they knew better than Murray and changed/ignored his suggestions. Mainly Murray used Douglas 4 groove 10 twist barrels with a certain bore area then used a chamber with a longer freebore. The dumb shits at Remington ignored the bore area and shortened the freebore .050". That caused higher pressures. Remington loaded the first ammo and sent some out for testing. It blew primers. The military guys testing didn't know if it was high pressure or undersized ammo/excessive headspace. The military informed Remington that the ammo must not exceed 55,000 psi at 110 degrees.
At that point Remington downloaded the ammo. That is where it dropped from 2800fps-24" barrel to 2650fps 24"barrel and 2450fps 16" barrel. Shortly after Remington dropped out and SSA stepped in to take over ammo production. SSA found a copper coated lead bullet made by Extreme bullets and loaded them. PTG made some reamers with a mistake. They transposed a number that resulted in a cone with an 80 degree angle. When those Extreme bullets passed over the sharp corner in the chamber it shaved off copper. Over time a copper ring developed which choked the bullet in the case and raised pressure. The ammo was blowing primers again. I think this was about the time Barrett was involved in making the barrels and the 468 rifle and the 6.8 was being passed around in the military.
Shortly after (around 2007)a few other people got involved in the 6.8 and the mistake in the chamber was found and corrected, SSA stopped using the copper clad bullets and the freebore in the chambers were increased. Then a few started making barrels with the correct bore area. After all of the mistakes were corrected everyone started pushing the performance and found they could get back to the original velocities and more. Art Kalwas of SSA called me in 2008 and talked about needing a stronger bolt for the 6.8. He thought that was one thing the guys testing the 6.8 was still unsure of since they had seen 5.56 bolts fail. It was the weak link. I did what I could to increase the strength of the bolt while working with the mil spec barrel extension and carrier. The bolts we produce are apx 28% stronger than a mil spec carpenter 158 bolt. By 2009 all of the mistakes had been corrected.
There may be a few companies still using poor spec 10 twist barrels with 6 grooves and a small bore area but most have changed to better spec barrels. There is nothing unsafe about the 6.8 these days. Those of us that do understand the strength of materials use 4150 11595e steel instead of stainless for AR15 barrels. Some of us choose to Melonite our barrels to add even more strength, wear and corrosion resistance . The yield strength of some 416R stainless is as low as 40,000psi, some stainless barrel steel as high as 80,000psi. 4150 yield is 128,000psi at 28 rockwell in the annealed state. Stainless or most 4150 gun barrels that are chrome lined are not hardened/tempered and are in the range of 28-32 rockwell in order to pull the rifling buttons. Melonite barrels are carburized more or less where the surface inside and out is 60-70 rockwell and apx 50 at the core.
That increases the yield strength above the 128,000psi.
If 416R stainless is used for a AR15 barrel it does not meet the 2:1 firearm safety margin for hoop stress around the chamber if it is chambered in the 5.56 and run at 58,000 psi the way Paul is calculating it. Any caliber larger in diameter than the 5.56 is weaker and also does not meet the 2:1 safety margin when 416R is used. It doesn't seem to stop the big firearm manufactures from using it though.
A few years ago the 6.8 had a much better selection of hunting bullets, the 6.5 a better selection of match bullets. That was my opinion and what I told people who were trying to decide between the 2. Now the 6.5 has a few more hunting bullets as does the 6.8. Other than that both have apx the same performance. IMO everyone needs to research to find what parts including mags, ammo and reloading components are avail and make a decision.
Around 2009 Grendelizer, B waites, Bill A and I had all had enough of the BS of arfcom. It all started from misinformation being posted by some who knew nothing about the other caliber and those that did arguing the other guys information was wrong. That's still going on today with new people coming into the loop not knowing much about the other caliber.

 

[steve123]

Thanks for that info Bustin.

 

[Regalkismet]

It's been my experience that LRRPF52 will use information about the 6.8 that he knows is no longer accurate to mislead people about the 6.8....I've seen him do it many times.....The fact that he knows the information is either outdated or has been corrected long ago and is no longer accurate yet still uses it on threads to manipulate what others think about the cartridge makes me not believe anything he says....I've witnessed him do it over and over again.

 

[corym468]

.....Let me ask you Cory, being a military guy if you are using a Grendel in battle and the bolt breaks what do you do other than pick up an AK laying on the ground? What is more dangerous, a rifle system(firearm and ammo) that breaks bolts or one that does not? No one I know has ever seen or heard of a 6.5 or 6.8 scattering a barrel.

...........

Many don't know the history of the 6.8 and the mistakes made by Remington and PTG early on that nearly killed the 6.8.
Cris Murray really developed the round, tested it along with others and sent Remington some information. Remington thought they knew better than Murray and changed/ignored his suggestions. Mainly Murray used Douglas 4 groove 10 twist barrels with a certain bore area then used a chamber with a longer freebore. The dumb shits at Remington ignored the bore area and shortened the freebore .050". That caused higher pressures. Remington loaded the first ammo and sent some out for testing. It blew primers. The military guys testing didn't know if it was high pressure or undersized ammo/excessive headspace. The military informed Remington that the ammo must not exceed 55,000 psi at 110 degrees.
At that point Remington downloaded the ammo. That is where it dropped from 2800fps-24" barrel to 2650fps 24"barrel and 2450fps 16" barrel. Shortly after Remington dropped out and SSA stepped in to take over ammo production. SSA found a copper coated lead bullet made by Extreme bullets and loaded them. PTG made some reamers with a mistake. They transposed a number that resulted in a cone with an 80 degree angle. When those Extreme bullets passed over the sharp corner in the chamber it shaved off copper. Over time a copper ring developed which choked the bullet in the case and raised pressure. The ammo was blowing primers again. I think this was about the time Barrett was involved in making the barrels and the 468 rifle and the 6.8 was being passed around in the military.
Shortly after (around 2007)a few other people got involved in the 6.8 and the mistake in the chamber was found and corrected, SSA stopped using the copper clad bullets and the freebore in the chambers were increased. Then a few started making barrels with the correct bore area. After all of the mistakes were corrected everyone started pushing the performance and found they could get back to the original velocities and more. Art Kalwas of SSA called me in 2008 and talked about needing a stronger bolt for the 6.8. He thought that was one thing the guys testing the 6.8 was still unsure of since they had seen 5.56 bolts fail. It was the weak link. I did what I could to increase the strength of the bolt while working with the mil spec barrel extension and carrier. The bolts we produce are apx 28% stronger than a mil spec carpenter 158 bolt. By 2009 all of the mistakes had been corrected.
There may be a few companies still using poor spec 10 twist barrels with 6 grooves and a small bore area but most have changed to better spec barrels. There is nothing unsafe about the 6.8 these days. Those of us that do understand the strength of materials use 4150 11595e steel instead of stainless for AR15 barrels. Some of us choose to Melonite our barrels to add even more strength, wear and corrosion resistance . The yield strength of some 416R stainless is as low as 40,000psi, some stainless barrel steel as high as 80,000psi. 4150 yield is 128,000psi at 28 rockwell in the annealed state. Stainless or most 4150 gun barrels that are chrome lined are not hardened/tempered and are in the range of 28-32 rockwell in order to pull the rifling buttons. Melonite barrels are carburized more or less where the surface inside and out is 60-70 rockwell and apx 50 at the core.
That increases the yield strength above the 128,000psi.
If 416R stainless is used for a AR15 barrel it does not meet the 2:1 firearm safety margin for hoop stress around the chamber if it is chambered in the 5.56 and run at 58,000 psi the way Paul is calculating it. Any caliber larger in diameter than the 5.56 is weaker and also does not meet the 2:1 safety margin when 416R is used. It doesn't seem to stop the big firearm manufactures from using it though.
A few years ago the 6.8 had a much better selection of hunting bullets, the 6.5 a better selection of match bullets. That was my opinion and what I told people who were trying to decide between the 2. Now the 6.5 has a few more hunting bullets as does the 6.8. Other than that both have apx the same performance. IMO everyone needs to research to find what parts including mags, ammo and reloading components are avail and make a decision.
Around 2009 Grendelizer, B waites, Bill A and I had all had enough of the BS of arfcom. It all started from misinformation being posted by some who knew nothing about the other caliber and those that did arguing the other guys information was wrong. That's still going on today with new people coming into the loop not knowing much about the other caliber.

As a military guy whether I have a 5.56, 6.8, Grendel, or .308 I want a sidearm as well. They all have a multitude of parts that can fail in battle rendering the weapon useless.

I've never had a bolt fail on me. I know guys that have ran 1000s of rounds over the a standard AA Grendel (Beowolf) Bolt, in a spec Grendel barrel with no broken bolt. Even some full auto use.

I wasn't involved in the Grendel when the great run of broken bolts happened (at least that's how y'all make it out), but from my experience with the Grendel and Engineering I suspect they for the most part a product the wrong material used, poor heat treating process, or a bad reamer producing a chamber that gave pressure spikes.

Grendel bolts breaking have become a rare problem that has been solved with better material and processes for the making the bolts and more attention to using a spec reamer.

You've never heard me bash the 6.8. As far as a hunting platform goes for the average hunter they're a wash in end results. However, for the hunter that can take full advantage of the potential of both, the Grendel holds the edge.

I find it almost amusing that the 6.8 had its own problem early own, that you laid out so well, but y'all don't still harp on them. However, y'all can't leave the Grendel's growing pains alone.

Even the 5.56 will break bolts from time to time especially if the right material isn't used, but no one harps on it anymore.

Some people like to say well Military adoption, well military adoption..... The military has never adopted a new round without adopting a new platform for it. If the military was to adopt either of these rounds in the AR platform they'd modify for the round like LWRC did for the 6.8. This would result in a beefer bolt for either round. This if it was being used in the military argument is null and void.

 

[Regalkismet]

The LWRC six8 is used and was developed for military contracts and they didn't beef up the bolt nor are they having any bolt issues..even if it's for foreign military's, it is a good sign for 6.8 SPC II. I don't think the US will be adopting anything in the near future....5.56 does a good job for the most part.

 

[dakarhunter]

It's been my experience that LRRPF52 will use information about the 6.8 that he knows is no longer accurate to mislead people about the 6.8....I've seen him do it many times.....The fact that he knows the information is either outdated or has been corrected long ago and is no longer accurate yet still uses it on threads to manipulate what others think about the cartridge makes me not believe anything he says....I've witnessed him do it over and over again.

When LRRPF52 isn't licking Bill Alexanders toilet bowl he is spreading FUD about the 6.8SPC and other Grendel manufactures that compete with Alexander Arms.He is a misinformation factory take anything he says with appropriate discernment.

 

[Twelve208]

Wow this is worse then arguing about religion or with a woman. How long do you chase your tail before you finally catch it?..And how long does it take before you realize you've ate your tail, and your head somehow ended up your ass? Not directing that to anyone...but good hell let your tail go with the 6.5 vs 6.8.
People who give a flying batshit about the cartridges will do their research and sift through the shit,coming up with a final conclusion or personal preference.For those who don't,its their loss.
Reputation for a cartridge can't be based on shitty manufacturing, and yes both 6.5 and 6.8 have had those pitfalls.
You have your Grendel Bandwagon,You have your SPC bandwagon..Why do we need any wagons? Shit folks go enjoy shooting.I often wonder if any pro gun control groups sit and read some of the stuff people argue or say on gun related forums..Because that would sure be the joke of the day for them.Then to top it off we act upset that we are stereotyped.. Bottom line who looks the the idiot?..So fight your battle here..Because your winning right? Shoot on guys..

 

[dakarhunter]

Here's a basic slide between the Grendel and Grendel II.

 

[LRRPF52]

It's been my experience that LRRPF52 will use information about the 6.8 that he knows is no longer accurate to mislead people about the 6.8....I've seen him do it many times.....The fact that he knows the information is either outdated or has been corrected long ago and is no longer accurate yet still uses it on threads to manipulate what others think about the cartridge makes me not believe anything he says....I've witnessed him do it over and over again.

For example.......

I've been tracking 6.8 since 2003. I've emailed back and forth with Murray, done a lot of research myself, to include ballistic comparisons that showed that almost all the claims from the 6.8 camp were totally false, although most of them seemed reasonable enough to believe when I read them on the surface. It has made me very suspicious of everything I hear even more so than before in this industry.

I think the 6.8 is safe if you keep it loaded to 53,000psi or less, but the Accurate Powder load data pushing 58,850psi is over the edge. The common response I see from defensive and insecure 6.8 folks is that I'm using the original SAAMI abortion info for the short throat and 80 degree shoulder, when I'm really talking about the most up-to-date, non-standardized chamber designs, which still have an error in the drawing as Harrison has pointed out himself.

The fact that there is no standard is a major problem for the industry, and you have major barrel makers calling up Bill A. asking what chamber design they should use, because they actually have industry professionals in engineering departments who are looking at the drawings and scratching their heads. Then you have alternate chamber designs that are declared better by their tweakers, and many jump on that wagon, demanding different magazine designs with more COL, so you've ended up with no standard for the magazines, and even SSA declaring many of their loads no for use in this or that magazine, different maker's rifles, etc.

Then you have the Six8, which opens the non-standardization even more with another magazine and receiver set design. So with 6.8, you have several different COLs to consider, no standardization on a chamber design that can be pinned down, no standardization on factory ammunition, questions about what pressures are appropriate for it in the AR15, but enough demand that suppliers find what is acceptable to them to meet consumer needs, which are really driven by a desire for something other than .223 Rem in such a versatile firearms design.

Whenever these facts are pointed out, it becomes a personal matter of attacking people individually, which is a resort to logical fallacies and indicative of an inability to argue the merits.

The 6.8 crowd had me believing Bill Alexander was a pompous British bastard based on what I had read online. After meeting him and talking with him, I learned it was quite the opposite. Reed Knight III remarked to me at SHOT this year that Bill Alexander is probably the most knowledgeable guy in this industry, so take that for what it's worth. The Knight's have forgotten more about the AR15 and Stoner designs than most AR15 companies will ever know. On the other hand, guys like Harrison have turned me away from being customers of theirs, particularly after personal threats were issued, and open admissions that their only intent for posting was to "smear buggars" and cause discontent for "entertainment value".

I've ordered a lot of barrels from AR Performance, but I can no longer support a company whose owner insults, threatens, and attacks me personally. When I've spoken with Harrison on the phone, he seemed totally reasonable, nice guy, but then this dark half comes out every now and then, and blind sides you. I wish it were different, but it's out of my control really.

If anyone wants to point out specifically where I'm wrong, I'll own it like a man, rather than lash out with counter accusations. I'm not sure what the issue is with my dad being a rocket telemetry data technician, aerospace engineer, mathematician, and physicist for the DOD/USAF, but that's what he did. Being raised by him and my mom was a better education than any school I could have attended on a number of levels, and I look at things a lot differently as a result.

 

[LRRPF52]

When LRRPF52 isn't licking Bill Alexanders toilet bowl he is spreading FUD about the 6.8SPC and other Grendel manufactures that compete with Alexander Arms.He is a misinformation factory take anything he says with appropriate discernment.

So how would you explain my support for...

* Precision Firearms
* JP Enterprises
* J&T/Double Star
* Long Range Precision
* Templar Customs
* Les Baer
* Specialized Dynamics
* Christiansen Arms

...and all the other manufacturers who make Grendels. We mentioned most of those companies in the Grendel Reloading Handbooks. Kinda puts a damper in your accusation that I'm somehow an advertising agent for AA, despite what you've been told by Satern. I don't even own an AA rifle or carbine. I built my first Grendel with an AA barrel/bolt combo from Midway in 2009.