6.5 Grendel AR. Looking to go with that round. Is it worth it?

[Joe Dirt]

I am looking to get a 6.5 Grendel AR upper. Just for around 500 yards target and hunting. I just have a few Questions. I will be reloading.
How much does the brass stretch? How many reloads until the brass is no good?
Does the ejecting shell dent to where it can not be reloaded?
Overall is every one that has a 6.5 Grendel AR happy with the results?
Thanks for all the feed back.

 

[LRRPF52]

I've always enjoyed the 5.56 chambering in the AR15, but I enjoy shooting my Grendel in the traditional rifle role a lot more. It does a lot for the little AR15 frame, and is an ideal hunting caliber, as well as recreational target-shooting caliber for intermediate ranges, delivering a lot more energy on-target than 5.56 ever could.

 

[Unknown]

I love my Grendels. I use Lapua cases, and anneal. I quit counting after I passed 6-8 loadings. Now, out of about 100 rounds fired I still get 2-3 cases where the necks get lengthwise cracks. I think that is pretty good as no cases last forever. I started with about 600 cases 3-4 years ago, and am now down to about 520...and I shoot quite a bit.

Grendel has around 20% more recoil than a 5.56, and smacks steel plates with what appears to be 70% the power of a 7.62x51

 

[SFC Carpentier jr]

I have two 6.5 Grendel uppers. I like this round and of course Hornday has factory ammo for this caliber. I talk to some one from Alexander Arms at the NRA Convection and they said they have plenty of 6.5 brass.

 

[Archer762]

I haven't noticed any difference compared to reloading 5.56 in regards to brass. I have not tried it yet, but many people convert 7.62x39 brass. The only reason I haven't done it because most of that ammo is steel cased. I do like that the brass can be converted from another common caliber (like the 300 BLK can be converted from 5.56 brass) so it has long-term staying power even if it doesn't catch on in your average gun shop.

6.5 Grendel is the round I would want for battle or hunting with the AR, especially beyond 300 yards.

 

[Regalkismet]

For 500 yards and less I would go with a 6.8 spc II..... I think it's a better hunting round under 400 yards and if you don't want to reload ammo is becoming fairly common with even Walmart carrying it now... Not trying to start the old grendel vs 6.8 debate.... If I was target shooting over 500 yes the grendel has the advantage but 400 and under IMHO goes to the 6.8 spc II especially when ammunition availability is considered. The newer bullet choices and manufacturers making the ammo has really made the 6.8 spc II a great choice. Especially considering barrel length required for each caliber to get optimum results.

 

[LRRPF52]

There are 25 factory loads for the 6.5 Grendel, and new manufacturers of rifle and ammunition components coming online all the time, to include recent companies like:

Colt Competition (Rifles)
LAR Mfg.
Nosler (brass) add to Lapua, Hornady, AA, PPU
LRP Arms (rifles with super match Pac-Nor barrels)

The different approach to hunting from each camp has some overlap in certain bullet weights, but generally has been this:

The 6.8 SPC in the 85gr-115gr weights tends to yaw significantly with conventional bullets, with a lot of energy-dump into the medium. Think 5.56 on steroids.

The Grendel shooting 120gr and higher consistently demonstrates excellent penetration with conventional bullets.

You can get a Grendel to perform like a 6.8 with the lighter, varmint-weight bullets if you want, but you are limited with trying to get the 6.8 to perform like the Grendel to a few projectiles like the 120gr Hornady SST, or the 140gr Berger.

There are a lot of 6.5mm 100gr cup & core projectiles that will run fast from the Grendel, but a lot of hunters like penetration and minimum meat damage, with the ability to blow through shoulders, and hunters using the Grendel have done just that with the 123gr A-MAX and SST on hogs and deer.

Using a Barnes bullet seems to produce similar results with both calibers, and the Barnes units really come into play on quartering shots. You can generally expect more penetration with higher sectional density 6.5 Barnes units, and Mark LaRue used the 120gr TTSX to pile up a rather large Bull Elk at 405yds with his 20" Grendel back in 2007.

Muzzle velocities between factory loadings from both calibers are a lot closer than the max hand loads that are frequently listed, which is why I went with Grendel for the significant BC advantage.

For long-term brass and projectile availability, the Grendel enjoys a sizable component selection advantage, even if all Grendel brass makers quit tomorrow, because there is quality boxer-primed 7.62x39 brass from:

Lapua
IMI
Winchester
Federal
Remington
PMC
PPU

When you head to the reloading component section, there are tons of bullets to choose from in a wide weight range that all will fit and fire from the Grendel, whereas the 6.8 needed a niche market of varmint-weight projectiles made specifically for it since the vast majority of .277" projectiles are meant for the long-action .270 Winchester.

The 6.8 has enjoyed a faster initial market response in demonstrating the viability and consumer-demand for a high performance intermediate cartridge, while the Grendel has steadily followed closely along with it. Both have made each other better as manufacturers compete for improved performance to satisfy two camps of loyal customer bases, while many customers just get both and move forward. Both will be around into the indefinite future as hunters finally have industry-supported, harder-hitting cartridges that have changed the way people look at AR15's and their potential on medium game.

 

[Regalkismet]

A grendel needs a 20" or longer barrel to get those results while a 6.8 only needs a 16" barrel.... Also most of the data and info you see online is using the old 6.8 saami chamber which isn't indicative of the spc ii chamber which makes the round much more effective with the ability to use hotter loads which are readily available and adds considerable velocity . I think the Grendel is a great round.... But after much research most agree the 6.8 spc ii is a better round under 300 to 400 yards especially for hunting. It's important to compare apples to apples.... Like using the most recent chamber, bullets and barrel Length IMHO. If I was shooting over 500 yards regularly I would go with a grendel. From all the credible info I've read and comparisons, which anyone can search the Web for, as well as comparing ballistics of ammunition in spc ii and grendel it's pretty clear that up to 300 yards the 6.8 spc ii has the advantage... 300-400 yards it's very close.... 500 up... Grendel...... This is if Comparing similar bullets... except the grendel will have 20" barrel most likely and the 6.8 will have a 16" barrel.... It comes down to what distance you will be shooting at regularly and if barrel length is important to you..... And if you want to be able to buy ammo at Walmart...... Hopefully the 6.5 will be available at Walmart soon to.....

 

[win.308stealth]

I have put together 2. 6.5's and am planning on getting another 4. One for myself, one for my daughter, and the next four will be for my sons (ages 8years-9months). It is a great round for whitetails. I shoot 129 gr hornady softpoints out of mine.

 

[Joe Dirt]

Thanks for the info. I think I will be going Alexander arms 24" Shilen barrel. I would like to take it out to 1000 yards for fun.

 

[Desert_Racer]

123gr Scenars are the tits. The 6.5 Grendel is a great round. If the ammo was more available (and less expensive), I probably wouldn't have pulled the barrel off of mine and sold it.

 

[BERTMAN77MK2]

The Grendel is my personal favorite AR15 caliber (if you could only have 1---ha!) and my do-it-all truck gun is a Grendel---not sure why anyone is commenting on 6.8 as you asked about the Grendel----due to its long range capability you are correct in getting a high quality barrel---my tightest grouper is a Satern 22"er.
My truck gun is a 14.5"er---like having an AK that is accurate and useful for anything that comes up!

 

[fmsniper]

excellent cartridge, I have 2 24 inch grendels I use for antelope, great 600 yard rifle, I have shot it out to 975 yards on 10 inch steel. My favorite ammo is Hornandy 123 SST

I built an AR style bolt action and my Gas gun. I use the Bolt action AR for target and my son to hunt with.

bolt action


Gas gun

 

[Regalkismet]

The Grendel is my personal favorite AR15 caliber (if you could only have 1---ha!) and my do-it-all truck gun is a Grendel---not sure why anyone is commenting on 6.8 as you asked about the Grendel----due to its long range capability you are correct in getting a high quality barrel---my tightest grouper is a Satern 22"er.
My truck gun is a 14.5"er---like having an AK that is accurate and useful for anything that comes up!

Look at the title of the thread.... Op asked if it was worth it and obviously was asking for opinions. And my opinion which is well supported.... 500 yards and up.... Grendel..... Under 500....6.8 spc ii..... Especially considering availability and ammo price........ They are both great rounds..... Trying to help op..... And not bring fanboy bs into it. So Grendel is certainly worth it if you regularly shoot 500 yards..... But if not 6.8 spc ii would be a better choice 400 and under and is cheaper to shoot and acquire ammo if you don't want to reload. I went through the decision on which round and originally was gonna go with the grendel but when I put the time in to see what actually would fit my needs it ended up being the 6.8....which may or may not help the op.... Only he can decide as its his question/thread..... I'm simply trying to help op make a sound decision by giving him an alternative choice which may or may not help him... Pointing out advantages and disadvantages of both rounds. Op clearly states 500 yards in his post but it isn't clear if he means that would would be the average distance used at or the max distance used at. I ended up deciding that if I was going to shoot regularly over 500 yards that the 6.5 creedmoor or 260 in an AR10 format was what I'd build..... Or just use my 308. Just to be clear Grendel is a great round....And I almost built one.... But I was going to use it primarily for hunting at or under 400 yards so with the shorter barrel, availability and cost of ammunition the 6.8 was a better fit for me.....

 

[Joe Dirt]

Should I go 20" or 24" barrel.

 

[346ci]

I run both but prefer the 6.8 for hunting as my 6.8 rigs are 16" or less, I'm in the process of building a 6.8 SBR now, hoping NC will pass the law where we can hunt with cans. A 12.5" suppressed 6.8 would be a bad ass deer slayer.

My 18" .264 GARP, shooting 6.5G factory Hornday is a tack driver. I built that rifle for long range steel and like it so far.

 

[Regalkismet]

I'd probably go 20" if it's going to be used for hunting...

 

[cjgemm]

Should I go 20" or 24" barrel.

I personally would not go any longer than 18".

 

[LRRPF52]

A grendel needs a 20" or longer barrel to get those results while a 6.8 only needs a 16" barrel.... Also most of the data and info you see online is using the old 6.8 saami chamber which isn't indicative of the spc ii chamber which makes the round much more effective with the ability to use hotter loads which are readily available and adds considerable velocity . I think the Grendel is a great round.... But after much research most agree the 6.8 spc ii is a better round under 300 to 400 yards especially for hunting. It's important to compare apples to apples.... Like using the most recent chamber, bullets and barrel Length IMHO. If I was shooting over 500 yards regularly I would go with a grendel. From all the credible info I've read and comparisons, which anyone can search the Web for, as well as comparing ballistics of ammunition in spc ii and grendel it's pretty clear that up to 300 yards the 6.8 spc ii has the advantage... 300-400 yards it's very close.... 500 up... Grendel...... This is if Comparing similar bullets... except the grendel will have 20" barrel most likely and the 6.8 will have a 16" barrel.... It comes down to what distance you will be shooting at regularly and if barrel length is important to you..... And if you want to be able to buy ammo at Walmart...... Hopefully the 6.5 will be available at Walmart soon to.....

I do all my comparisons apples to apples as close as possible:

16" Grendel vs. 16" 6.8
123gr SST vs. 120gr SST
Factory load vs. factory load

The 6.5 123gr Hornady SST vs. the 6.8 120gr SST is about as close as you can get apples to apples. I've compared several different bullets and weights for both, but there really wasn't anything that close until these two loads. 6.5 Grendel Nosler AB's were always heavier, and the lightest Barnes TTSX for the 6.5 is a 100gr designed around faster cartridges, but still performs great from the Grendel. The 115gr Barnes wasn't the same type of bullet at all as the 115gr OTM or Pro-Hunters. Now that there are two SST's of comparable weights within 3gr of each other, it makes it much easier for the discerning consumer.

What advantages does the 6.8 have over the 6.5 out to 300yds?
Trajectory?
Wind deflection?

The factory 123gr SST leaves the 16" Grendel barrel at 2350fps according to Hornady. The 16" 6.8 spits the factory 120gr out at 2460fps. By 200yds, the Grendel has already exceeded the 6.8's energy. A .510 BC pill will cut the wind better than a .400 BC pill all day long as well, so your hit probability is much better with a Grendel-rules of the road. From 200yds on out, the Grendel will continue out-gassing it, and will still penetrate deeply through game, with double caliber expansion with the SST.

Hornady Manufacturing Company :: Ammunition :: Rifle :: Choose by Caliber :: 6.8mm SPC :: 6.8mm SPC 120 GR SST®

Hornady Manufacturing Company :: Ammunition :: Rifle :: Choose by Caliber :: 6.5 Grendel :: 6.5 Grendel 123 gr SST®

If you want to make the comparison more fair for the 6.8, use a 14.5" Grendel and an 18" 6.8 to keep the energies similar out to 400yds. I've run comparisons ad-infinitum between the two because I used to believe the claims that you needed a 24" Grendel to be competitive with the 6.8. The fact is you need an 18" or 20" 6.8 to try to be competitive with a 14.5" or 16" Grendel for wind drift and energy past 200-300yds.

 

[Unknown]

The most useful, and efficient barrel length for the grendelmis around 20 inches. IIRC, that length is Bill Alrxander's favorite length (he was the primary proponent of the Grendel). Comparing the 6.5 with the 6.8 using those barrel lengths provides what I thinl is the lost useful info.

Because both cartridges launch the 123 grain bullet at around 2550 fps, there isn't an appreciable difference inside of 300 yards. There are subtle differences based on expansion, penetration, but they are not terribly different. After 300 meters, the Grendel's performance advantage really shines. I am a huge grendel fan, and have owned quite a number of various configurations.

However, if I didn't already have magazines, brass, and rifles, I would probably look very strongly at the 6x45. It is simply the 5.56x45 necked up to accept 6mm bullets. All that is needed to convert a 5.56x45 rifle is a new barrel and ammo. Here are it's advantages over the grendel:

1. uses AR15 magazines
2. Brass is FAR cheaper than .60-$1.00 per case
3. bolt is stronger than the grendel..I have had 3 Grendel bolts break so far
4. logistics: much easier and cheaper to reload for than the Grendel

I still love my Grendels, and because I already have Grendel magazines, dies, and brass I won't be changing. I recently had a friend ask me which one to buy, and I recommended he look at the 6x45, unless he will primarily use the rifle for long distance shooting that would be near the max range for the Grendel.

 

[Joe Dirt]

The most useful, and efficient barrel length for the grendelmis around 20 inches. IIRC, that length is Bill Alrxander's favorite length (he was the primary proponent of the Grendel). Comparing the 6.5 with the 6.8 using those barrel lengths provides what I thinl is the lost useful info.

Because both cartridges launch the 123 grain bullet at around 2550 fps, there isn't an appreciable difference inside of 300 yards. There are subtle differences based on expansion, penetration, but they are not terribly different. After 300 meters, the Grendel's performance advantage really shines. I am a huge grendel fan, and have owned quite a number of various configurations.

However, if I didn't already have magazines, brass, and rifles, I would probably look very strongly at the 6x45. It is simply the 5.56x45 necked up to accept 6mm bullets. All that is needed to convert a 5.56x45 rifle is a new barrel and ammo. Here are it's advantages over the grendel:

1. uses AR15 magazines
2. Brass is FAR cheaper than .60-$1.00 per case
3. bolt is stronger than the grendel..I have had 3 Grendel bolts break so far
4. logistics: much easier and cheaper to reload for than the Grendel

I still love my Grendels, and because I already have Grendel magazines, dies, and brass I won't be changing. I recently had a friend ask me which one to buy, and I recommended he look at the 6x45, unless he will primarily use the rifle for long distance shooting that would be near the max range for the Grendel.

I see you had 3 bolts break. Is this common for the Grendel? Or is this due to the quality of the parts?

 

[Regalkismet]

I do all my comparisons apples to apples as close as possible:

16" Grendel vs. 16" 6.8
123gr SST vs. 120gr SST
Factory load vs. factory load

The 6.5 123gr Hornady SST vs. the 6.8 120gr SST is about as close as you can get apples to apples. I've compared several different bullets and weights for both, but there really wasn't anything that close until these two loads. 6.5 Grendel Nosler AB's were always heavier, and the lightest Barnes TTSX for the 6.5 is a 100gr designed around faster cartridges, but still performs great from the Grendel. The 115gr Barnes wasn't the same type of bullet at all as the 115gr OTM or Pro-Hunters. Now that there are two SST's of comparable weights within 3gr of each other, it makes it much easier for the discerning consumer.

What advantages does the 6.8 have over the 6.5 out to 300yds?
Trajectory?
Wind deflection?

The factory 123gr SST leaves the 16" Grendel barrel at 2350fps according to Hornady. The 16" 6.8 spits the factory 120gr out at 2460fps. By 200yds, the Grendel has already exceeded the 6.8's energy. A .510 BC pill will cut the wind better than a .400 BC pill all day long as well, so your hit probability is much better with a Grendel-rules of the road. From 200yds on out, the Grendel will continue out-gassing it, and will still penetrate deeply through game, with double caliber expansion with the SST.

Hornady Manufacturing Company :: Ammunition :: Rifle :: Choose by Caliber :: 6.8mm SPC :: 6.8mm SPC 120 GR SST®

Hornady Manufacturing Company :: Ammunition :: Rifle :: Choose by Caliber :: 6.5 Grendel :: 6.5 Grendel 123 gr SST®

If you want to make the comparison more fair for the 6.8, use a 14.5" Grendel and an 18" 6.8 to keep the energies similar out to 400yds. I've run comparisons ad-infinitum between the two because I used to believe the claims that you needed a 24" Grendel to be competitive with the 6.8. The fact is you need an 18" or 20" 6.8 to try to be competitive with a 14.5" or 16" Grendel for wind drift and energy past 200-300yds.

Those velocities you post out of a 6.8 sound like velocities out of the old saami chamber not the spc ii chamber with spc ii ammunition .. My WC spc ii ammo pushes 110g Barnes tsx 2700 fps out of a 16" barrel and the 95g ttsx 2850 fps out of a 16" barrel.... Both factory ammo.... Again like I said before there is a big difference..... You are comparing the old chamber with the grendel..... What I've stated is widely accepted on most forums. Like its also widely agreed the recommended grendel barrel length is 20" and 6.8 spc. II is 16", longer barrels don't significantly affect velocity on the 6.8. I don't have the time or energy with a newborn to state specifics... Anyone interested can Google it and make their own decisions..... By not comparing apples to apples and telling the complete story or by telling your experience and not the generally accepted facts.... Example not comparing the newest and most accepted chamber and ammunition sounds like you are being biased. Also the availability and price of ammo if you are not reloading makes a difference to some..... The 6.8 has made significant headway in this aspect. Being able to stop at Walmart and grab some ammo is a big convenience. Many too like to get this performance out of a shorter barrel which is more convenient for hunting. But just as my intent with my original post the 6.8 spc. II would be my choice if not regularly shooting extremely long range.... Parts and ammo are usually readily available and you don't need a long barrel.... If shooting 500 plus regularly the extra cost etc is worth worth it for a grendel...... Obviously trying to help the op isn't accepted if it isn't saying the grendel is the best for everything and everyone.

 

[Unknown]

I see you had 3 bolts break. Is this common for the Grendel? Or is this due to the quality of the parts?

All three bolts had one lug nest to the extractor fail. I spoke with a nationally known AR15 gunsmith who runs a very successful AR business, and he said that on about 80% of forged uppers, the faces on the ridge on the upper where the barrel extension rim abuts the into the receiver is not truly square. This puts uneven pressure on the bolt lugs, and the weakest ones are next to the extractor. I had him square my receivers, and I have not had any problems since then. I guess he was right.

 

[Unknown]

I willingly admit to being Grendel biased..however, each cartridge has it's advantages. Just as it is with politicians, we can all find our own numbers to back our positions. That only makes sense, because if we believed different stats, we would change our opinions. So the following are my completely subjective thoughts regarding two fine cartridges that each have their own benefits:

For hunting inside of 300 meters, I think the 6.8 SPC is superior..by a small amount, but it is there.

For long range shooting over 400-500 meters, the Grendel is far superior.

I think the 6.8 probably has slightly less recoil if the same bullet weight and velocity are used.

The 6.8 generally performs better out of shorter barrels such as 16 inches.

Either cartridge is vastly superior to the 5.56x45 inside of 400 meters.

 

[LRRPF52]

Those velocities you post out of a 6.8 sound like velocities out of the old saami chamber not the spc ii chamber with spc ii ammunition .. My WC spc ii ammo pushes 110g Barnes tsx 2700 fps out of a 16" barrel and the 95g ttsx 2850 fps out of a 16" barrel.... Both factory ammo.... Again like I said before there is a big difference..... You are comparing the old chamber with the grendel..... What I've stated is widely accepted on most forums.

Those are Hornady factory ammo velocities, not maxed-out, bolt-destroying hand loads. Yes, 6.8's break bolts too when you push them-I've seen it on 6.8forums. The AR15 bolt geometry isn't even meant for 5.56 pressures, as the AR15 and all its pressure components were designed around the 50,000psi max .222 Remington. Opening the bolt face diameter any larger than .223 head dimensions weakens the integrity of the bolt, especially when it comes to lug root strength. This is why Knight's made the SR15E3 bolt, which is what 5.56 bolts should be, since 5.56 pressures can get up to 62,000psi.

Looking at SSA factory loads, the 100gr Nosler Accubond runs at 2620fps from a 16" barrel. That's the same velocity I can safely run a 100gr Nosler BT from a 16" Grendel while staying at or under 50,000psi. Even if I handicap the Grendel velocity, it will still out-gas the little short .277" varmint-weight pills.

Like its also widely agreed the recommended grendel barrel length is 20" and 6.8 spc. II is 16", longer barrels don't significantly affect velocity on the 6.8. I don't have the time or energy with a newborn to state specifics... Anyone interested can Google it and make their own decisions.....

You had the time and energy to post this. A newborn? You lost me there dude.

By not comparing apples to apples and telling the complete story or by telling your experience and not the generally accepted facts.... Example not comparing the newest and most accepted chamber and ammunition sounds like you are being biased. Also the availability and price of ammo if you are not reloading makes a difference to some..... The 6.8 has made significant headway in this aspect. Being able to stop at Walmart and grab some ammo is a big convenience.

You can't compare guys' pet loads that will break bolts to factory ammunition. No manufacturer that wants their customers to be safe is going to run insane pressures in a factory load, and what you see with boxed ammo is that comparable bullet weight loads between 6.8 and the Grendel run at very similar velocities. If you want to compare an 85gr TTSX run at 2800fps versus a 6.5 120gr TTSX at 2400fps, yeah, the 6.8 is super fast. If you compare an 85gr to 85gr, both from 16" barrels, not so much, but hardly anybody messes with little varmint weight bullets in the Grendel. There is much more affordable multi-purpose ammunition available for the Grendel with the Wolf 120gr MPT, and there are 25 factory loads total.

Many too like to get this performance out of a shorter barrel which is more convenient for hunting. But just as my intent with my original post the 6.8 spc. II would be my choice if not regularly shooting extremely long range.... Parts and ammo are usually readily available and you don't need a long barrel.... If shooting 500 plus regularly the extra cost etc is worth worth it for a grendel...... Obviously trying to help the op isn't accepted if it isn't saying the grendel is the best for everything and everyone.

I have no problems with your choice, and given a choice between 5.56 and 6.8 for hunting, I would also choose 6.8-easy decision....but there are more choices. Because I can do what a 6.8 will do within 200yds, then out-gas it from thereon out, I chose the Grendel. I had my hands on 6.8 before the public even knew about it, and waited and watched how things developed. If the Grendel had never been made, I would own a 6.8 or two, but there is no reason for that when you have the Grendel option. Velocity is not king, BC and sectional density are in my approach to hunting and target-shooting.

 

[Regalkismet]

Hand loads? This is factory made ammo by wilson combat..... Goto their website and check.... Check SSA's factory spc ii loads... Similar velocities..... All within spc ii pressures..... I'm not even going to read the rest of your post as you obviously don't have any info about the 6.8 spc ii that is correct.... Bolt breaking? What a joke.... It's factory tested ammo.... No broke bolts here or by anyone else I know and I'm a 68forumns member. And yeah I have a newborn baby born yesterday, so I'm not gonna spend my time looking up specifics and posting them Because anyone that was interested can do that and decide for themselves as I have other obvious priorities at the moment DUDE... After your last post I now know you are uninformed .. I even said the ammo was factory ammo..... Wow... Show me one bolt broken by spec ii ammo....used in a spc ii chamber.... If there are any I'm betting it's another issue as I've never heard of one.... Or are you trying to equate some idiot using spec ii ammo in a saami chamber? Cause that's probably the only failures you could find. And I'm sure wilson combat and ssa among others only load to proper pressure levels..... Totally laughable... Only broken bolts I've ever heard of were on grendel. And everyone knows that 6.8 ammunition is more widely available....the grendel currently has a wider range of bullets. As usual people want to make this a fanboy issue and compare the old chambering and ammo to the grendel and not the spc ii chamber and ammo... Even after pointing it out.... You cling to it. Also suggesting the Barnes ttsx 95g bullet is for varmints is also laughable......
http://shopwilsoncombat.com/68-SPC-...FPS-16-Barrel-20_Box/productinfo/A68-110-TSX/

http://shopwilsoncombat.com/68-SPC-...PS-16-Barrel-20_Box/productinfo/A68-110-BTHP/

http://shopwilsoncombat.com/68-SPC-...FPS-16-Barrel-20_Box/productinfo/A68-95-TTSX/

http://www.ssarmory.com/6.8_spc_ammo-110_Barnes_TSX_Tactical_Load.aspx

http://www.ssarmory.com/6.8_spc_ammo_Nosler_100grain_Accubond-tactical_load.aspx

 

[LRRPF52]

I'm familiar with all those loads, and they're pushing 110gr bullets at 2650fps from a 16" 6.8 SPC II. I've been aware of the SAAMI screw-up because I have kept tabs on the development of the cartridge from before it was commercially known, to the present.

You're still talking about projectiles with very low BC's, that are varmint-weight for .277". There's nothing laughable about the data I'm pointing out. If you go back and slowly read, you will see "varmint-weight", not "varmint" in my description of the projectiles.

That 110gr Barnes Tactical load is running 2650fps from a 16" 6.8 SPC II. It has a BC of .323 G1. I have to go to a flat-base or varmint pill for the 6.5 to get the BC that low. The 110gr 6.5mm Barnes bullet has a BC of .452 G1. Have you ever run a comparison of the two through a program?

Even if I handicap the 110gr 6.5mm Barnes from the Grendel down to 2450fps, (could be 2500fps, but let's use 2450fps), that .452 BC will beat the .323 BC, especially for wind drift, and I'm left with a projectile that really likes to penetrate because of sectional density.

6.5 Grendel 16" 110gr Barnes 200yd Zero 2.5" Sight Height Sea Level

 Range    Velocity    Energy     Trajectory         TOF          Drift
      (yards)     (fps)     (ft-lb)     (inches)         (sec)       (inches)
          0      2450        1466          -2.50         0.0000         0.00
         25      2402        1409          -0.76         0.0309        -0.05
         50      2354        1354           0.61         0.0624        -0.22
         75      2307        1300           1.59         0.0946        -0.49
        100      2261        1249           2.16         0.1275        -0.89
        125      2215        1198           2.30         0.1610        -1.40
        150      2170        1150           2.00         0.1952        -2.03
        175      2125        1103           1.24         0.2301        -2.79
        200      2081        1057           0.00         0.2658        -3.68
        225      2037        1013          -1.74         0.3022        -4.71
        250      1994         971          -4.01         0.3394        -5.87
        275      1951         930          -6.82         0.3774        -7.18

16" 6.8 SPC II 110gr Barnes Tactical 200yd Zero 2.5" Sight Height Sea Level

       Range    Velocity    Energy     Trajectory         TOF          Drift
      (yards)     (fps)     (ft-lb)     (inches)         (sec)       (inches)
          0      2650        1715          -2.50         0.0000         0.00
         25      2580        1625          -0.91         0.0287        -0.07
         50      2511        1539           0.36         0.0582        -0.28
         75      2442        1457           1.29         0.0884        -0.63
        100      2376        1378           1.84         0.1196        -1.13
        125      2310        1303           2.02         0.1516        -1.78
        150      2245        1231           1.79         0.1845        -2.60
        175      2181        1162           1.12         0.2184        -3.59
        200      2118        1096           0.00         0.2533        -4.75
        225      2056        1033          -1.61         0.2893        -6.09
        250      1996         973          -3.72         0.3263        -7.63
        275      1936         915          -6.39         0.3644        -9.36

The 95gr .277" TTSX has a BC of .292 G1, so even when you run it at 2850fps, it loses gas fast. It's still an excellent close-in killer, and plenty of people have demonstrated that-nothing wrong there, but I can run a 95gr 6.5mm at 2750fps with a .365 BC from a 16" Grendel if you're looking for a Coyote load, and I'll have a further point blank zero again.

16" Grendel, 95gr V-MAX, 2750fps, 200yd Zero

  Range    Velocity    Energy     Trajectory         TOF          Drift
      (yards)     (fps)     (ft-lb)     (inches)         (sec)       (inches)
          0      2750        1595          -2.50         0.0000         0.00
         25      2686        1522          -1.02         0.0276        -0.06
         50      2624        1452           0.15         0.0558        -0.23
         75      2562        1384           1.01         0.0848        -0.52
        100      2501        1319           1.54         0.1144        -0.94
        125      2441        1256           1.72         0.1448        -1.48
        150      2381        1196           1.54         0.1759        -2.16
        175      2323        1138           0.97         0.2078        -2.97
        200      2265        1082           0.00         0.2405        -3.93
        225      2208        1029          -1.39         0.2740        -5.03
        250      2152         977          -3.23         0.3084        -6.29
        275      2097         928          -5.54         0.3437        -7.70
        300      2043         880          -8.34         0.3799        -9.28

16" 6.8 SPC II, 95gr Barnes TTSX, 2850fps, 200yd zero

       Range    Velocity    Energy     Trajectory         TOF          Drift
      (yards)     (fps)     (ft-lb)     (inches)         (sec)       (inches)
          0      2850        1713          -2.50         0.0000         0.00
         25      2769        1617          -1.06         0.0267        -0.07
         50      2689        1525           0.09         0.0542        -0.28
         75      2611        1438           0.94         0.0825        -0.63
        100      2534        1354           1.47         0.1117        -1.13
        125      2458        1275           1.67         0.1417        -1.79
        150      2384        1199           1.50         0.1727        -2.61
        175      2311        1126           0.95         0.2046        -3.61
        200      2239        1058           0.00         0.2376        -4.78
        225      2169         992          -1.39         0.2716        -6.14
        250      2100         930          -3.24         0.3068        -7.69
        275      2032         871          -5.58         0.3431        -9.46
        300      1965         814          -8.45         0.3806       -11.43

There we see the 16" Grendel exceed the 16" 6.8 for energy at 175yds, but those projectiles are of totally different types. That is why I like comparing the 123gr SST and the 120gr SST. Even if you can get a Tactical Spec II pressure load to push the 120gr SST to 2900fps (ain't gonna happen), you still can't beat the 123gr SST's wind drift from a 2450fps. That should send the message of how important BC is in trajectory-especially for drift.

I didn't realize the differences until I ran the numbers for myself, because I used to believe "what was widely known on forums".

 

[Eric B.]

6,5 Grendel Versatility

LRRPF52 wuz keerect.

The 6.5 Grendel is THE MOST VERSATILE when compared with the 6.8 in terms of both energy beyond 200 meters and wider range of bullet weights that perform well.

And (militarily speaking) rumors that the 6.5 Grendel "...won't work in full auto or a belt feed..." are false and have no bassis in testing. Afer all the parent case is a Russian round - which has worked very well.

The 6.8 was designed for exactly what SOCOM asked for, a great 5.6 replacement out to 300 meters. It does a superb job at that - just not beyond that range.

 

[Bevan]

I'm building a 12.5" or 14.5" Grendel for hunting. Haven't decided on length 100% yet. Research tells me that a 12.5" Grendel will shoot a 123 Amax at 2250-2350fps with factory ammo which is more than adequate for hunting at <300m ranges, and is superior to the 6.8

 

[Regalkismet]

I'm building a 12.5" or 14.5" Grendel for hunting. Haven't decided on length 100% yet. Research tells me that a 12.5" Grendel will shoot a 123 Amax at 2250-2350fps with factory ammo which is more than adequate for hunting at <300m ranges, and is superior to the 6.8

That's funny.... Under 300 yards 6.8 spc II is superior...Especially when using hunting rounds. The ammo listed above isn't even the hottest ammo available for the 6.8 spc II. Maybe you can look at the above ballistics and advise me on how it's superior in that range. Again compare spc II chamber/ammunition ... 6.8 spc. II generally does not need a long barrel for peak performance... Atleast not as long as the grendel.... But under 300 yards using hunting rounds.... All things considered, 6.8 spc II edges out the grendel.

 

[Bevan]

123amax is the best hunting round in my opinion.

What load would you think is better in the 6.8 and what speed from a 12.5 ? Link to chrono results? From the research that I've done the Grendel has the edge.

 

[bustin]

All three bolts had one lug nest to the extractor fail. I spoke with a nationally known AR15 gunsmith who runs a very successful AR business, and he said that on about 80% of forged uppers, the faces on the ridge on the upper where the barrel extension rim abuts the into the receiver is not truly square. This puts uneven pressure on the bolt lugs, and the weakest ones are next to the extractor. I had him square my receivers, and I have not had any problems since then. I guess he was right.

Glad that worked out for you, kind of wondered after all this time.

 

[bustin]

The best long distance factory load for the 6.8 is the 140gr Berger at 2400 out of a 16" barrel. The 130 if factory loaded would hit right around 2500. 2500 and 2600 respectively out of a 20" barrel. Both bullets depending on the stock number have BCs of .495 more or less. Now the 6.8 and 6.5 are so close in performance it isn't worth arguing about. The 6.8 has more hunting type bullets in the usable range. The 6.5 has more and better match bullets in the usable range.
I've been on 68forums since the 3rd day it was in operation (mid 07), there has not been 1 broken bolt reported. As far as handloads I've probably pushed tham as far as anyone back in 07 and 08. 110gr bullets at 2800 out of a 16" barrel, 85TSX-3175fps, 100gr around 3000fps and 130gr 2550fps all out of 16" barrel and I still have the same LWRC ACB 6.8 bolt in one rifle that has seen thousands of rounds. That same bolt was shot at a charity 3 gun shoot in Durango, it was a test to see how that bolt would hold up. 131 shots fired that day with the average velocity of a Speer 90Gr TNT was 3140fps. JMO- If you are going to shoot long distance target mainly get the 6.5 in a 20". If you're going to hunt in a woody area or use it for CQB get a 16" 6.8.
Lets get on with life there are better things to spend time on.

 

[user]

I had both Noveske, 6.8 and a Satern 24" Grendel.
Both were great for a while. As have been stated by many others, the 6.8 is a hammer. The six and a half was great to send long.

My 6.5 Creedmore gasser is by far more useful for me and the most fun of my quiver.

24" Krieger kills bugs dead

 

[Bevan]

The best long distance factory load for the 6.8 is the 140gr Berger at 2400 out of a 16" barrel.

Okay that must be a new load?? That puts it very similar to the performance of a 123 from a 6.5, what's the speed of that like out of a shorter barrel?? Guessing 2200-2300. Cool. Good to see 6.8 finally getting some better loads. In my opinion BC is absolutely key in smaller cartridges, you're starting out with so little speed and energy that you want to keep as much of it as possible downrange. Same with .223

 

[bustin]

Okay that must be a new load?? That puts it very similar to the performance of a 123 from a 6.5, what's the speed of that like out of a shorter barrel?? Guessing 2200-2300. Cool. Good to see 6.8 finally getting some better loads. In my opinion BC is absolutely key in smaller cartridges, you're starting out with so little speed and energy that you want to keep as much of it as possible downrange. Same with .223

I think the 130 Berger would have been a better choice but I think SSA has something special going on with LWRC, that load and the foreign mil contracts...no other reason to jump out on a limb with a load like that.

 

[Regalkismet]

I read on 68forumns that lwrc had some foreign military contracts.... Or just signed one....do you recall which country(s)? That can only mean good things for the longevity of the round as well as more ammunition choices/lower prices down the line if that were to continue....I think it was Jordan.

 

[bustin]

I read on 68forumns that lwrc had some foreign military contracts.... Or just signed one....do you recall which country(s)? That can only mean good things for the longevity of the round as well as more ammunition choices/lower prices down the line if that were to continue....I think it was Jordan.

Jordan was one of them, the other is over there in the area too but, I can't remember who.

 

[Regalkismet]

I never really thought of the A max as a hunting round.... We'll atleast not for anything bigger than coyotes..... Of course I've never tried it.... So maybe folks are having good luck with it but personally I think there are better choices available..... I try to use bullets for their intended purpose especially when hunting larger game....humane harvesting is important to me and using a round that can fragment if it hits bone and potentially not kill or just severely wound an animal doesn't fall into my category of best hunting round.

 

[Bevan]

The Amax is a phenomenal hunting round. It works incredibly well.

 

[user]

I never really thought of the A max as a hunting round.... We'll atleast not for anything bigger than coyotes..... Of course I've never tried it.... So maybe folks are having good luck with it but personally I think there are better choices available..... I try to use bullets for their intended purpose especially when hunting larger game....human harvesting is important to me and using a round that can fragment if it hits bone and potentially not kill or just severely wound an animal doesn't fall into my category of best hunting round.

AMAX work outstanding on hogs, deer and other targets.

 

[bustin]

Hornady makes a 123gr SST that opens at a lower velocity just for the Grendel/264 now. My early testing shows the jacket to have the same outside dimensions as the Amax, the same loads work and it has the same POI.

 

[cjgemm]

I'm building a 12.5" or 14.5" Grendel for hunting. Haven't decided on length 100% yet. Research tells me that a 12.5" Grendel will shoot a 123 Amax at 2250-2350fps with factory ammo which is more than adequate for hunting at <300m ranges, and is superior to the 6.8

You are correct on your velocity estimations (12.5"). With the Hornady 123SST's you can deliver 800 flbs of energy out to 350yards.

 

[Unknown]

I think if you compare the 6.8 and 6.5 Grendel using the same barrel length, and bullet weight, the 6.8 will be superior inside of 300 yards/meters. But then, that is precisely what it was designed for. The Grendel on the other hand was designed with more long range work in mind.

I readily admit being a Grendel fanboy, but also like to think that I accept facts when they are presented in a fair comparison. The Grendel is not inadequate inside of 300 yards/meters, I just think the 6.8 is better. Much depends on whether you think penetration, or expansion is more important.

Newton's laws say that two bullets (6.5 and 6.8) of the same weight, at the same velocity will have the same foot pounds of energy on target. After that, the shooter will need to evaluate whether expansion or penetration (based on such things as sectional density) is more important. I think the 6.8 gets the nod for expansion, while the 6.5 gets the nod for penetration...all other things being equal.

 

[bustin]

Okay that must be a new load?? That puts it very similar to the performance of a 123 from a 6.5, what's the speed of that like out of a shorter barrel?? Guessing 2200-2300. Cool. Good to see 6.8 finally getting some better loads. In my opinion BC is absolutely key in smaller cartridges, you're starting out with so little speed and energy that you want to keep as much of it as possible downrange. Same with .223

6.8 loads usually run apx 100fps faster than the 264/Grendel with the same weight bullets out of the same length barrels. A 123gr at 2550fps out of a 20" Grendel. A 140 Berger at 2500 out of a 20" 6.8. Then figure your 2-300fps drop to get to the velocity from a 12" barrel. If it was me using the 6.8 I would have used the 130 Berger with a BC of apx .495 out of a 16" barrel 25-2550fps. 12" should be 2350-2400fps. I haven't had time to do a lot of testing. We're so far behind machining bolts I just can't get to the range now.

 

[Regalkismet]

Bustin is right... I just read an article where someone was getting 2300 fps using the Berger 140 gr out of a 6.8 with a 12" barrel. So 130 gr estimate should be close. I generally agree with UNKNOWN but you do have to remember that the 6.8 will have more velocity(100-200fps)with the same size bullet so I'm not sure what the last part of your post is stating..... I do agree that the Grendel is great... That's why I don't like this type of debate.... Most of us don't try and use one gun for everything..... Grendel shines at long range.... 6.8 shines 300 and below especially for hunting. And for me the availability of ammunition locally also plays a factor....

 

[cjgemm]

Nothing to debate. A 12.5" Grendel will push a 123 SST between 2200-2300 fps. Minimum expansion is 1700 fps from Hornadys web site. That puts you in a 330 to 400 yard max range depending on your tube. The one I chrono'd happened to be 2270fps. Unless your only shooting longer than than that I would not build an upper with a barrel longer than 18"s

 

[plong]

My Kingdom for a 18" or 20" 6.5 Grendel Barrel... !

 

[Bevan]

The 6.8 has a mild velocity edge, the 6.5 has a BC edge (less so when you use a decent bullet in the 6.8 which it appears there are finally loads for) and while speed is nice, BC is forever.

Can't go too far wrong with either, I'm going 6.5

 

[fmsniper]

05/27/2013
Grendel shot group at 900 yards
18.5 inch barrel
AA factory ammo 123