I would agree except that is more accurate than any Grendel I have ever seen.
In 2007 I designed a chamber similar to the Grendel but with a smaller neck dia and 1.5 degree throat. It shot better for me than the G chamber. Les Baer designed the 264LBC very close to what my chamber was a few years later. When we started producing barrels in 2011 I used my design and stamped 6.5G/264LBC on the barrel to show they would shoot either ammo since for all practical purposes they are the same. The Grendel guys jumped all over me for saying it was a Grendel. I couldn't remove the stamp from the barrel but I did remove "Grendel" from the name on the website. They are very protective of the Grendel name, I'll make sure I don't use it on any products from now on.
I think people were hyper-sensitive to some of the name and chamber discrepancies, not because of any of your barrels, but the no-name ones that would show up quite regularly with things like 1/2x28 muzzle threads, chambers that wouldn't allow factory ammunition to go into battery-or if they did, would not extract reliably for a number of reasons.
Some of these barrels had things like "6.5 Gren" engraved on them, or "6.5 G", etc., but were gun-show grade garbage with no trace as to their origins. Guys would start a thread listing issues they were having, and people would chime in to help trouble-shoot, until 3 pages later, someone would finally ask, "What make exactly is this thing, and where did you get it?"
Alexander Arms even took some of these in that literally had no connection to them, other than they were passed off onto some poor sucker as a "6.5 Grendel", when they clearly were not, and replaced the barrel and bolt with their products on AA's dime. There was at least one guy who ditched the whole endeavor together out of sheer frustration, which he associated as being a 6.5 Grendel problem, even though his barrel/bolt came from an unknown origin, had a crazy gas port diameter, short shoulder, .292" neck, extremely short freebore, etc. The only thing it had in common with a Grendel was the bore diameter.
Some wannabe gunsmith saw a new cool trend hit the market, and started cranking out products that he felt he improved, then slapped "6.5 Grendelish" on it, and the thing was a total money pit that ate quality ammo and spit out worthless brass and malfs. I personally would be incensed if I wasted my money and range time to have that kind of experience.
So the reputable companies using .264 LBC chambers aren't the problem, and it's been a while since we've seen anything atrocious come up on the radar to be honest. Any reasonable manufacturer wants to ensure that something new stays standardized so that customers can all use factory ammo safely and reliably.
Now that 6.5 Grendel has been SAAMI spec'd, it isn't a huge issue. There are plenty of people with .264 LBC-AR and 6.5 CSS chambers killing game left and right with their rifles, and plenty of us with SAAMI Grendel chambers that eat anything they're fed and still run beautifully.
I don't really see the point in stirring the pot on the 6.5 Grendel/.264 LBC-AR debate at this stage in the game. People are plenty happy with their barrels made by reputable manufacturers, whether they be AA, JP Enterprises, Precision Firearms, Templar, Satern, Les Baer, Saber Defense ( a bunch of their barrels recently showed up on the market for some reason ), AR Performance, J&T/Double Star, BHW, Christiansen's, SAOD, LRP, Specialized Dynamics, etc.
The OP has beautiful groups, and I'm looking forward to seeing how this stick shoots at 600yd and farther.
