Lets keep this informative and polite. Whats your opinion on the best Multi-purpose hunting caliber for the AR-15 Here's the criteria? The round needs to work in a AR-15 (not AR-10). It needs to be effective for large game with in reason such as Elk out to at least 200 to 300 yards. It should be effective against medium size game such as deer and antelope out to at least 400 to 500 yards. It should be able to drop a 400 lb pig and be viable for varmint hunting. The ammo needs to be none proprietary SAAMI ammo with bullets designed for hunting. In other words not just FMJ military ammo. It needs to be supported by at least one tier one US manufacturers such as Remington, Hornady or Winchester. Preferably also supported by at least one cheaper ammo manufacturer as well for target practice. The ammo needs to be available from tier one suppliers such as Cabelas and Midwayusa as well. The caliber can not be copywrited as to allow multi manufacture for full support of components such as caliber specific parts like barrels, bolts and clips. In other words the common pieces need to be available from multiple outlets not just one. It needs to be fairly flat shooting not requiring a ballistics chart for a 200 yard shot for example. The bullets should not eat barrels which average barrel life a requirement. In other words no exotic tricks to achive good performance at expense of barrel or bolt life. It needs to be very accurate for long range precision shots for dropping deer in the kill zone out to 400 to 500 yards. If your idea of best multi-purpose caliber does not meet all the requirements but achieves most lets here about it as well. If you think i missed an important criteria post that up as well.

I hereby cast one (1) vote for 6.8 Remington SPC.

When i laid out this criteria which i think is reasonable and fair i think the two top calibers and i believe the only two that are viable are the 6.5mm Grendel and the 6.8mm Remington. Of the two i think the Grendel beats the 6.8 by a hair do to the added kill range being more effective at the longer 300+ ranges. Both i believe have been shown to be effective on Elk within the ranges specified given precision shots. I think both are good choices but I picked the Grendel but think the 6.8 is a viable choice as well. One other caliber the 243 WSSM comes pretty close to the requirements but its reputation as a barrel eater i think disqualifies it from the top tier candidates.

6.8 spc

The Grendel worries me because of the seating depth.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I never thought that was very good practice.

Hope these are informative.

6.5mm Grendel makes the grade and hits all the check marks. I think the 6.8mm hits them all except the longer range deer kills. It has to much energy and bullet drop past 300 yards. Up to that point it does well.

AR-15 Check
Can Kill Elk out to 400 yards at least Check
Can Kill Deer out to 500 yards Check
Can bring down 400lb Pigs Check
Varmint effective Check
SAAMI Round Check
Cheap Ammo (Wolf) Check
Hunting rounds made by Hornady Check
Sold at Cabelas and Midwayusa and a ton of others Check
Non- Copywrited multiple manufacture Check
Flat Shooting Check
Easy on Barrels Check

6.8SPC fans can you specify why you think its a better Multi-Purpose hunting round? I think its a good multi-purpose hunting round but tell use why you think its the best?

Honestly.. the 243wssm is out because of feeding issues and barrel life.. shouldn't of been considered..

.223/5.56mm to me personally was out as soon as you said Elk. I know people have killed everything with a 22LR.. and i'm sure someone is going to chime in they have killed XXX animal weighing 1/2 a ton with a .223, but if you read how far elk run, how nasty of terrain they get themselves into when wounded, I just loose faith in my beloved .223 to do the job. If it was deer.. thats another story.

.300 blk is actually a good choice.. fast expanding subs out of a silenced shorty is plenty for deer, the sonic loaded .300 is capable for elk out to 200 meters, absolutely a ton of .300 type bullets to pick from for whatever job you want done, but much past 300 yards the round drops like a brick out of the small 39mm casing.

6.8 SPCII is a fantastic all a rounder, but the magazine limits the grain of bullet choices, IE you cannot fit the 150 grain rounds I shoot out of my .270WSM bolt gun.. would be seated too far into the case to fit. I don't think their's enough oomph behind it to make it effective to 400-500 yards on deer, it drops to much at that distance.

6.5 grendel is an excellent choice, flat shooter, high BC bullets to slip through the air, less ammo choices then the rest for variety, I havn't read up a ton on .264 but I think it's overkill for anything smaller then a Coyote, so then were talking small/medium to large game, and of course being able to show-up your buddy with a 800 yard shot on steel just to laugh at him for only showing up with a .223/5.56 ;)  One thing I have noticed is that regardless of ammo type, of course I'm talking before the election / Sandy Hook, 6.8spc II and 6.5 grendel are both like looking for an Albino Water Buffalo in North Dakota.. I couldn't find ammo at any of my local gun stores, I'm currently starting a lower receiver build that will turn into a 6.5 or 6.8, but I think i'll have to reload to make it work.

A Better solution for what your asking.. I'll highlight the part you didn't want to hear. But I think that with the consideration of such large game in your question, there may be other large game in your future such as caribou or brown bear, and I honestly think when considering something that is going to be effective on Deer/ Large Hogs/ Elk / Brown Bear/ Caribou that you need to tap into the life of an AR-10.. preferably in .300 WM. Never a bad thing to have multiple toys.

This sums it up.  The numbers don't lie. According to the first chart you'll have as much as 43% more kinetic energy at your max range.  Also the sectional density for 6.5 diameter bullets tends to be higher than that of 6.8 bullets (in bullets with OAL's short enough to load to magazine length for AR-15's.) Sectional density plays a part in penetration, especially at longer distances.  

Also note the wind drift differences.  In your OP you mentioned antelope who tend to live in flat, open country where long shots can be necessary.  That kind of terrain also has the potential to be windy.  

Personally I've never understood all of the 6.8 hype.

Grendel is pretty much just as available as anything else right now. You go to the link below that has all the online ammo sources and sign up for a email alert for each supplier and when it comes in you get an alert and you go to the page and buy your 10 box limit. You keep working on your stock pile until you get comfortable with your little ammo treasure.

Commercial sources of Grendel Ammo

Back when I learned the "business" we never seated a bullet so that the base protruded into the powder space. The base of the bullet being flush, or just barely below the shoulder/neck junction, was as deep as we went. If the required seating depth was greater, we used a shorter (lighter) bullet, or seated it further out.

OK now?

Interesting Thread with a Elk taken at 400 yards with a Modern Sporting Rifle 6.5mm Grendel.





Another Pretty cool Thread on the Grendel VS Texas hogs.





Grendel VS Bobcat thread

6.5mm Grendel VS 6.8 SPC Hornady SST Hunting Rounds

Velocity (FPS)
CARTRIDGE BULLET          MUZ  100 yd 200 yd 300 yd 400 yd 500 yd
6.5 Grendel 123 gr. SST      2620 2449   2284      2126   1829   1875
6.8 SPC 120 gr. SST           2460 2250   2051     1863   1687   1524

Energy (ft/lb)
CARTRIDGE BULLET          MUZ    100 yd 200 yd 300 yd 400 yd 500 yd
6.5 Grendel 123 gr. SST      1875   1638   1425     1234    1064     913  
6.8 SPC 120 gr. SST           1612   1349   1121     925      758      619

Trajectory Tables (inches)
CARTRIDGE BULLET          MUZ  100 yd 200 yd 300 yd 400 yd 500 yd
6.5 Grendel 123 gr. SST       2.4      1.7    0      -8.4        -24.5   -49.5
6.8 SPC 120 gr. SST-          2.4       2.3    0     -10.5       -31.1   -64.0

So Xcountry, you going to try your hand at Grendel 6.5?

I built one with my son a couple weeks ago now finishing the second one. Just waiting for the LPK in the mail and its finished. Mounted the scope that came in the mail tonight.  Like most people i was going back and forth between the 6.5 and 6.8. The 6.8 seemed to have a better market share but 6.5mm is a better round with better ballistics. In the end i went with the Grendel and started the ammo hunt. Turned out that wasn't to big of a deal. Picked up a couple hundred at a local gun show in March and then got a few hundred more at Midwayusa. All my ammo is Hornady Amax and SST ammo. Would like to get some cheaper wolf ammo for range time.

My son shooting it for the first time.

Got ya.. this thread has me aiming my lower build towards mating a 6.5G upper to it.. the 6.8.. well it just drops too much.. and I figured if its shooting the same thing as my main deer rifle without the round variability.. why buy it. I have a .270wsm bolt gun atm.. so I think a light light weight 6.5 is in the works.

and liars use numbers.

The charts above use a short range bullet in the 6.8 and then quote the 1000 yard stats.  basically dishonest

Short range bullets? Hmm and what about Hornady's numbers using the exact same bullet (Hornady SST) and almost the exact grain? Dishonest as well? No me thinks not. 6.8SPC is a good round and performs pretty damn good under 300 yards which is where the majority of hunting takes place. Even most Antelope are taken in that range. That said the Grendel does just as good in that range and performs much better past it out to 600 yards and well beyond. Nothing wrong with the 6.8SPC just like theirs nothing wrong with a 30/30 for deer hunting. Its just that the Grendel is longer range making it a better all purpose hunting round in my opinion.

Youtube video comparing ballistics

Can you explain why you consider a Sierra Match King a short range bullet? Is that not the bullet that Sierra sells for long range target shooting? And 115 grains is the heaviest factory load I can find for a BTHP in 6.8.  

Those aren't the correct 6.8 ammo choices.

Nor is that

Look at
Barnes 95 TTSX
Barnes 85 TSX
Sierra 110 Pro Hunter
Nosler 110 Accubond

If you need an exact round to do a comparison does that not tell you something?

The SMK is not a good LR round. It has a low BC for it's weight, it is long for it's weight, which does not allow sufficient powder. For the 115gr class the Nosler CC is much better. The Noslers are generally 150fps faster than the SMK, and has a better BC.

Try the SSA 140gr VLD. 2400fps from a 16" barrel.

Or the Wilson Combat 110gr TTSX at 2700fps.

I would point out that for me, wind deflection is more important than most of the other figures, and wind deflection is largely a function of BC.  Most of our hi-power rifle cartridges are going to be very close trajectory-wise within 300yds from a practical perspective.

The 5.56, 6.5 Grendel, and 6.8 SPC are actually pretty flat trajectory-wise when using light bullets going 2700fps or faster, but it does jack squat for you unless the BC is high.  One load that I have really learned to respect from the 5.56 is the 75gr A-MAX deep-seated into the case and mag-fed like normal from a 1/8 twist or tighter, especially from a 16" barrel, because the BC is .435 G1 on that bullet.  I've seen plenty of people say it can't be done, but watched a fellow Arfcommer who attended my last Designated Marksmen Course blast away with hundreds of them a few weeks ago, and ring a ton of steel in 20mph winds in 17F temps, from a 16" Centurion barreled AR15.  He was at least 85% hit rate on steel from 200-600yds with that system, in terrible wind conditions (with my wind calls).



It still doesn't have impressive energy like the Grendel and 6.8 do within 300yds.  Once we start pushing out, the Grendel is the way to go for retained energy, and it has better wind deflection throughout the flight path, which helps with your hunting point blank zero, as well as target shooting.  I'm wondering if the 6.8 can be loaded the same way with some of the longer pills, and just deep-seat them to see what happens with a high density powder.  It works beautifully with 5.56 and the 75gr A-MAX.

One issue we have had with the 5.56 in my DM Courses is that it runs out of gas really fast, and this can be painfully seen when trying to put down steel pepper-poppers at 200yds or further.  A by-product of this lack of energy at distance has driven shooters to become really good at double-tapping the upper portion of the 200yd and 300yd poppers to make them go down, but then their buddy with a .308 AR comes after and blows the whole target apparatus down the berm, or at least slams the popper down with authority.  The Grendel and 6.8 are in a sweet spot between the 5.56 & .308, and I will be using the Grendel more in the DM Courses, in addition to my .223 Wylde carbines with 75gr and 77gr pills.



All 3 calibers will be around for a long time, but each year I spend working with the Grendel, the more fond I become of it, since I get so much out of a little 16" gun.  Even with its mild muzzle velocities, it really does catch up and out-gas the other calibers as the distance increases, and as a shooter, you can see it when you compare it at 400-600yds.  You get impact that is closer to .308, with recoil that is closer to something like an AK, only with the impulse of the AR15.  It really is a fun little cartridge to shoot and work with.

I love all my 2A brethren and sisters equally, especially in these times where we are under attack, so I'm looking for any and all reasons to build coalitions of friendship.  Both the Grendel and 6.8 are fun to shoot, and pack more punch than a .223 does at distance, which offers everyone the ability to practice with their hunting or steel-ringing blaster more than they would with magnums or even .308's in the same rifle weight class.  You don't get beat up, and it's fun to hit stuff with a loud smack, versus the tiny ping of the .223 once we get out to 300yds and further.

Perhaps the 140 VLD
Ballistic Coefficient: 0.487
Muzzle Velocity (fps): 2401
Muzzle Energy (ft-lb): 1802

http://www.ssarmory.com/6.8_spc_ammo_140gr_VLD_Berger.aspx

Remember folks this is a tech section - keep it civil.

Seems like every time the 6.8 vs 6.5 question comes up most everyone on both sides of the argument get their panties in a bunch.  They are both good calibers and my opinion is get the one that has the most vendor support in your area of operations.

There are available projectiles with BCs in the high .400s and one with .505. They aren't cheap though, about $65 total for 50 projectiles.

The 105gr GS can has been launched at just under 2900fps from a 16 " barrel, with a BC of .505. There's a 99gr from the same company with a mid .400 BC, that can be launched faster.

The thing is, for the 6.8 to compete at longer ranges, you need a specialized bullet. With the 6.5G , there are already many out there due to the 6.5 caliber being big in the long range game for so long, and the cartridges they were designed for, and because of that, they are cheap and easy to find.

I would hope that soon we can get some of those higher BC pills in greater numbers. The desire for them is certainly there.

Not to imply a match but to point out that bullet selection based on desired end result is vital.

I don't know in general what percentage of hunting shots are taken at which ranges.
But I would expect long rang, past say 500 yards, to be a small percentage over all.

I'm sure this guy appreciated the added range when Ibex hunting.

Ibex hunt New Mexico March 2013

And...?

Having that best case scenario, "magic bullet" will increase range but it won't turn a 30-30 into a 308 and like wise won't turn a 6.8SPC into a 6.5mm Grendel. If your looking for 308 like ballistics in a mid range round go with the Grendel. If your looking for 30-30 like ballisitics go with the 6.8SPC. Theirs no grand conspiracy to fake ballistics. It is what it is. They are different rounds with different characteristics. If the 6.8SPC could match the Grendel performance Remington would have published that data.

So now I'm confused.
Is this entire thread some kind of subterfuge?

You are the one that asked the question and set the criteria for discussion, and now you obviously already have an opinion and are itching for some kind of fight.
I thought you didn't want to turn this into the kind of discussion that you are going to great lengths to turn it into.




Remington screwed the pooch on the 6.8 and has essentially been out of the game since they submitted the incorrect drawings to SAAMI and then refused to correct them.  They are not the authority on the round and have not been for some time.
This isn't a 6.8 vs Grendel thread but you are working awfully hard at making it that.

Remington has the worst possible ammo available, and almost nobody uses it.

The drawings Remington sent to SAAMI were incorrect, with the wrong number for the leade. On top of that, the barrels they were using had too high a land/groove ratio. Chris Murray's original chamber had a longer leade. When Remington loaded ammo to Murray's specs, it had extremely high pressures in their barrels due to that. So what Remmy did was to load the bullets down by about 200-250fps rather than fix their mistake.

The Spec II chambers are the norm now, and are what Murray designed , and the combat/tac loads from SSA, Wilson, and what hand loaders are loading match the original ammo.

For instance, my 29.0gr AA2200 and Hornady 110gr OTM projectile load, chronographed today, at 80f, 500ft elevation from a 16" ARP barrel, was 2740fps.  Primers were not flat, or even starting, and there are no swipes or other marks on the brass indicating to me that I can go another .5gr and see close to 2800fps in a near max ( or 60K load ). My 115gr Nosler load is 2625fps. My 90gr TNT load is 2925fps. 85gr factory from SSA in the old tac load was 3100fps. I have duplicated that without swipes or flat primers.

Missed this post earlier:

No, I'm saying you made poor choices for comparison.  Some of the poorest in the caliber.
If you understood the round better and the performance of the various loads, you would make better choices to make comparisons.  And those comparisons would have more meaning and show the two rounds are very close, which is why they are both popular and viable.
6.8 probably has more market share because it is marketed as both an anti-personnel round and a hunting round.  Many police agencies adopted it.
Also the non-proprietary nature of the 6.8 means it is easier for companies to get into this caliber.  
Those are policy issues, not merits of the respective cartridges.

The 95 TTSX was purpose built by Barnes for the 6.8 and is probably the beast all around choice.
These numbers are from a 16" barrel.  So when comparing them to a Grendel load, you should compare them to a 16" Grendel, or add a few hundred fps to these velocities if using a 20" barrel.

Ballistic Coefficient: .291
Muzzle Velocity (fps): 2580
Muzzle Energy (ft-lb): 1402

I didn't make caliber choices actually i just posted open data. Secondly Grendel is just an non proprietary as 6.8SPC. They are both SAAMI rounds. If both are so close wheres the data? To have a productive discussion where we all learn you have to have data. It can't stay at the level of your data is all lies and if we had the magic bullet our caliber would smoke yours etc. This discussion is about furthering our understanding of what makes the best multipurpose AR-15 round. If the data does not support your pick its not cool to say the data is made up or whatever.

• Must use a
  PRI magazine for this round.  Magazine must accept a cartridge with
  Overall Length (OAL) of 2.300".  Magazines sold on this site.
  
  


• Spec II or SAAMI II chamber required.


• This load will not function properly in Barret rifles.


• SSA will not accept returns on this ammunition for failure to fire.

Special load, special magazine.  Glad I didn't trade for a 6.8.  If I had to choose, it would be a Grendel, but those plans have been put on hold.  Until then the SKS will take the lead.



 

Sorry but the points you're making are invalid. The warnings they are showing in that ad pertain to old SAAMI spec, which nobody uses anymore.  It's no different than a warning to use 5.56 in only 5.56 guns and not .223. In fact it's the same thing for the same reason, except less specialized because they still produce tons of .223 guns, and they don't for the old Rem screw up SAAMI.

I'm so confused now with 6.8SPC didn't we say in the criteria that the rounds had to be SAAMI?

SAAMI is outdated, and underpowered by about 200fps or more. They were designed to work with a chamber that was not the correct chamber.

The Remington chamber submitted to SAAMI was not the Chris Murray designed 6.8spc. It should not even be called that. The Spec II chambers are the Murray, original chambers.

Like I have said, the numbers on the bluprints that Remmy submitted contained an error, having a short leade.

The only reason that SAAMI ammo exists at all now is due to lawyers.

You have compare loads that everyone is using, which is the norm, and the correct stuff , not stuff we all stay away from. If you're having trouble with that , go to 68forums and read a bit.

In my opinion it comes down to the grendel and the 6.8 spc.

If youre planning on doing the majority of your shooting past 300 yds the grendel would be my go to choice.

If most of your shots will be less than 300 yds then it comes down to if you want to reload or not and if you want to take the time to research the parts youre using.

Most factory loaded grendel ammo will outperform factory 6.8 because most factory 6.8 is loaded based on saami specs. If you get a well built 6.8 upper with 3-groove or 5r rifling and a spc II or 6.8x43 chamber, you can normally push similar weighted bullets slightly faster than grendel factory ammo.  Normally any velocity or energy advantage is gone by about 300 yds though due to the lower bc of the .277 bullets.

For my purposes I went with the 6.8 partially because of availability of ammo and parts in my area. I really did like the added range the grendel offered, but I wouldn't have felt comfortable taking anything but deer past 300 yds and deer only out to about 400 yds. If you are a good marksman and want to be able to go shoot steel at 600+ yds id definitely go with the grendel, but for most feasible hunting situations where an ar15 is appropriate, they're really neck and neck so just get whatever is more availible in the area you're at.

Thank you for your reasonable thoughtful response. I was as most of us are running through those same considerations. I decided though that 6.5 would kill just as well under 300 as the 6.8 and so why not go with Grendel to get that extra range. Who knows better to be Red Dawn ready :). The trick to doing a Grendel at a decent price without waiting months for pre orders is to sign up for email alerts at Midwayusa for the barrel bolt combo's. When the email comes in usually in the afternoon buy immediately. I've built two Grendels in the last couple months. One with my son for his hunting rifle and one for me. The two lower ones are what I've built the top one is a Windham Weapons 5.56mm.

That's my choice.

I look on the shelves of reloading supplies and I see a ton of .277 bullets still available.

I plan on picking up a Rem .270 bolt gun so that I can use my 6.8 bullets with it interchangably.  One bullet-two calibers.

Be careful, most of the bullets for the 6.8 are developed with a certain velocity envelope in mind to promote proper expansion.  Drive them at velocities attainable in the .270 Winchester and they will likely come apart and give less than optimal penetration on game.  Many of the older popular 6.8 bullets were actually intended for varmint hunting with the .270 like the 110 grain Vmax or 90 grain TNT.