AR Sponsor
6.8SPC or 6.5G? Which one should I buy? (Page 8 of 14)
|
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
My problem with the 6.8 SPC is due to the lack of progress in certain areas. Years ago, mot of the 6.8 guys were all on the same page with getting the cartrige mainstream. Everyone was on the same page and then things change with guys wanting their own thing. As a result, it seems like for every 2 steps forward, it goes 1 or 2 steps back. One of the things I've learned running large projects over the years is that some times you have to let go and let people do what they want. Diversity is the sign of a growing community. That is the price of success. Some will do well, some will fail but we're all better off for the ideas being explored. Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Things such as SSA thickening up the brass for better accuracy, caused problems in chambers. Apparently that has been fixed, but that caused problems. Plinking ammo. I think I have a better chance of growing hair. Yeah, unless we get some russians to work cheap I am not holding my breath on this development. OTOH, I have 5.56 and 22 LR uppers I can use to train cheap and then go back to 6.8 for when it matters. Classes are expensive, no two ways about it. Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Even if it ever comes out, I doubt it will be cheap. And for anyone that doesn't think that is an issue, try taking a high round class and see how much it will cost. And with the economy the way it is how can PD's afford to switch to it? Wouldn't matter if the economy was going great guns. The management has a lot of places to spend money, any one area they can avoid it in will always win, especially with continuing costs. This will hold true until the 5.56 performs badly in such a way it embarasses the brass, such as the Miami gun fight. I don't anticipate this happening with the 5.56 since it's much better than the 9mm was during the Miami incident. This makes me very skeptical of changes actually taking place. Same thing with the Army. It isn't glamorous to spend money on small arms. Only someone within the system who sees the value of the improvement will make this change possible. Sure he guys on the ground getting shot at do if they care enough to research it but not that many do. Originally Posted By paulosantos:
There still isn't a good match bullet. I thought Nosler would get it right with the 115 GR BTHP, but it is almost identical to the Sierra 115 GR SMK. All of the bullets in the last 3 years have all been hunting bullets. Even those have been hit or miss. When Barnes came out with the 110 GR TTSX, I thought that would be the perfect bullet for the 6.8, instead they made the ogive too long and you have to load them to 2.3", which is no good unless you handload and have PRI mags. Then the 95 GR TTSX was supposed to be the end all bullet for the 6.8 and now supposedly SSA can't load them because the bands are positioned so that you have to load the bullets out to 2.85-2.3". My first reaction to this was, how stupid. The 85 GR TSX are too light for my taste. I think the ideal weight for he 6.8 is 110 GR. When you start going that light, you might as well stick with the 5.56 as they have a much better BC. And the lighter bullets bring a whole new problem with short stroking. The heavier bullets prefer the medium fast powders such as H322. When you go to the lighter bullets, they prefer the H4198 powders, which are even faster. So if you set up the gas port for the lighter bullets, you will get hard recoil with the heavier bullets and if you set up the gas port for the heavier bullets, you may get short stroking with the lighter bullets. I experienced this with the majority of my barrels. Companies introduce bullets they think will sell well and make them money. If my interest was target shooting, I wouldn't be shooting the 6.8 SPC. Sure you can do it but there are better alternatives out there. Hell, if I wanted to punch paper, I'd own a 6.5 G. I shoot the 6.8 SPC because it has tremendously effective terminal ballistics and performs well out of the platform I want to use, a SBR. I see the big markets as being military, LEO, and then hunters. For this round, I believe that target shooters are way behind in numbers. If it continues to grow enough, then at some pooint companies will be able to make money off target bullets and they'll come out. At present, I think the biggest market the companies have to target is hunters. Therefore they introduce hunting bullets. The LEO who have adopted the round have the 100 gr Accubond which does a fine job. If the military gets involved, there will be more bullets introduced. If the LEO market continues to grow, there will be more bullets aimed at them. Originally Posted By paulosantos:
So while I still think the 6.8 is a great round, it has become nothing more than a hunting round. And even that, the 5.56 has come out with some real nice hunting bullets that has hurt the 6.8, so unless you live in a state that doesn't allow you to use the 5.56, a lit of guys are sticking with the 5.56, which is cheaper. Seriously, when was it more than a hunting round? It had its roots in the military but they ignored it like a red headed step child. Some LEO have considered it but the cost seems to drive most of them away. I have several contacts who are LEO and I've even volunteered to pick up the tab for the 100 gr Accubond for them to run testing but so far they haven't got out of the gate because of the cost difference. I didn't pick it up as a hunting round personally, it's great for that and I use it for hunting but that isn't why I own the platform. Originally Posted By paulosantos:
So IMHO, the 6.8 is becoming more of a hunter/reloaders/wildcatters cartridge than it is becoming mainstream. I still think it is one of the best cartridges for the AR15, along with the Grendel, but unless the 6.8 makes a huge turn for the better in the next year or so, I don't see it getting much popular than it already is, no matter how many manufacturers get behind it. Because if most of the guys just get an upper and shoot it a couple of times a year during the hunting season or just to get it out of the closet to wipe the dust off, it isn't doing much good for sales of brass, ammo, and other components. I'd disagree with you there. Changing over is a slow process. More and more I run into people who know about the cartridge. The more people who know about it and its performance the better its prospects are. Originally Posted By paulosantos:
I'm not bashing the 6.8 as I have spent thousands of dollars of my own money testing this round and have easily shot over 20k rounds through a total of 8 different uppers. My frustration with the 6.8 is because of the direction it is headed. Respectfully, Paulo Santos Edit to add: I didn't come back to ARFCOM to get into with anyone over this issue. This is just my opinion after 5 years of testing it. If the round fits your purposes, go for it. I think we've covered the ground already and you know how high a regard I have for your opinions in general, hell you're one of two people I go to when I need advice on the AR-15 platform! And I've learned an incredible amount from you over the years. In this case, the 6.8 SPC still meets my needs perfectly. I don't care who adopts it, military, LEO, etc. The bullets are there for me to do what I want with the round and they aren't going away any time soon. That's all I need to make me happy with it! |
|
With regard to the comments about the 6.8 in the LE market, the biggest hang up is going to be training ammo. My department buys a relatively small number of duty rounds and the bulk of our ammo is cheap training ammo (this is true for 5.56 and .40). As long as this isn't a possibility with 6.8, I can't see departments embracing the 6.8 platform.
The range advantage of the 6.8 isn't a significant issue for most departments as most LE engagements are well within 100 yards. I do think the 6.8 could make a viable medium range precision rig but most snipers want good BC wind bucking bullets and that isn't the 6.8's strongest attribute. Another problem is duty ammo selection. I haven't seen bullets readily available for the 6.8 that won't be overpenetration problems in intermediate barriers like drywall. I'm not saying .223 won't penetrate drywall, and I have admittedly not done testing myself with the 6.8, but most 6.8 bullets are designed for hunting and, by their nature, penetrate more than LE will want. The Accubond was mentioned. I know my department only allows the use of bonded bullets for SWAT, and even then only for special circumstances that require barrier penetration. The front line guys are forbidden to have them for fear of liability from overpenetrating rounds. Whether you agree or disagree with the reasons I listed, they are very much alive in the minds of LE administrators. It has only been in the last couple years that the .223 patrol rifle has become a standard and accepted tool for LE. Even then, that isn't everywhere and there are lots of people who believe that Police shouldn't have "military weapons that can punch through 8 houses and kill baby's in their cribs" (I actually heard an interview where someone said this after Chicago adopted AR's). Imagine how much worse those fools will squawk if LE starts getting rifles that are more powerful than what our military carries. I like the idea of 6.8 as a patrol rifle (especially an SBR), but I just don't see it happening any time soon. |
We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions. --Ronald Reagan
| A 12" 6.8 mm can perform nearly every LE long gun requirement better than any 5.56 mm––it just may be the ideal rifle for LE. The Hornady 110 gr OTM is a great duty load, as are the 100 gr Accubond, 115 gr Rem Core-Lokt, and 85 gr TSX projectiles, not to mention the 110 gr Pro-Hunter and 110 gr VMAX. Rather than comparing them with 5.56 mm, the 12-16" 6.8 mm's are much closer to a 16" KAC SR25 EM or LaRue OBR in terms of terminal performance. Viewed in that light, which is more cost effective––6.8 mm uppers dropped onto an agency's existing AR15 lowers or purchasing all new KAC SR25EM's? |
|
Originally Posted By DocGKR:
A 12" 6.8 mm can perform nearly every LE long gun requirement better than any 5.56 mm––it just may be the ideal rifle for LE. The Hornady 110 gr OTM is a great duty load, as are the 100 gr Accubond, 115 gr Rem Core-Lokt, and 85 gr TSX projectiles, not to mention the 110 gr Pro-Hunter and 110 gr VMAX. Rather than comparing them with 5.56 mm, the 12-16" 6.8 mm's are much closer to a 16" KAC SR25 EM or LaRue OBR in terms of terminal performance. Viewed in that light, which is more cost effective––6.8 mm uppers dropped onto an agency's existing AR15 lowers or purchasing all new KAC SR25EM's? I'm not saying 6.8 wouldn't make a better LE rifle, I think it would. Especially with 12" SBR setups. I've exchanged some PM's with PauloSantos about bullets for the 6.8 that don't overpenetrate and he made some good suggestions that would probably work well for LE. I know the Accubond and TSX work well, but are examples we would never be allowed to use because of overpenetration problems. Regardless of what arguments can be made for them, the guys that don't carry rifles but make the decisions won't accept the percieved liability. Bullets like the V-Max are more likely. To give you an example, we are using 55gr TRU ammo. Not exactly the best performing .223 ammo available but it is what the admin decided on regardless of what the end user had to say about it. In the end, the problem isn't terminal performance, it is cost and perception (of the public and of department managment). Ammo cost is a big, recurring issue that would be a major deal breaker at my department. Right now we get less than 500 rounds per Officer per year for both handgun and rifle due to budget constraints. That number would drop if we switched to 6.8 (or .308) and would further degrade the training we get. Many other departments are even worse off. I've long said that training is more important than caliber and I believe it. I would only condone a switch if we could maintain or increase training. As for comparing the cost with SR25's, that isn't a fair comparison. There is absolulely zero chance we'd be allowed to carry .308 rifles on patrol. It was a difficult uphill fight that took a long time (about 5 years) before we were even allowed 5.56 rifles. Another issue would be that most of the rifles used at my department are privately owned. My department almost certainly won't stock two types of rifle ammo. My chief is big on ammo/magazine interchangability as well so we would have to convert every singe rifle over to 6.8 if we made the switch. It would be asking alot to make all the guys who already own 5.56 rifles buy new uppers. It would take alot of rifles off the street for a long time as many of my partners had to save for quite some time to get their 5.56 rifles. Fewer rifles, even if they are a better caliber, isn't a good option either. I personally hope that down the road, when some of the older guys in management retire and leave, myself and some of the more firearms savy guys can make some much needed changes but for now, I'm happy that we have 5.56 rifles. To put it in perspective, I'm currenly fighting with admin to allow semi-auto shotguns. I've been fighting that one for over a year and we still don't have them. |
We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions. --Ronald Reagan
Since your agency's admin is so concerned about "overpenetration", your officers must not be allowed to carry handguns, given that all the common service pistol calibers go deeper and are more likely to "overpenetrate" than any current deforming 5.56 mm load, as proven in numerous tests over the past several decades, including those done by the FBI BRF, JSWB-IPT, IWBA, etc...
If "overpenetration" is such a hazard with bonded projectiles, I wonder why so many well known LE agencies, including numerous Federal agencies like the FBI, as well as large municipal agencies like NYPD and LAPD, have used bonded loads––what data does your admin cite to support their (erroneous) position in opposition to bonded projectiles? Failures to stop a suspect because of under-penetration, poor bullet placement, and completely missing the target are far more significant problems than over-penetration. With shots to the center of mass, if a bullet fails to have enough penetration to reach the large blood bearing vessels and organs in the torso, rapid physiological incapacitation is unlikely and an opponent may remain a lethal threat to officers and citizen bystanders. Conversely, if a bullet fired by officers completely penetrates a violent criminal and exits downrange, the bullet will certainly have had enough penetration to reach the large blood bearing vessels or organs in the torso. As a result, it is more likely to have caused sufficient hemorrhage to induce hypovolemic shock––the only reliable method of physiological incapacitation in the absence of CNS trauma. Unfortunately, according to the available published date, the majority of shots fired in the field by U.S. LE officers miss their intended target. According to published NYPD SOP-9 data, the NYPD hit ratio by officers against perpetrators in 2000 was 12.3% of shots fired and in 2001 13.5% of shots fired. The Miami Metro-Dade County PD had hit ratios ranging between 15.4% and 30% from 1988-1994. Portland PD reported hits with 43% of shots fired at adversaries from 1984-1992, while Baltimore PD reported a 49% average hit ratio from 1989-2002. Given that the reported averages for LE officers actually hitting the suspect ranges between 12% to 49% of shots fired, more concern should be given to the between 51%-88% of shots fired by LE officers which completely MISS the intended target and immediately result in a significant threat to any person down range, rather than excessively worry about the relatively rare instance where one of the 12%-49% of shots fired actually hits the intended target and then exits the perpetrator in a fashion which still poses a hazard. In short, the consequences of projectile under-penetration are far more likely to get officers and citizens killed than over-penetration issues. Since your agency appears to offer an inadequate amount of training ammunition for proper ongoing training requirements, it appears your admin would be far more likely to be held liable for missed shots due to insufficient training, then for shots the "overpenetrated" and still resulted in an inadvertent injury.... Bullet construction is a far greater determiner of penetration depth than caliber; note all three of these rifle calibers are penetrating to the same depth: 
|
|
Originally Posted By DocGKR:
Since your agency's admin is so concerned about "overpenetration", your officers must not be allowed to carry handguns, given that all the common service pistol calibers go deeper and are more likely to "overpenetrate" than any current deforming 5.56 mm load, as proven in numerous tests over the past several decades, including those done by the FBI BRF, JSWB-IPT, IWBA, etc... You are correct, and this data has been brought up with my admin. It was a big help in getting 5.56 approved. Even with this data, and the multitude of cases where rifles were needed by other departments, it is amazing how many of the admin were against rifles and still are. If "overpenetration" is such a hazard with bonded projectiles, I wonder why so many well known LE agencies, including numerous Federal agencies like the FBI, as well as large municipal agencies like NYPD and LAPD, have used bonded loads––what data does your admin cite to support their (erroneous) position in opposition to bonded projectiles? They cite no data at all. They merely hold the position that it penetrates more and is, therefore, a "liability." Our SWAT team has bonded ammo but the line guys aren't allowed to use it. Failures to stop a suspect because of under-penetration, poor bullet placement, and completely missing the target are far more significant problems than over-penetration. No argument here. Unfortunately, according to the available published data, the majority of shots fired in the field by U.S. LE officers miss their intended target. Again, no argument. Since your agency appears to offer an inadequate amount of training ammunition for proper ongoing training requirements, it appears your admin would be far more likely to be held liable for missed shots due to insufficient training, then for shots the "overpenetrated" and still resulted in an inadvertent injury.... That argument has been made by me as well as several other trainers. We simply get the "there isn't enough money" speech. I've started taking the Officers I work with that are serious about training out on our own dime (we buy our own ammo and train on our off time) because I agree that the level of training we receive is grossly inadequate. I merely made the point that it would only get worse with more expensive ammo. For what it is worth, we get far more ammo than most agencies to train with. I've spoken with quite a few trainers from around the state recently and a significant number of departments have gone to just doing a qualificiation course once a year without any other range time to save money. This clearly goes against established case law that requires training with moving targets, in low light, with decision making targets, etc and I believe they are setting themselves up for huge lawsuits. That said, it is the current reality in LE. |
We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions. --Ronald Reagan
|
"Our SWAT team has bonded ammo but the line guys aren't allowed to use it."
Of course the patrol guys out doing vehicle stops and pursuits are the ones who will more likely need the bonded ammo...Can't your POA or union band together to rectify this egregious thinking? Heck, the city attorney should be looking at this from a liability perspective and take steps to mitigate inappropriate policy. |
|
Originally Posted By DocGKR:
"Our SWAT team has bonded ammo but the line guys aren't allowed to use it."
Of course the patrol guys out doing vehicle stops and pursuits are the ones who will more likely need the bonded ammo...Can't your POA or union band together to rectify this egregious thinking? Heck, the city attorney should be looking at this from a liability perspective and take steps to mitigate inappropriate policy. We have no union, it is illegal in Indiana for Police to engage in collective bargaining or to strike. The city attorney is an angle I hadn't considered though. |
We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions. --Ronald Reagan
Though I think we are probably  , I want to add a few things that have not been said. Paulo, welcome back.  ...I don't completely agree with some of what you said, and just so that newbies to the 6.8 aren't more confused by your opinions, I'll add the foregoing:
1) the "direction" in which the 6.8 is headed, happens to be a result of market forces, NOT people forcing it to go one way or another. No one here can influence the buying public. People buy what they perceive to be wants or needs. They happen to be doing this regardless of whether any official agency adopts it for their use. Which brings us to : 2) The 6.8 and 6.5 Grendel turned the AR-15 into a viable hunting caliber. It excels at the attributes necessary to kill medium game at the ranges that 90% of said game is taken. I would guess that 90% of hunters could care less about what the 6.8's bullets' BC is. Hunting bullets have evolved for the 6.8 specifically because there are hunters that want to buy them. If there were an equal number of LE agencies clamoring for "LE" type bullets, then we would probably have more. As is, we already have some that are perfect for this role. We have the 85 grain Barnes RRLP Frangible, which no one has mentioned, so that if you are worried about over-penetration, there you have an 85 grain bullet that is as accurate as the 90 grain TNT. The 90 TNT, the 100 and 110 Accubond and the 110 Hornady are all excellent for LE, and far better than 5.56, even in very short rifles. This is fact, so if LE doesn't adopt it, then maybe they are hurting for funds or they just don't really know enough about it. Better is better. Yes, 6.8 costs more. No argument there. 3) All new cartridges evolve over time. Does anyone think that today's 5.56mm is the same as 1965's ? Things are evolving with the 6.8 just as they do with all other cartridges. Most of the evolution has been in response to the people that buy the guns shooting it. I cannot think of a better determiner of the future of a gun or round. Its simply capitalism at work (while the vestiges still remain, in the US  ).
4) The 6.8 already has a SAAMI approved chamber. There are others. BIG DEAL. There are at least 6 .308 chambers. Get over it already, folks. It is not a wildcat. Manufacturers know how to make SPCII, 11 twist rifles now. That was not a huge step, and any of you can ream a chamber from SAAMI to SPCII yourself. It does nothing more than takes the SAAMI leade (like a .223) and turns it into a SPCII (like a 5.56 X 45.) 5) Another myth is the proposition that you cannot take a midlength gas 6.8 and shoot 85 grain TSX's and then pop in some 115 SMK's and have it cycle. I think that's totally inaccurate. None of my favorite handloads (nor any of the SSA factory loads) use H4198. There are powders which allow for cycling with both light and heavy bullets, in almost all rifles. I have 5 of these rifles, and three have adjustable GB's and 2 don't. I use a suppressor, and every single one cycles 100%. I like the 85 TSX, and I also happen to like the 115 SMK. I shoot both in the same gun, all the time, and they both cycle. Even with the non-adjustable GB, my 20" 12 twist 3 groove, will cycle 85 TSX's and 115 SMK's with aplomb. Since it shoots the 115 SMK, 90 grain TNT and the 85 RRLP into one hole, why, exactly do we need more "match" bullets for the 6.8? What about those won't work? I'm not here to argue either. I don't have a financial interest in the 6.8. I think the Grendel is a great round and have said so from the very beginning. The only difference about which you should know, if contemplating one, is the following: 1) the Grendel generally uses bullets with a better BC, and carries energy and velocity of the projo farther in general, than the 6.8. Both have bullets with BC's higher than most 5.56 loads. 2) both are far superior to 5.56mm in almost any role you can imagine 3) the 6.8 has better initial velocity, with similar bullets when fired from much shorter barrels, so mid-range performance is similar to 6.5 G, but in a much smaller package. Since you can get so much higher velocity from 6.8 bullets, that weigh at least 10- 50 grains more than any 5.56 bullet, performance in very short barrels is far superior to any similar load fired from a short 5.56 barrel. |
"Texas - the only state that ever kicked another country's ass."
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
Thanks for the welcome Chris. Maybe I didn't explain it well when I first wrote it or in the last 50 or so times I've said this.
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
1) the "direction" in which the 6.8 is headed, happens to be a result of market forces, NOT people forcing it to go one way or another. No one here can influence the buying public. People buy what they perceive to be wants or needs. They happen to be doing this regardless of whether any official agency adopts it for their use. I completely disagree. Years ago when we first started on 68forums, we were all on the same page. Nearly all of the manufacturers used the 1:10/SAAMI specs and WE COLLECTIVELY called up every company and explained to them the benefits of the newer specs. Keyword here being WE COLLECTIVELY. How did that work out? Then when the hunters like yourself wanted better hunting bullets,, again, WE COLLECTIVELY contacted Banres and other companies requesting more hunting bullets. Keyword here being WE COLLECTIVELY. How did that work out? Then when us po-po said that in order to get more PD's to adopt the 6.8, there had to be more affordable ammo and preforably a cheap plinking load, WE COLLECTIVELY...How did that work out?...Oh wait, we were told to shut the f*ck up and stop complaining about the price of ammo because the more we complained about the price of ammo, the more people we discouraged and it would hurt sales. Or have we forgotten about the infamous "CAPORIDER THREAD." Do you see the difference? Of course not. What do some dumb ass po-po know about what actually goes on in a PD and how hard it is to get stuff approved. 5) Another myth is the proposition that you cannot take a midlength gas 6.8 and shoot 85 grain TSX's and then pop in some 115 SMK's and have it cycle. I think that's totally inaccurate. None of my favorite handloads (nor any of the SSA factory loads) use H4198. There are powders which allow for cycling with both light and heavy bullets, in almost all rifles. I have 5 of these rifles, and three have adjustable GB's and 2 don't. I use a suppressor, and every single one cycles 100%. I like the 85 TSX, and I also happen to like the 115 SMK. I shoot both in the same gun, all the time, and they both cycle. Even with the non-adjustable GB, my 20" 12 twist 3 groove, will cycle 85 TSX's and 115 SMK's with aplomb. Since it shoots the 115 SMK, 90 grain TNT and the 85 RRLP into one hole, why, exactly do we need more "match" bullets for the 6.8? What about those won't work? My last two uppers ejected perfectly at the 4 o'clock position with the lighter bullets, but when I switched to the 110-115 GR bullets, they ejected at the 1 o'clock position. Even after switching to the H3 buffer, heaviets carrier I could find, Superior Shooting Spring, and the FSC30, the brass still ejected at the 1-2 o'clock position and the recoild sucked. Yet my first two uppers worked perfect with the 110-115 Gr bullets and short stroked with the lighter ones. And I received similar complaints when I was on 68forums. And since I came back here, I already received 1 IM from a guy whose upper is perfectly setup for the 85 GR bullets and when he switched to the 11 GR bullets, it tears the rims right off the brass. |
|
While there is currently good duty ammo available in 6.8 mm, training ammo is a critical need for 6.8 mm tactical/LE use––obviously 6.8 mm training ammo will be more expensive than 5.56 mm training ammo (Federal AE223 = $10.50/20 rds), but less than equivalent .308 ammo (Federal AE308 = $16.50/20 rds).
Over the past 8 years, our numerous properly assembled 6.8 mm uppers with 8" to 20" barrels have worked with loads from 85 gr to 115 gr without any problems––the sole exception being two uppers from the same vendor that could not get through a magazine without a FTF... |
|
Here's something I forgot before.
The desired/recommended pressures for the 6.8 SPC were 55K PSI and preforably 52-53K for combat type use. With the SAAMI chamber, that meant loading a 110 GR bullet to 2550 FPS. That was OK, but it could be better, so the newer specs such as the 1:11"/SPCII chambered weapons meant that you could now load up the same 110 GR bullet to 2650 FPS and still be around 52-53K PSI. What else could you want? Well, some hotrodders just weren't happy and decided to push those 110 GR bullets to 2800 FPS at around 60k PSI. I bet most guys are saying, what's the big deal? Personally, I don't care if someone wants to load the shit up to 70K. It's your life. But when you start pushing that crap around on an open forum is downright irresponsible. There is a difference in pushing things to the limit to see what they could do and then there is downright imature and stupid. I think everyone is in agreement that the 6.8 and even the 6.5 are good hunting rounds out to 300 yards. Most loads, even at SAAMI velocities are good out go 300 yards under 52K PSI. So why the need to hotrod the living crap out of something when there is no need for it? By the way, has anyone actually plugged in the numbers to see exactly how much an extra 200 FPS will add to the maximum performance range? A whopping 60 yards. So let me take a load that is good for 300 yards at 52K PSi and load it up to 60K PSI for and whopping extra 60 yards of performance. And then I'm going to take my 60K load that is good to take down a medium sized animal out to 360 yards, when in reality 90% of my kills will be under 200 yards and in reality the majority of the shots will be around 100 yards. But I'm not a hunter, I'm just a dumb cop, so maybe my thinking is off on this. And by the way, the example above is using a marginal hunting bullet. The new bullets such as the Barnes 95 GR TTSX are good out to 400+ yards even at SAAMI velocities. And by no means am I suggesting that we should go back to the SAAMI chamber or SAAMI velocities. Just be responsible in what you post/recommend on an open forum. |
|
Originally Posted By DocGKR:
While there is currently good duty ammo available in 6.8 mm, training ammo is a critical need for 6.8 mm tactical/LE use––obviously 6.8 mm training ammo will be more expensive than 5.56 mm training ammo (Federal AE223 = $10.50/20 rds), but less than equivalent .308 ammo (Federal AE308 = $16.50/20 rds). Over the past 8 years, our numerous properly assembled 6.8 mm uppers with 8" to 20" barrels have worked with loads from 85 gr to 115 gr without any problems––the sole exception being two uppers from the same vendor that could not get through a magazine without a FTF... I spoke with Art numerous times about the problems with the lighter bullets. He told me some barrels would shoot them fine and some would short stroke. And if he increased the powder, then barrels would stop short stroking, but then the pressure would be too high on the other barrels. I also saw first hand at the class the short stroking problems with the 90 GR ammo. If I want a light, fast bullet, I'll stick with the 5.56. IMHO, the sweet spot for the 6.8 are the 110-115 GR bullets. |
|
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Here's something I forgot before. The desired/recommended pressures for the 6.8 SPC were 55K PSI and preforably 52-53K for combat type use. With the SAAMI chamber, that meant loading a 110 GR bullet to 2550 FPS. That was OK, but it could be better, so the newer specs such as the 1:11"/SPCII chambered weapons meant that you could now load up the same 110 GR bullet to 2650 FPS and still be around 52-53K PSI. What else could you want? Well, some hotrodders just weren't happy and decided to push those 110 GR bullets to 2800 FPS at around 60k PSI. I bet most guys are saying, what's the big deal? Personally, I don't care if someone wants to load the shit up to 70K. It's your life. But when you start pushing that crap around on an open forum is downright irresponsible. There is a difference in pushing things to the limit to see what they could do and then there is downright imature and stupid. I think everyone is in agreement that the 6.8 and even the 6.5 are good hunting rounds out to 300 yards. Most loads, even at SAAMI velocities are good out go 300 yards under 52K PSI. So why the need to hotrod the living crap out of something when there is no need for it? By the way, has anyone actually plugged in the numbers to see exactly how much an extra 200 FPS will add to the maximum performance range? A whopping 60 yards. So let me take a load that is good for 300 yards at 52K PSi and load it up to 60K PSI for and whopping extra 60 yards of performance. And then I'm going to take my 60K load that is good to take down a medium sized animal out to 360 yards, when in reality 90% of my kills will be under 200 yards and in reality the majority of the shots will be around 100 yards. But I'm not a hunter, I'm just a dumb cop, so maybe my thinking is off on this. And by the way, the example above is using a marginal hunting bullet. The new bullets such as the Barnes 95 GR TTSX are good out to 400+ yards even at SAAMI velocities. And by no means am I suggesting that we should go back to the SAAMI chamber or SAAMI velocities. Just be responsible in what you post/recommend on an open forum. As to your former post, I won't respond as it is full of anecdotes about what was said and done by a bunch of guys on internet forums at some time in the past, and more anecdotal evidence about a few guns (IMO, the exception) that wouldn't cycle properly with different weight bullets. That has no place in a tech forum, Paulo, and you as a former mod, should know that. To the latter post above, I will say this: The one thing said (in red) that best characterizes the current evolution of the cartridge, is that we got Barnes to develop a bullet, which, when fired at normal 6.8 velocities and pressure, could function at a lower speed. We asked for a bullet that functions well at lower speeds, fits in the mag well, and has a decent BC. We got it, and the range now has been extended without having to max out the charge. That's not hotrodding, that is searching for other variables to change, which could result in better performance, while working within the confines of the AR-15 mag length restriction. There are many ways to skin a cat. With such great bullets coming to the market, "hotrodding of the cartridge" (your terms, not mine), is no longer really necessary, anyway. 
As an interesting comparison, I would like to ask DocGKR this question. Since the release of Mk319 ammo, can you tell us what the operating pressures are in M4's? With the velocity claimed, it seems that the pressure is probably in the 55K range? |
"Texas - the only state that ever kicked another country's ass."
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
|
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By DocGKR:
While there is currently good duty ammo available in 6.8 mm, training ammo is a critical need for 6.8 mm tactical/LE use––obviously 6.8 mm training ammo will be more expensive than 5.56 mm training ammo (Federal AE223 = $10.50/20 rds), but less than equivalent .308 ammo (Federal AE308 = $16.50/20 rds). Over the past 8 years, our numerous properly assembled 6.8 mm uppers with 8" to 20" barrels have worked with loads from 85 gr to 115 gr without any problems––the sole exception being two uppers from the same vendor that could not get through a magazine without a FTF... I spoke with Art numerous times about the problems with the lighter bullets. He told me some barrels would shoot them fine and some would short stroke. And if he increased the powder, then barrels would stop short stroking, but then the pressure would be too high on the other barrels. I also saw first hand at the class the short stroking problems with the 90 GR ammo. If I want a light, fast bullet, I'll stick with the 5.56. IMHO, the sweet spot for the 6.8 are the 110-115 GR bullets. You are completely free to have that opinion, but that is what suits your needs. For my needs, that would be incongruous with my experience. All of you know that I have killed nearly a thousand feral hogs here in south Texas with the 6.8, over the last 5 years. There are enough numbers here to make some general statements, if not draw out some trends or conclusions. If you are going to hunt deer or hogs, and you want to keep things inexpensive and simple, then you will be well-served simply buying the 110 grain Sierra Prohunter 110 grain soft points. They don't always penetrate to the vitals of a big feral hog, but kill deer very efficiently. They are selling as low as $ 17.00 per box. If you shoot lots of hogs, then you find out very quickly that the Barnes 85 TSX is fast, very flat (in fact flatter trajectory than many actually understand) and penetrates very well, while retaining 100% of its weight, which means that all 85 grains usually comes out the other side, even after penetrating thick bone. The 95 TTSX is even more promising, since it can open at around 1600 FPS, still retains 100% of its weight, and can be loaded modestly to perform in all existing 6.8's, even those with SAAMI chambers. I still have one with a SAAMI chamber ( I play around with subsonics in this barrel), and I am shooting 95 TTSX's through it with pretty good results. Definitely no pressure problems with some of the loads I am now testing. Sneak up on pig with 150 grain sub in the chamber.....shoot pig in head, then shuck the round out and follow up with supersonic 95 TTSX, if necessary 
No 5.56 can do this. |
"Texas - the only state that ever kicked another country's ass."
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
|
So first hand knowledge of something is anecdotal? After shooting well over 20k rounds through 7 different uppers, you'd think I'd actually learn something. I guess not. And by the way, the problems I was referring to is only for a few types of barrels, like the 20" barrels with the rifle length gas system and the 16" barrels with the midlength gas system. I never had any problems with my 14" barrels with carbine length gas system, nor did I have any problems with my 18" barrel with the midlength gas system. Those barrels fed everything from the 90 to the 130 GR bullets with no gas issues. It was the 16" barrels with the midlength and the 20" barrel with the rifle length that gave me problems. So because of the lighter bullets, some of the 16" midlength barrels are overgassed so they can cycle the lighter bullets. I just wanted to clear that up before it caused any further confusion.
And yes, the 95 GR TTSX is a great bullet, even at moderate velocities, yet you guys stuff it with 30 GR of RE10x which is well over the recommended max according to Barnes and post that all over the Internet as the bread and butter load. |
|
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By DocGKR:
While there is currently good duty ammo available in 6.8 mm, training ammo is a critical need for 6.8 mm tactical/LE use––obviously 6.8 mm training ammo will be more expensive than 5.56 mm training ammo (Federal AE223 = $10.50/20 rds), but less than equivalent .308 ammo (Federal AE308 = $16.50/20 rds). Over the past 8 years, our numerous properly assembled 6.8 mm uppers with 8" to 20" barrels have worked with loads from 85 gr to 115 gr without any problems––the sole exception being two uppers from the same vendor that could not get through a magazine without a FTF... I spoke with Art numerous times about the problems with the lighter bullets. He told me some barrels would shoot them fine and some would short stroke. And if he increased the powder, then barrels would stop short stroking, but then the pressure would be too high on the other barrels. I also saw first hand at the class the short stroking problems with the 90 GR ammo. If I want a light, fast bullet, I'll stick with the 5.56. IMHO, the sweet spot for the 6.8 are the 110-115 GR bullets. You are completely free to have that opinion, but that is what suits your needs. For my needs, that would be incongruous with my experience. All of you know that I have killed nearly a thousand feral hogs here in south Texas with the 6.8, over the last 5 years. There are enough numbers here to make some general statements, if not draw out some trends or conclusions. If you are going to hunt deer or hogs, and you want to keep things inexpensive and simple, then you will be well-served simply buying the 110 grain Sierra Prohunter 110 grain soft points. They don't always penetrate to the vitals of a big feral hog, but kill deer very efficiently. They are selling as low as $ 17.00 per box. If you shoot lots of hogs, then you find out very quickly that the Barnes 85 TSX is fast, very flat (in fact flatter trajectory than many actually understand) and penetrates very well, while retaining 100% of its weight, which means that all 85 grains usually comes out the other side, even after penetrating thick bone. The 95 TTSX is even more promising, since it can open at around 1600 FPS, still retains 100% of its weight, and can be loaded modestly to perform in all existing 6.8's, even those with SAAMI chambers. I still have one with a SAAMI chamber ( I play around with subsonics in this barrel), and I am shooting 95 TTSX's through it with pretty good results. Definitely no pressure problems with some of the loads I am now testing. Sneak up on pig with 150 grain sub in the chamber.....shoot pig in head, then shuck the round out and follow up with supersonic 95 TTSX, if necessary
No 5.56 can do this. And the 110 GR TSX doesn't work on hogs as well as the 85 GR TSX? Funny, that is Bill Wilson's favorite bullet for hogs. And while I agree that the 6.8 is better than the 5.56 for hogs, I've read plenty of threads on here in which guys are taking out hogs with the 5.5) with no problems. |
|
Chris, it's been a blast chatting with you again. We should do it again sometime. Or maybe not. And thanks again for the welcome back. I'm sure it was sincere. LOL.
Edit to add: I just want to clear up one thing. I don't want anyone reading my comments and think that I all of a sudden think the 6.8 sucks ass and that I'm trashing it. Some people read a little criticism and feel like they have to defend it like it is matter of life or death. I still think it is one of the best rounds for the AR15 along with the Grendel. After 6 years, 7 uppers (it is actually more like 9, but 2 were loaned to me for testing), and over 20K rounds, I know what this cartridge can and cannot do. Sure I'm a little disappointed in the progress of the round, but honestly, who isn't. What I can't stand is all of the constant overhyping bullcrap that I read and the constant battle to try to turn it into something that it isn't. |
|
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Chris, it's been a blast chatting with you again. We should do it again sometime. Or maybe not. And thanks again for the welcome back. I'm sure it was sincere. LOL. I always enjoy an educated disagreement...provided that its civil and unemotional. I have even found some of the 6.5 Grendel devotees to be worthy adversaries, but guys with whom I would gladly share a beer. I think most of the members here can watch some of us spar with differing opinions and learn from it. That is my hope, anyway. The welcome was sincere....I have no axe to grind, but it seems that maybe you do. Maybe I'm wrong. |
"Texas - the only state that ever kicked another country's ass."
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
|
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By DocGKR:
While there is currently good duty ammo available in 6.8 mm, training ammo is a critical need for 6.8 mm tactical/LE use––obviously 6.8 mm training ammo will be more expensive than 5.56 mm training ammo (Federal AE223 = $10.50/20 rds), but less than equivalent .308 ammo (Federal AE308 = $16.50/20 rds). Over the past 8 years, our numerous properly assembled 6.8 mm uppers with 8" to 20" barrels have worked with loads from 85 gr to 115 gr without any problems––the sole exception being two uppers from the same vendor that could not get through a magazine without a FTF... I spoke with Art numerous times about the problems with the lighter bullets. He told me some barrels would shoot them fine and some would short stroke. And if he increased the powder, then barrels would stop short stroking, but then the pressure would be too high on the other barrels. I also saw first hand at the class the short stroking problems with the 90 GR ammo. If I want a light, fast bullet, I'll stick with the 5.56. IMHO, the sweet spot for the 6.8 are the 110-115 GR bullets. You are completely free to have that opinion, but that is what suits your needs. For my needs, that would be incongruous with my experience. All of you know that I have killed nearly a thousand feral hogs here in south Texas with the 6.8, over the last 5 years. There are enough numbers here to make some general statements, if not draw out some trends or conclusions. If you are going to hunt deer or hogs, and you want to keep things inexpensive and simple, then you will be well-served simply buying the 110 grain Sierra Prohunter 110 grain soft points. They don't always penetrate to the vitals of a big feral hog, but kill deer very efficiently. They are selling as low as $ 17.00 per box. If you shoot lots of hogs, then you find out very quickly that the Barnes 85 TSX is fast, very flat (in fact flatter trajectory than many actually understand) and penetrates very well, while retaining 100% of its weight, which means that all 85 grains usually comes out the other side, even after penetrating thick bone. The 95 TTSX is even more promising, since it can open at around 1600 FPS, still retains 100% of its weight, and can be loaded modestly to perform in all existing 6.8's, even those with SAAMI chambers. I still have one with a SAAMI chamber ( I play around with subsonics in this barrel), and I am shooting 95 TTSX's through it with pretty good results. Definitely no pressure problems with some of the loads I am now testing. Sneak up on pig with 150 grain sub in the chamber.....shoot pig in head, then shuck the round out and follow up with supersonic 95 TTSX, if necessary
No 5.56 can do this. And the 110 GR TSX doesn't work on hogs as well as the 85 GR TSX? Funny, that is Bill Wilson's favorite bullet for hogs. And while I agree that the 6.8 is better than the 5.56 for hogs, I've read plenty of threads on here in which guys are taking out hogs with the 5.5) with no problems. Reasonable question. I had pressure signs earlier in load development with the 110, so I abandoned it for the shorter 85. I did not have to compress powder as much. I have killed over 450 hogs with that one bullet, and about 90% of them were DRT. This is anecdotal, of course, because I never performed a blinded, controlled study comparing the two bullets on the same hog, same weight, same distance, and same rifle. You can see the difficulty in setting up such a trial. |
"Texas - the only state that ever kicked another country's ass."
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
|
Interesting thread, especially the last page or so. It does seem there are a few things we ALL agree on.
1) At the moment, in spite of being a better mousetrap it seems the 6.8 SPC is still largely a hunting round. 2) There are some decent bullets out there for LEO use. 3) We need inexpensive practice ammo to really spur its adoption by Law Enforcement. Personally I really don't see where the present state of things is that much different than any other new round. There are rough edges out there which get honed as the builders gain experience with the round. Look at the history of the 5.56 and even where it is today. Can you use a 77 grain bullet in all AR-15's that are out there? I find based on my limited experience with the 6.8's I've owned is that they do like the heavy bullets better than the lighter bullets. I wouldn't say that bothers me since I like heavier bullets better also. There is enough bullet selection out there that I can get the results I need. It'd be nice not to have to test but heck, most of my semi-auto handguns and rifles have some rounds they like and some they don't. |
|
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By DocGKR:
While there is currently good duty ammo available in 6.8 mm, training ammo is a critical need for 6.8 mm tactical/LE use––obviously 6.8 mm training ammo will be more expensive than 5.56 mm training ammo (Federal AE223 = $10.50/20 rds), but less than equivalent .308 ammo (Federal AE308 = $16.50/20 rds). Over the past 8 years, our numerous properly assembled 6.8 mm uppers with 8" to 20" barrels have worked with loads from 85 gr to 115 gr without any problems––the sole exception being two uppers from the same vendor that could not get through a magazine without a FTF... I spoke with Art numerous times about the problems with the lighter bullets. He told me some barrels would shoot them fine and some would short stroke. And if he increased the powder, then barrels would stop short stroking, but then the pressure would be too high on the other barrels. I also saw first hand at the class the short stroking problems with the 90 GR ammo. If I want a light, fast bullet, I'll stick with the 5.56. IMHO, the sweet spot for the 6.8 are the 110-115 GR bullets. You are completely free to have that opinion, but that is what suits your needs. For my needs, that would be incongruous with my experience. All of you know that I have killed nearly a thousand feral hogs here in south Texas with the 6.8, over the last 5 years. There are enough numbers here to make some general statements, if not draw out some trends or conclusions. If you are going to hunt deer or hogs, and you want to keep things inexpensive and simple, then you will be well-served simply buying the 110 grain Sierra Prohunter 110 grain soft points. They don't always penetrate to the vitals of a big feral hog, but kill deer very efficiently. They are selling as low as $ 17.00 per box. If you shoot lots of hogs, then you find out very quickly that the Barnes 85 TSX is fast, very flat (in fact flatter trajectory than many actually understand) and penetrates very well, while retaining 100% of its weight, which means that all 85 grains usually comes out the other side, even after penetrating thick bone. The 95 TTSX is even more promising, since it can open at around 1600 FPS, still retains 100% of its weight, and can be loaded modestly to perform in all existing 6.8's, even those with SAAMI chambers. I still have one with a SAAMI chamber ( I play around with subsonics in this barrel), and I am shooting 95 TTSX's through it with pretty good results. Definitely no pressure problems with some of the loads I am now testing. Sneak up on pig with 150 grain sub in the chamber.....shoot pig in head, then shuck the round out and follow up with supersonic 95 TTSX, if necessary
No 5.56 can do this. And the 110 GR TSX doesn't work on hogs as well as the 85 GR TSX? Funny, that is Bill Wilson's favorite bullet for hogs. And while I agree that the 6.8 is better than the 5.56 for hogs, I've read plenty of threads on here in which guys are taking out hogs with the 5.5) with no problems. Reasonable question. I had pressure signs earlier in load development with the 110, so I abandoned it for the shorter 85. I did not have to compress powder as much. I have killed over 450 hogs with that one bullet, and about 90% of them were DRT. This is anecdotal, of course, because I never performed a blinded, controlled study comparing the two bullets on the same hog, same weight, same distance, and same rifle. You can see the difficulty in setting up such a trial. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, my guns mostly like the 110's better. *Shrug* Maybe I'm missing something here but I don't miss the 85 when I have the 110... |
|
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By DocGKR:
While there is currently good duty ammo available in 6.8 mm, training ammo is a critical need for 6.8 mm tactical/LE use––obviously 6.8 mm training ammo will be more expensive than 5.56 mm training ammo (Federal AE223 = $10.50/20 rds), but less than equivalent .308 ammo (Federal AE308 = $16.50/20 rds). Over the past 8 years, our numerous properly assembled 6.8 mm uppers with 8" to 20" barrels have worked with loads from 85 gr to 115 gr without any problems––the sole exception being two uppers from the same vendor that could not get through a magazine without a FTF... I spoke with Art numerous times about the problems with the lighter bullets. He told me some barrels would shoot them fine and some would short stroke. And if he increased the powder, then barrels would stop short stroking, but then the pressure would be too high on the other barrels. I also saw first hand at the class the short stroking problems with the 90 GR ammo. If I want a light, fast bullet, I'll stick with the 5.56. IMHO, the sweet spot for the 6.8 are the 110-115 GR bullets. You are completely free to have that opinion, but that is what suits your needs. For my needs, that would be incongruous with my experience. All of you know that I have killed nearly a thousand feral hogs here in south Texas with the 6.8, over the last 5 years. There are enough numbers here to make some general statements, if not draw out some trends or conclusions. If you are going to hunt deer or hogs, and you want to keep things inexpensive and simple, then you will be well-served simply buying the 110 grain Sierra Prohunter 110 grain soft points. They don't always penetrate to the vitals of a big feral hog, but kill deer very efficiently. They are selling as low as $ 17.00 per box. If you shoot lots of hogs, then you find out very quickly that the Barnes 85 TSX is fast, very flat (in fact flatter trajectory than many actually understand) and penetrates very well, while retaining 100% of its weight, which means that all 85 grains usually comes out the other side, even after penetrating thick bone. The 95 TTSX is even more promising, since it can open at around 1600 FPS, still retains 100% of its weight, and can be loaded modestly to perform in all existing 6.8's, even those with SAAMI chambers. I still have one with a SAAMI chamber ( I play around with subsonics in this barrel), and I am shooting 95 TTSX's through it with pretty good results. Definitely no pressure problems with some of the loads I am now testing. Sneak up on pig with 150 grain sub in the chamber.....shoot pig in head, then shuck the round out and follow up with supersonic 95 TTSX, if necessary
No 5.56 can do this. And the 110 GR TSX doesn't work on hogs as well as the 85 GR TSX? Funny, that is Bill Wilson's favorite bullet for hogs. And while I agree that the 6.8 is better than the 5.56 for hogs, I've read plenty of threads on here in which guys are taking out hogs with the 5.5) with no problems. Reasonable question. I had pressure signs earlier in load development with the 110, so I abandoned it for the shorter 85. I did not have to compress powder as much. I have killed over 450 hogs with that one bullet, and about 90% of them were DRT. This is anecdotal, of course, because I never performed a blinded, controlled study comparing the two bullets on the same hog, same weight, same distance, and same rifle. You can see the difficulty in setting up such a trial.  BUUUDY
Why is it some use a 300 mag to shoot deer when some say a 5.56 will do just fine? They could use a .308 with the same bullet as the 300mag but just 200fps slower, kind of makes ya wonder why magnums were invented doesn't it?. Lets just say there are 2 cartridges introduced by two diffferent companies at the same time, both are equally available, same caliber, apx the same cost, same accuracy but one has better terminal performance due to an extra 150fps, I wonder which one would be successful? Which would the public gravitate to? Kind of like those companies that introduce a new #1 product but then just ignores any advancements that could be made, supply isn't so great due to licensing and warnings of death is possible if you exceed 55mph, while another company promotes their #2 product, improves the product and in general encourges the public to use and get the most from their product. Soon #2 has hundreds of photos of people using and having fun with their product, even photos of road kill taken while exceeding 55mph with their 6.8. Nobody likes boring. The meek may indeed inherit the earth but until then the rest of us will live and have fun on it. We need to get together to do some terminal performance test at extreme ranges with different bullets and different velocities, just for the fun of it, between shooting hogs of course. ETA- Aren't hunters the largest single group of civilian rifle purchasers? Seems like I read that in a Shot show trade publication. |
[url] www.AR15Performance.com [/url]
6.8, 5.56, 6BRX and 6.5BR rifles and uppers
6.8, 5.56, 6BRX and 6.5BR rifles and uppers
I don't know about of the other stuff, but 5 shots into 6.7 inches at 300 yards with an Eotech is enough to make me happy,  90gr tnts loaded to 2.305 oal, and 29.8gr Re7 at 2915fps from aN AR Performance 16" recon. I have so far not had any issues with any weight of bullets cycling properly with it, from 85gr up to 115s.
|
|
Originally Posted By pavlovwolf:
I don't know about of the other stuff, but 5 shots into 6.7 inches at 300 yards with an Eotech is enough to make me happy, 90gr tnts loaded to 2.305 oal, and 29.8gr Re7 at 2915fps from aN AR Performance 16" recon. I have so far not had any issues with any weight of bullets cycling properly with it, from 85gr up to 115s.I'm glad you are happy with it. My LMT, Bison Upper, and even the ARPerformance upper that I borrowed were all ejecting the brass at 1 o'clock with the heavy bullets and the recoil was pretty harsh for a 6.8 because of it. |
|
Originally Posted By AR-Performance:
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By DocGKR:
While there is currently good duty ammo available in 6.8 mm, training ammo is a critical need for 6.8 mm tactical/LE use––obviously 6.8 mm training ammo will be more expensive than 5.56 mm training ammo (Federal AE223 = $10.50/20 rds), but less than equivalent .308 ammo (Federal AE308 = $16.50/20 rds). Over the past 8 years, our numerous properly assembled 6.8 mm uppers with 8" to 20" barrels have worked with loads from 85 gr to 115 gr without any problems––the sole exception being two uppers from the same vendor that could not get through a magazine without a FTF... I spoke with Art numerous times about the problems with the lighter bullets. He told me some barrels would shoot them fine and some would short stroke. And if he increased the powder, then barrels would stop short stroking, but then the pressure would be too high on the other barrels. I also saw first hand at the class the short stroking problems with the 90 GR ammo. If I want a light, fast bullet, I'll stick with the 5.56. IMHO, the sweet spot for the 6.8 are the 110-115 GR bullets. You are completely free to have that opinion, but that is what suits your needs. For my needs, that would be incongruous with my experience. All of you know that I have killed nearly a thousand feral hogs here in south Texas with the 6.8, over the last 5 years. There are enough numbers here to make some general statements, if not draw out some trends or conclusions. If you are going to hunt deer or hogs, and you want to keep things inexpensive and simple, then you will be well-served simply buying the 110 grain Sierra Prohunter 110 grain soft points. They don't always penetrate to the vitals of a big feral hog, but kill deer very efficiently. They are selling as low as $ 17.00 per box. If you shoot lots of hogs, then you find out very quickly that the Barnes 85 TSX is fast, very flat (in fact flatter trajectory than many actually understand) and penetrates very well, while retaining 100% of its weight, which means that all 85 grains usually comes out the other side, even after penetrating thick bone. The 95 TTSX is even more promising, since it can open at around 1600 FPS, still retains 100% of its weight, and can be loaded modestly to perform in all existing 6.8's, even those with SAAMI chambers. I still have one with a SAAMI chamber ( I play around with subsonics in this barrel), and I am shooting 95 TTSX's through it with pretty good results. Definitely no pressure problems with some of the loads I am now testing. Sneak up on pig with 150 grain sub in the chamber.....shoot pig in head, then shuck the round out and follow up with supersonic 95 TTSX, if necessary
No 5.56 can do this. And the 110 GR TSX doesn't work on hogs as well as the 85 GR TSX? Funny, that is Bill Wilson's favorite bullet for hogs. And while I agree that the 6.8 is better than the 5.56 for hogs, I've read plenty of threads on here in which guys are taking out hogs with the 5.5) with no problems. Reasonable question. I had pressure signs earlier in load development with the 110, so I abandoned it for the shorter 85. I did not have to compress powder as much. I have killed over 450 hogs with that one bullet, and about 90% of them were DRT. This is anecdotal, of course, because I never performed a blinded, controlled study comparing the two bullets on the same hog, same weight, same distance, and same rifle. You can see the difficulty in setting up such a trial. <a href="http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php" target="_blank">http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-greet024.gif</a> BUUUDY Why is it some use a 300 mag to shoot deer when some say a 5.56 will do just fine? They could use a .308 with the same bullet as the 300mag but just 200fps slower, kind of makes ya wonder why magnums were invented doesn't it?. Lets just say there are 2 cartridges introduced by two diffferent companies at the same time, both are equally available, same caliber, apx the same cost, same accuracy but one has better terminal performance due to an extra 150fps, I wonder which one would be successful? Which would the public gravatate to? Kind of like those companies that introduce a new #1 product but then just ignores any advancements that could be made, supply isn't so great due to licensing and warnings of death is possible if you exceed 55mph, while another company promotes their #2 product, improves the product and in general encourges the public to use and get the most from their product. Soon #2 has hundreds of photos of people using and having fun with their product, even photos of road kill taken while exceeding 55mph with their 6.8. Nobody likes boring. The meek may indeed inherit the earth but until then the rest of us will live and have fun on it. We need to get together to do some terminal performance test at extreme ranges with different bullets and different velocities, just for the fun of it, between shooting hogs of course. ETA- Aren't hunters the largest single group of civilian rifle purchasers? Seems like I read that in a Shot show trade publication. This sounds great, H! When can you guys come down here? I now have a 400 yard range in the "yard." You know I can not turn down a good terminal performance test, ....can someone get us some ballistic gelatin? I have plenty of hogs, but no gel 
|
"Texas - the only state that ever kicked another country's ass."
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
| double tap |
"Texas - the only state that ever kicked another country's ass."
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
"I'll never forget September 11, 2001, those who have fought and died, or those who continue to fight to avenge the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans"
|
Originally Posted By paulosantos:
Originally Posted By pavlovwolf:
I don't know about of the other stuff, but 5 shots into 6.7 inches at 300 yards with an Eotech is enough to make me happy, 90gr tnts loaded to 2.305 oal, and 29.8gr Re7 at 2915fps from aN AR Performance 16" recon. I have so far not had any issues with any weight of bullets cycling properly with it, from 85gr up to 115s.I'm glad you are happy with it. My LMT, Bison Upper, and even the ARPerformance upper that I borrowed were all ejecting the brass at 1 o'clock with the heavy bullets and the recoil was pretty harsh for a 6.8 because of it. I use several of your load recipes with tremendous results here in GA. I've got the 110gr Hornady OTM running over 2700 fps with zero problems out of my 18" Bison recon profile upper (with some room to "up" the load if need be). How have you been, man? |
|
By no means am I trying to define what a wildcat is to anyone who has posted here. I agree that how I am using it is not accurate or even proper.
What I am saying is that when I am on a forum reading about the disadvantages of 6.8, or 6.5, the cost of cheap plinking ammo seems to be the #1 complaint. #2 is the lack of availability - which I agree and know is BS. It's teh guy who is saying that who is wrong - "Joe Fudd." He's a Walmart ammo shopper who impulsively gets a box to blast away with at the local gravel pit. To HIM, I reply it's a "wildcat" round - and that's they way it looks to him. No stock on the shelf means weird or special. These are the same guys who still think silencers and full auto are completely illegal and any AR marked "auto" by God must be, and call the cops. Poor old Joe Fudd is being sold the 6.8, but he can't see the support on the store shelf. No offense to Cold, Paul, or AR Perf intended. Glad to read all the views from all points, it helps me understand more of why I find the 6.8 a better cartridge for the AR15 platform. I'm selling stuff to build one in 6.8, sure hope none of this has overinflated my expectations for what I intend to do with it - hunt. After all, it's the only legal killing game in town.
|
|
Originally Posted By tirod:
By no means am I trying to define what a wildcat is to anyone who has posted here. I agree that how I am using it is not accurate or even proper. What I am saying is that when I am on a forum reading about the disadvantages of 6.8, or 6.5, the cost of cheap plinking ammo seems to be the #1 complaint. #2 is the lack of availability - which I agree and know is BS. It's teh guy who is saying that who is wrong - "Joe Fudd." He's a Walmart ammo shopper who impulsively gets a box to blast away with at the local gravel pit. To HIM, I reply it's a "wildcat" round - and that's they way it looks to him. No stock on the shelf means weird or special. These are the same guys who still think silencers and full auto are completely illegal and any AR marked "auto" by God must be, and call the cops. Poor old Joe Fudd is being sold the 6.8, but he can't see the support on the store shelf. No offense to Cold, Paul, or AR Perf intended. Glad to read all the views from all points, it helps me understand more of why I find the 6.8 a better cartridge for the AR15 platform. I'm selling stuff to build one in 6.8, sure hope none of this has overinflated my expectations for what I intend to do with it - hunt. After all, it's the only legal killing game in town. No offense taken on my end. Everyone in here is free and entitled to express their opinion, I do the same. In the last year, I have tapered off my responses to these threads (or just stopped replying at all) simply because, its the same old guys rehashing the same old arguments. When I realized this, I had a lot more free time to shoot .
My sincere suggestion is this, if your happy with your decision or purchase of either round, ultimately, thats all that counts. And, if you do have problems, rest assured there are still good people here willing to help solve the problem too. |
When there's lead in the air... there's hope in the heart.
<font size=3>www.68Forums.com</font id=s3>
Oh, how the ghost of you clings...
<font size=3>www.68Forums.com</font id=s3>
Oh, how the ghost of you clings...
|
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By alorton:
I've been doing some reading on these two cartridges as I'm interested in branching out from the traditional 5.56 and 7.62 AR platforms. I will be doing almost all of my shooting at 300 yards or less so extreme long ranger performance is a small issue to me. I also have other rifles that would be better suited to that application than either a 6.8 or 6.5. I would like to build 2 rifles, one an 11.5" SBR and one an 18" precision gun. Both cartridges will do, ballistically, what I would ask of them in either weapon. The advantage I see to the 6.8 is the high velocity potential in short barrels and the main advantage to me for the 6.5 is the ability to make brass from 7.62x39. Other small things advantages to me for the 6.8 are that the it can share bullets with my .270 and several interesting wildcats are surfacing using the 6.8 bolt and magazines. I also like that more companies are involved with making parts for the 6.8. I haven't made a final decision yet but I'm leaning toward the 6.8 right now. I did have a couple questions about the newer chamber designs. The SPC II chamber is to the SAAMI chamber what the 5.56 chamber is to the .223 from what I've read but I've also read alot about using a slower twist in conjunction with this chamber. In 5.56 the trend has been toward a faster (1:7) twist, not to a slower twist like in the 6.8. Does the twist really affect the pressure enough to make a difference? It would seem that keeping the versatility of a faster twist for longer bullets would be better unless there was some tangible benefit to using the slower twist. If it does affect pressure significantly, wouldn't that same be true for 5.56, making a 1:9 better for hot loads than a 1:7? I would say that your research has already paid off because you seem to have characterized the slight differences in these two cartridges accurately. I find it very cool that you can make Grendel brass from X 39 (Thanks Dave Fortier!) There is a relative versatility with the 6.8 in that the 11.5 " SBR will perform so well as to make it an excellent compliment to an 18" precision gun. This is what I use. Primarily a 12" SBR for pigs (mostly on foot, with NOD's & suppressed, ergo the short, light gun), and the 20" 12 twist, 3 groove for maximum velocity and trajectory.... "stand" hunting, deer etc. Chambers & twists: It is unwise to compare the presumed need for extreme twist rates in the 5.56, to that which is best for the 6.8. The 6.8 SPC uses lightest weight for caliber bullets. I.e, 80, 85, 90, 100, 110 and 115 grain bullets. The 130 grain bullets are not a viable round, given the design of this cartridge, and the length of that weight of bullet. Many magazines will not accept OAL's > 2.26" and you can't get even the 110 TTSX in a 43mm case without going to 2.30". Why would one ever use the fastest twist for varmint-weight-for-caliber bullets? Would you use a 1:7 with 40 grain VMAx's in the 5.56? No, one would not, unless he had the mistaken idea that somehow 1:7 must be good for everything. I have loaded many 130 grain .277 bullets, and I was not satisfied with the velocity or the terminal performance. So, it males very little sense to use a twist that can handle 130 grain bullets, when those are not even loaded routinely. There is NOT ONE 130 grain 6.8 SPC factory load on the market today. So, why do we need 1 in 10" twist? We do not, unless you are shooting a 10" SBR, or subsonics. I have a SAAMI 1 in 10 barrel, and I use it exclusively to create excess pressure so that I can get subs to cycle. It never sees supersonic rounds. When you use the combination of SPCII or DMR chambers, and a proper land: groove ratio, the pressure is lower than with more land area. Many 10 twist barrels use 6 grooves, possess more land area, and create more bearing surface contact with the bullet, increasing pressure. I have never seen a 10 twist 3 groove barrel, but I would guess it would be a good SBR barrel, especially if you used 115 grain bullets. LWRC uses 10 twist and polygonal rifling, and I have now seen their barrels handle pressure....they do it very well. When you use the SPCII chamber with an improper land: groove ratio, or excess chrome, even 1 in 11" twist might handle less pressure than a 1 in 10 with Poly or stainless barrel and good bore ratio. So, it is not simply about how many times the bullet spins on its way out. However, many benhcrest shooters agree that unnecessarily fast twists waste energy, and give lower velocities. They result in more throat erosion, because bullets may actually tend to "skip" over the first few lands before they catch. They may destroy light, thin jacketed bullets. I WOULD NOT purposely buy a very fast twist barrel, just so that I might be able to shoot heavy bullets which don't fit the case well, or are not loaded by any manufacturer. The 6.8 SPC does not require heavy bullets for its performance. The 85 grain TSX is among the most lethal killers I have ever used in the field, in my 30+ years of hunting. When you use a SPC II or DMR chamber with 12 twist and 3 grooves with the proper ratio, you can get groups like this ( below) , and velocities that some people still think (mistakenly) are unattainable. AR Performance and Noveske make 11.25 and 12 twist barrels, with 5r and 4 groove rifling, which easily handle the pressure of the 6.8 X 43 mm. LWRC's are promising, as well. I wold love to see someone else re-release a 12 twist 3 groove. If you want someone else's opinion in the industry, not just mine, ask Noveske why they chose the SPCII chamber, 4 grooves and 1 in 12" twist. Probably because therein lies the new standard. http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s233/dkred5854/ARP1.jpg can't let this one get away, You shoot pretty good for a Doc 6.5 Grendel using Bill Alexanders max loads in a 16" barrel- zeroed at 200yds drops at 300yds. due to energy being less than 1000ft lbs 300 yds is about max for taking deer or hogs with either caliber. the same temp, pressure, line of sight and program used to figure all drops in both calibers. This data figured using my normal altitude, BP and humidity settings for Colorado 100 Nosler-2600fps––drop 9.4/801 ft lbs 107 SMK-2545fps––––-drop9.5/878ft lbs 123 SMK-2472fps––––drop 9.4/1083ft lbs 120TSX-2472fps––––drop9.8/984ft lbs 6.8 SPC SSA factory ammo 16" barrel 100 Nosler-2700fps––drop9.0/809ft lbs 110 Nosler-2630fps––drop9.0/939ft lbs 110TSX-2630fps––-drop 9.5/856ft lbs ––––––added 6.8 handloads max 100 Nosler 2950fps––-drop 7.4/993ftlbs 110 Nosler 2750fps––drop8.2/1040ftlbs Available factory ammo 6.5 Grendel––––––––- Hornady-123 Amax Wolf -120 copper plated bullet or something, gunwriter will be along in a minute to lets us know ––––––-123 soft point AA––––120 Nosler ––––––-123 Lapua ––––––-129 SST ––––––-90gr TNT 6.8 SPC BVAC––––––-110 Vmax ––––––––––––––-115OTM Corbon––––––110 TTSX ––––––––––––––115 SMK ––––––––––––––115 subsonic DoubleTap––95TTSX ––––––––––––––-110 Vmax ––––––––––––––-115 FMJ ––––––––––––––-110TTSX ––––––––––––––-110 OTM Hornady––––-110 Vmax ––––––––––––––-110 OTM Hunting Shack-110 Vmax ––––––––––––––-115 OTM Rem.––––––––-115 FMJ ––––––––––––––-115 HPBT ––––––––––––––115 corelokt ––––––––––––––115SMK Sellier&Bellot-110 TTSX ––––––––––––––––-110 Vmax SSA––––––––––––85 TSX––––––––––––SSAs loads available in Commercial and Tactical velocities ––––––––––––––––90 TNT ––––––––––––––––95 frangable ––––––––––––––––97 AP ––––––––––––––––100 Nosler Accubond ––––––––––––––––110 Nosler Accubond ––––––––––––––––110 Sierra Pro hunter ––––––––––––––––110 TTSX ––––––––––––––––115 SMK ––––––––––––-95gr Barnes TTSX coming soon Manufacture of rifles/uppers ––––––––6.8 ––––––––- Barrett RRA Armalite LMT Bushmaster TC MSAR Cmmg Remington Addax POF WOA Globa Tact. LWRC Stag DPMS Noveske PRI MSTN Ruger Wilson Combat FN Robinson Arms Titan Bison AR Performance YHM Model 1 sales JT distributing 6.5 Grendel makers–––––––––– Alexander Arms Sabre Defence SSK JP Ent. Saturn- barrels only War Dog outfitters Templar Consulting could not find any on JT dist or Tactical Rilfes sites, Precision Rifles buys barrels from Les Baer and white oak to build the 264LBC and 6.8SPC 264LBC makers and ammo Les Baer Black Hills 123gr Amax AR Performance SAOD ind(Lothar Walther) |
Custom AR15, AR10, AR12 uppers and rifles-Highpower match rifles, AR Benchrest class rifles.
6BR, 6BRX, 6.5BR, 6.5x47, 6x47, 260, 7mm-08, 308, .243, 6.8, 7.62x39, 5.45x39,
http://www.AR15Performance.com
6BR, 6BRX, 6.5BR, 6.5x47, 6x47, 260, 7mm-08, 308, .243, 6.8, 7.62x39, 5.45x39,
http://www.AR15Performance.com
|
Originally Posted By AR-Performance:
6.5 Grendel makers–––––––––– Alexander Arms Sabre Defence SSK JP Ent. Saturn- barrels only You can add J&T Distributing, Precision Firearms, Templar Consulting, Tactical Rifles, and War Dog Outfitters to the list of 6.5G mfgs. |
Μολὼν λαβέ
"We'll keep clinging to our Constitution and our guns and religion, and you can keep the change." - Sarah Palin
"We'll keep clinging to our Constitution and our guns and religion, and you can keep the change." - Sarah Palin
| Great update Dogue, I'm glad to see some more builders for the 6.5G. It is a great cartridge. It's the bashing that gets me, from either side. The facts are that the 6.8 was designed to do a specific job, and does it better. The 6.5G was designed to fill another role, and does that better. I think that the .264LBC has breathed new life into the round, since there is no worry about infringement on Mr. Alexander's licensing agreements. |
|
Originally Posted By AR-Performance:
6.5 Grendel––––––––- Hornady-123 Amax Wolf -120 copper plated bullet or something, gunwriter will be along in a minute to lets us know ––––––-123 soft point AA––––120 Nosler ––––––-123 Lapua ––––––-129 SST ––––––-90gr TNT I reckon that would be me.... Wolf offers a 120 grain OTM they call a Multi-Purpose Tactical or MPT Plus AA now offers more loads 130 grain Scirocco 120 grain Barnes TSX 100 grain Berger OTM Precision Firearms is now offering 6.5mm Grendel ammo too. They list on their website: 120 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip 123 grain Lapua Scenar 123 grain Sierra MatchKing 120 grain Hornady AMAX 120 grain Sierra MatchKing 108 grain Lapua Scenar |
Looking for info on firearms, ammo, optics, gear?
Check out www.tacticalgunfan.com
A dead whale or a stove boat.
Check out www.tacticalgunfan.com
A dead whale or a stove boat.
|
6.5 Grendel makers––––––––––
Alexander Arms Sabre Defence SSK JP Ent. Saturn- barrels only War Dog outfitters Templar Consulting could not find any on JT dist or Tactical Rilfes sites, Precision Rifles buys barrels from Les Baer and white oak to build the 264LBC and 6.8SPC J&T Distributing, Tactical Rifles. Precision uses Les Baer and Sabre barrels and is licensed by AA for the Grendel (they also mfg Grendel ammo). Tactical Rifles doesn't list the Grendel on their site, that I could find, but they introduced it at Shot Show earlier this year. ETA: TR announcement and correct JT link |
Μολὼν λαβέ
"We'll keep clinging to our Constitution and our guns and religion, and you can keep the change." - Sarah Palin
"We'll keep clinging to our Constitution and our guns and religion, and you can keep the change." - Sarah Palin
|
This is a lengthy...but thought provolking... assessment of the 6.8 vs 6.5 that I found to be very detailed and well thought out.
He makes a number of excellent points that I have not seen brought up before and provides, what I believe, to be an objective review of the the strengths, weaknesses and similarities of the two rounds. Although long...its a good read and worth the time. http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2010/07/you-wanna-learn-a-little-bit-about-ballistics-the-65mm-grendel-versus-the-68mm-spc-.html Kerry |
|
Originally Posted By Owenslee:
This is a lengthy...but thought provolking... assessment of the 6.8 vs 6.5 that I found to be very detailed and well thought out. He makes a number of excellent points that I have not seen brought up before and provides, what I believe, to be an objective review of the the strengths, weaknesses and similarities of the two rounds. Although long...its a good read and worth the time. http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2010/07/you-wanna-learn-a-little-bit-about-ballistics-the-65mm-grendel-versus-the-68mm-spc-.html Kerry His math concerning the external ballistics of these two cartridges does not add up. That said, I agree the cartridges are very similar inside 200 yards. |
Looking for info on firearms, ammo, optics, gear?
Check out www.tacticalgunfan.com
A dead whale or a stove boat.
Check out www.tacticalgunfan.com
A dead whale or a stove boat.
|
Anyone that wants to find the truth can use any exterior ballistics program to figure it out for themselves.
A higher velocity lower BC bullet can perform better than a higher BC but slower bullet out to it's USEFUL range. 200fps will overcome a huge BC difference. Most hunters are not using AR15 cartridges to shoot game animals at 600yds, paper maybe sometimes. Internet fantasy of shooting 1000yds is just that, a fantasy, I'll bet the majority of shooters never shoot past 200. |
Custom AR15, AR10, AR12 uppers and rifles-Highpower match rifles, AR Benchrest class rifles.
6BR, 6BRX, 6.5BR, 6.5x47, 6x47, 260, 7mm-08, 308, .243, 6.8, 7.62x39, 5.45x39,
http://www.AR15Performance.com
6BR, 6BRX, 6.5BR, 6.5x47, 6x47, 260, 7mm-08, 308, .243, 6.8, 7.62x39, 5.45x39,
http://www.AR15Performance.com
|
Originally Posted By AR-Performance:
Most hunters are not using AR15 cartridges to shoot game animals at 600yds, paper maybe sometimes. Internet fantasy of shooting 1000yds is just that, a fantasy, I'll bet the majority of shooters never shoot past 200. If thats the case, use a 100 grain bulllet in the Grendel, kick it out at 2900 FPS or so, and go home happy! 
Maybe the majority never do, but I haven't shot at less than 200 for a year, apart from some penetration testing. And the Grendel, with its "slower" but better sectionally dense bullets, sure penetrates better than the 6.8 loads I have seen. (I'll be the first to admit that those loads have simply been whatever the guys shooting at the range happened to be shooting!) But face it, these two are brothers ballistically, with minimal difference out to 300-400 yards, where the Grendels advantage begins to take over. I just have yet to see anything the 6.8 can do that the Grendel can't come close to or equal, but after 400 yards the Grendel does lots the 6.8 can't. Bill |
|
Originally Posted By Owenslee:
This is a lengthy...but thought provolking... assessment of the 6.8 vs 6.5 that I found to be very detailed and well thought out. He makes a number of excellent points that I have not seen brought up before and provides, what I believe, to be an objective review of the the strengths, weaknesses and similarities of the two rounds. Although long...its a good read and worth the time. http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2010/07/you-wanna-learn-a-little-bit-about-ballistics-the-65mm-grendel-versus-the-68mm-spc-.html Kerry That write up seems pretty biased to me. He deliberately set the shooting parameters to favor the 6.8 as much as possible. He also didn't consider wind drift (which favors the Grendel) or barrel length (which favors the SPC) anywhere. I still haven't decided which way to go and I've been thinking on this for some time. So at this point I have no dog in the fight so to speak. I think the reason I've had trouble deciding is that they are so similar. I don't shoot much beyond 300 yards and I like short barreled AR's so the 6.8 looks like a good option but I'm thinking of building a .260 Remington which would share bullets with the 6.5G so I'm still sitting on the fence. |
We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions. --Ronald Reagan
|
I read the link two days ago. One of the major points the author makes is to compare apples to apples. Barrel lengths and bullet weights do distort the results and cannot allow a valid comparison. Using the same lengths and weights means just the bullet itself is the variable. Two things then become obvious - the diameter does make a difference, and the length does too. Both affect the speed and flight of the bullet.
Another point of the author's discussion is that BC isn't an actual physical attribute that is better if it's higher. Rather, it's a number calculated to reflect how it behaves. It, in and of itself, cannot make a bullet fly further, leap tall buildings in a single bound, or make time reverse. How ballistic coefficients work are impeded by other factors - which can makes the difference between two calibers a lot less than it seems. The idea that both calibers have drop figures at the same ranges within a few inches will make some uncomfortable, but there it is. Making a valid comparison turns up things like that. I found the author's conclusions somewhat disappointing in another way - it showed the cartridges to be lot more the same in performance than either of the originators may have intended. That does have a reason - both are improvements on an existing intermediate cartridge and have to conform to existing limits in overall length, and type of action. That they can be biased to opposite extremes is exactly what should be happening - that's where the optimum applications are, not in duplicating the same performance. There's no more point to attempting a 24" 6.8 SPC for 600m shooting anymore than a 10" SBR 6.5G for PDW use. The design of the cartridges then comes into play to the detriment of the attempt. Rather, the 6.5G holds a 600M record, and the 6.8 SPC is being adopted in a 10" PDW for Jordan. Asserting either one is superior overall is more a ploy of those who need the emotional support. Why they would choose anything less than .50 BMG is what they should be defending. 
|
|
I've built two rifle with 20" barrels. One of each caliber. Both shoot very well at my range which goes out to 1,000 yards. Up to 600 yards both cartridges shoot the same. I tried to keep the bullets at the same weight of just around 100 grains. All loads were the most popular/ most used to reload for these cartridges. All of the scientific post have been made on these two rounds and what they can and cannot do. About the only real advantage I can see is that at long range, the 6.5 Grendel will handle a longer heavier bullet over the 6.8. As this was the design of the cartridge, it lives up to it.
If the legal ramifications of the 6.5 Grendel were not so severe, I'm sure the cartridge would be much more popular than the 6.8 with long range shooters. On paper you cannot see any difference at 300 meters. Recoil is about the same. Brass life is about the same. It really comes down to what the shooter wants to own, and at what range they shoot. My opinion is that the 6.8 will win in the contest of which cartridge may/will be adopted. Not so much for down range performance as it is the legal aspect of copy written names and ammo weight. I do grab the 6.5 Grendel more than the 6.8. The only real reason is I love my .22PPC based on the .220 Russian cartridge, and I know how well the short,fat 100%+ loading density works for me in my rifles. Old habits are hard to break. what ever you end up with, your going to be happy with the results you get. Both are outstanding cartridges. |
6.8SPC or 6.5G? Which one should I buy? (Page 8 of 14)
AR Sponsor
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter