User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/14/2017 3:01:23 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
140gr Nosler Custom Comps 1.290". I decided to throw some of these together to bring with me Friday to see how they do when they go subsonic .....for shits and giggles. Using a different primer so they may not be worth a damn. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
As to 140s in the AR15, the projectile lengths don't rule out being mag-fed, like: 140gr Hornady SP at 1.252" vs. a 123gr AMAX at 1.241" 140gr SST 1.396" 160gr Hornady Round Nose at 1.26" 144gr Lapua FMJBT 1.281" 156gr Norma Oryx 1.295" 140gr North Fork 1.330" 140gr Nosler Accubond 1.368" 140gr Nosler Ballistic Tip 1.350" 140gr Partition 1.290" 140gr Remington Core Lokt 140gr Sierra Game King 1.262" 140gr Speer Hot Cor 140gr Swift A-Frame 1.247" 140gr Woodleigh PP SN 1.240" 160gr Woodleigh PP SN 1.381" I decided to throw some of these together to bring with me Friday to see how they do when they go subsonic .....for shits and giggles. Using a different primer so they may not be worth a damn. let us know how they do!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2017 3:03:30 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think you should change your user name to LRRPF65G  I keep thinking his name is LRSU |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2017 3:16:24 PM EDT
[#3]
Doublestar/JT might have 4 different 16" hbar barrels available right now for $99-125 with or without fsb and with or without chrome lining.* You just have to call instead of order from website.
No bolts though. Anderson has bolts and barrels in stock right now as well. *no affiliation to either besides proximity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2017 8:19:25 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Doublestar/JT might have 4 different 16" hbar barrels available right now for $99-125 with or without fsb and with or without chrome lining.* You just have to call instead of order from website. No bolts though. Anderson has bolts and barrels in stock right now as well. *no affiliation to either besides proximity. Some sort of sale or they seconds? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 10:15:43 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Some sort of sale or they seconds? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Doublestar/JT might have 4 different 16" hbar barrels available right now for $99-125 with or without fsb and with or without chrome lining.* You just have to call instead of order from website. No bolts though. Anderson has bolts and barrels in stock right now as well. *no affiliation to either besides proximity. Some sort of sale or they seconds? I just ordered one. You have to tell them 16" HBAR and that you read online it was 99 to 125. Damn, now I have to go buy 6.5 reloading dies, powder, projectiles, another upper, scope, bolt $$$$$$$$$$ it just got expensive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 10:32:04 AM EDT
[#6]
I don't feel like reading through 25 pages. That being said. The group of guys I hog and deer hunt will all run 6.5 Grendel. We have barrels from 12.5 up to 24 and we use them all the time. I run my 12.5 for hogs with a Flir RS32 and it is a pig slaying machine. I run a 18 for white tail most of the time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 11:00:49 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't feel like reading through 25 pages. That being said. The group of guys I hog and deer hunt will all run 6.5 Grendel. We have barrels from 12.5 up to 24 and we use them all the time. I run my 12.5 for hogs with a Flir RS32 and it is a pig slaying machine. I run a 18 for white tail most of the time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 11:33:37 AM EDT
[#8]
The LGS sold the 6.5G barrel/BCG combo but told me that they had another one coming in. This one had an adjustable gas block. Had just cleaned out the safe of the tired iron that was in it and used the consignment check to prepay for it. All I'll need is the rail and gas tube to be done.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 11:55:07 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The LGS sold the 6.5G barrel/BCG combo but told me that they had another one coming in. This one had an adjustable gas block. Had just cleaned out the safe of the tired iron that was in it and used the consignment check to prepay for it. All I'll need is the rail and gas tube to be done. Awesome I need to get on this |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 12:13:33 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What bullet do you use? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 12:36:33 PM EDT
[#11]
horrendous business sense of the patent owner
Less rounds per lb than 5.56 Worse barrel life than 5.56 Worse recoil than 5.56 Worse parts wear than 5.56 Heavier rifle needed than 5.56 Under 200m terminal effectiveness much the same as 5.56 Average engagements are no where near 800m where the advantage kicks in Not standardized with other systems like 7.62x51 .... A fantastic deer hunting round but little else... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 12:58:52 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
horrendous business sense of the patent owner Less rounds per lb than 5.56 Worse barrel life than 5.56 Worse recoil than 5.56 Worse parts wear than 5.56 Heavier rifle needed than 5.56 Under 200m terminal effectiveness much the same as 5.56 Average engagements are no where near 800m where the advantage kicks in Not standardized with other systems like 7.62x51 .... A fantastic deer hunting round but little else... You know how I know you didn't read anything before posting? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 1:03:26 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You know how I know you didn't read anything before posting? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
horrendous business sense of the patent owner Less rounds per lb than 5.56 Worse barrel life than 5.56 Worse recoil than 5.56 Worse parts wear than 5.56 Heavier rifle needed than 5.56 Under 200m terminal effectiveness much the same as 5.56 Average engagements are no where near 800m where the advantage kicks in Not standardized with other systems like 7.62x51 .... A fantastic deer hunting round but little else... You know how I know you didn't read anything before posting? I honestly thought the next post would be "LOL, WUT?" |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 1:10:51 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I honestly thought the next post would be "LOL, WUT?" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
horrendous business sense of the patent owner Less rounds per lb than 5.56 Worse barrel life than 5.56 Worse recoil than 5.56 Worse parts wear than 5.56 Heavier rifle needed than 5.56 Under 200m terminal effectiveness much the same as 5.56 Average engagements are no where near 800m where the advantage kicks in Not standardized with other systems like 7.62x51 .... A fantastic deer hunting round but little else... You know how I know you didn't read anything before posting? I honestly thought the next post would be "LOL, WUT?" Also fitting |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 1:44:40 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not standardized with other systems like 7.62x51 LOL WUT? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 1:49:52 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL WUT? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not standardized with other systems like 7.62x51 LOL WUT? 
Ain't nothing standardized about 762x51 |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 3:05:06 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ain't nothing standardized about 762x51 Further, why would an AR-15 based chambering want anything standardized with the 7.62x51? It's a stupid statement on every aspect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 4:03:54 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
horrendous business sense of the patent owner Less rounds per lb than 5.56 Worse barrel life than 5.56 Worse recoil than 5.56 Worse parts wear than 5.56 Heavier rifle needed than 5.56 Under 200m terminal effectiveness much the same as 5.56 Average engagements are no where near 800m where the advantage kicks in Not standardized with other systems like 7.62x51 .... A fantastic deer hunting round but little else... What in thee fuck..... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 4:30:38 PM EDT
[#19]
Good to see people are emotionally-attached...
Yes the OP was why isn't it more common, and lists major AR manufacturers .... So pointing out disadvantages to the 5.56 seems pretty reasonable.... as that's its main competitor Point was missed about the 7.62 apparently... ... that people who want something more powerful tend to go with a much cheaper 7.62x51 rifle in the first place
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 4:35:55 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good to see people are emotionally-attached... Yes the OP was why isn't it more common, and lists major AR manufacturers .... So pointing out disadvantages to the 5.56 seems pretty reasonable.... as that's its main competitor Point was missed about the 7.62 apparently... ... that people who want something more powerful tend to go with a much cheaper 7.62x51 rifle in the first place Go look at close range (sub 200) performance from an 11" barrel and then look at the abilities (drop and drift) at 1k with something like an 18" barrel Who EVER said it competes against 556? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 4:49:01 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Go look at close range (sub 200) performance from an 11" barrel and then look at the abilities (drop and drift) at 1k with something like an 18" barrel Who EVER said it competes against 556? Yes you bring a good point for short barrels, and yes of course it dominates at 1k. I know the 6.5 has a lot of advantages, I was just pointing it reasons it hasn't been more widely adopted All I'm saying is people tend to go to common and cheap calibers when available for a given task, there's a reason people hunt deer with a 223 or 308 all the time (because it's cheap and plentiful thanks to widespread adoption) That's all I'm saying, yes obviously the 6.5 would absolutely rock as a DMR for instance |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 4:55:54 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good to see people are emotionally-attached... Yes the OP was why isn't it more common, and lists major AR manufacturers .... So pointing out disadvantages to the 5.56 seems pretty reasonable.... as that's its main competitor Point was missed about the 7.62 apparently... ... that people who want something more powerful tend to go with a much cheaper 7.62x51 rifle in the first place Looking at Ammoseek.com, steel case ammo for both, Grendel is 7cpr cheaper than 308. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 5:08:38 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Looking at Ammoseek.com, steel case ammo for both, Grendel is 7cpr cheaper than 308. Yea that's true for steel but I was looking at brass 45 cents vs 86 cents (I don't trust steel in an AR  )
And that's also not taking into consideration the price per f/lb of energy. Where the 308 is much stronger |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 5:11:14 PM EDT
[#24]
If Americans weren't culturally wowed by big numbers, 300win mag wouldn't exist. It's a fair point.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 5:13:28 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yea that's true for steel but I was looking at brass 45 cents vs 86 cents (I don't trust steel in an AR )
And that's also not taking into consideration the price per f/lb of energy. Where the 308 is much stronger Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Looking at Ammoseek.com, steel case ammo for both, Grendel is 7cpr cheaper than 308. Yea that's true for steel but I was looking at brass 45 cents vs 86 cents (I don't trust steel in an AR )
And that's also not taking into consideration the price per f/lb of energy. Where the 308 is much stronger 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 5:14:21 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes you bring a good point for short barrels, and yes of course it dominates at 1k. I know the 6.5 has a lot of advantages, I was just pointing it reasons it hasn't been more widely adopted All I'm saying is people tend to go to common and cheap calibers when available for a given task, there's a reason people hunt deer with a 223 or 308 all the time (because it's cheap and plentiful thanks to widespread adoption) That's all I'm saying, yes obviously the 6.5 would absolutely rock as a DMR for instance 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 5:21:40 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes you bring a good point for short barrels, and yes of course it dominates at 1k. I know the 6.5 has a lot of advantages, I was just pointing it reasons it hasn't been more widely adopted All I'm saying is people tend to go to common and cheap calibers when available for a given task, there's a reason people hunt deer with a 223 or 308 all the time (because it's cheap and plentiful thanks to widespread adoption) That's all I'm saying, yes obviously the 6.5 would absolutely rock as a DMR for instance Plinking ammo can be had for around 25cpr, the difference between steel cased 6.5 and 5.56 is negligible. Hunting/match ammo is around $1/rd. Right in the same ballpark as .308. The real cost is building an AR in something other than 5.56. However the grendel forum's group buys are driving the cost down there too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 5:34:16 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yea that's true for steel but I was looking at brass 45 cents vs 86 cents (I don't trust steel in an AR )
And that's also not taking into consideration the price per f/lb of energy. Where the 308 is much stronger |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 6:51:38 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
horrendous business sense of the patent owner Less rounds per lb than 5.56 Worse barrel life than 5.56 Worse recoil than 5.56 Worse parts wear than 5.56 Heavier rifle needed than 5.56 Under 200m terminal effectiveness much the same as 5.56 Average engagements are no where near 800m where the advantage kicks in Not standardized with other systems like 7.62x51 .... A fantastic deer hunting round but little else... OK I'll bite. There was no patent, there was a trademark and it proved the right decision until a major company, in this case Hornady would SAAMI it. If he had not protected the chamber design it would have never been made SAAMI. 1. Yes, it weighs more than 5.56 but less than 7.62x51 2. No barrel life is longer than 5.56. 3. Recoil is heavier than 5.56 but less than 7.62x51 4. Parts wear is going to be less than 5.56 as Grendel is a lower pressure cartridge. 5. Weight is going to be about the same between 5.56 and 6.5 Grendel, AA offered a 5 pound rifle. 6. Terminal performance under 200 yards is not the same as 5.56, terminal performance of 6.5mm Grendel is drastically better, especially on big game. Grendel flattens things. 7. The advantage of the Grendel over the 5.56 starts at the muzzle not at 800 yards. It launches a heavier payload and has more retained energy at 300 yards than the 5.56 has at the muzzle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 6:56:18 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes you bring a good point for short barrels, and yes of course it dominates at 1k. I know the 6.5 has a lot of advantages, I was just pointing it reasons it hasn't been more widely adopted All I'm saying is people tend to go to common and cheap calibers when available for a given task, there's a reason people hunt deer with a 223 or 308 all the time (because it's cheap and plentiful thanks to widespread adoption) That's all I'm saying, yes obviously the 6.5 would absolutely rock as a DMR for instance Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Go look at close range (sub 200) performance from an 11" barrel and then look at the abilities (drop and drift) at 1k with something like an 18" barrel Who EVER said it competes against 556? Yes you bring a good point for short barrels, and yes of course it dominates at 1k. I know the 6.5 has a lot of advantages, I was just pointing it reasons it hasn't been more widely adopted All I'm saying is people tend to go to common and cheap calibers when available for a given task, there's a reason people hunt deer with a 223 or 308 all the time (because it's cheap and plentiful thanks to widespread adoption) That's all I'm saying, yes obviously the 6.5 would absolutely rock as a DMR for instance You are spot on when it comes to cheap and common. Agreed. Why the Wolf steel case ammo has been an absolute gamer changer for this cartridge. It has single-handed changed the entire market. Cheap ammo has a way of doing that. Keep in mind though how new the Grendel is compared to the .223 and .308. It wasn't very long ago you would be laughed at for hunting deer with a .223 Rem and it is not even legal to do so in some states. The Grendel on the other hand has worked well on elk..LOL |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 7:29:02 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OK I'll bite. There was no patent, there was a trademark and it proved the right decision until a major company, in this case Hornady would SAAMI it. If he had not protected the chamber design it would have never been made SAAMI. 1. Yes, it weighs more than 5.56 but less than 7.62x51 2. No barrel life is longer than 5.56. 3. Recoil is heavier than 5.56 but less than 7.62x51 4. Parts wear is going to be less than 5.56 as Grendel is a lower pressure cartridge. 5. Weight is going to be about the same between 5.56 and 6.5 Grendel, AA offered a 5 pound rifle. 6. Terminal performance under 200 yards is not the same as 5.56, terminal performance of 6.5mm Grendel is drastically better, especially on big game. Grendel flattens things. 7. The advantage of the Grendel over the 5.56 starts at the muzzle not at 800 yards. It launches a heavier payload and has more retained energy at 300 yards than the 5.56 has at the muzzle. Yes it's lighter than 7.62 but doesn't do the same role The 7.62 was accepted by the military because it sends a lot of f/lb with very long barrel life And yes fair enough on terminal performance if were talking medium-big game (I meant more for general purpose). I just mean the 5.56 under 200m is a nasty lil bastard lol ... Parts wear no way because the pressure is similar but the recoil impulse isn't The same way that 9mm and 40 are both 35000psi rounds but the 40 is much harder on parts because the pressure is held longer and with a stronger recoil impulse ... I guess what I mean is that there are two great rounds just below and above the 6.5
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 7:38:53 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good to see people are emotionally-attached... Yes the OP was why isn't it more common, and lists major AR manufacturers .... So pointing out disadvantages to the 5.56 seems pretty reasonable.... as that's its main competitor Point was missed about the 7.62 apparently... ... that people who want something more powerful tend to go with a much cheaper 7.62x51 rifle in the first place So many levels, and you're wrong on most of them. Five years ago, before we got the Wolf steel, you may have had a point. Everybody was hanging fire, waiting for that promise, and the Russians took their good ol' time bringing it to market. The ONLY reason 5.56 is cheaper is NATO and the ginormous pool of ARs that never see anything beyond Walmart shelf stats. That almost invariably means 5.56/.223. .308 is much the same. No non-military chambering can hope (in brass, at least) to match them for price. If price point of the ammo is your only metric and you refuse to use steel in spite of just about everybody else using it in just about everything else, then, yes, 6.5 makes no real sense. I'm not sure where you're getting your stats from, but I suspect they're largely from the very early rifles with the 'type 1' chamber and bolt. Modern 6.5 doesn't have any of those problems. Yes the ammo is heavier You're firing a projectile that's twice the weight of the M855 in exchange for all of the benefits that larger bullet conveys. The rifle itself doesn't weigh noticeably more than its 5.56 counterpart. And, seriously, unless you're Force Recon or LRRP, is the weight difference seriously an issue? I mean, seriously? It's certainly lighter than .308.
These days, more and more manufacturers are making barrels and rifles for the 6.5, Federal has started making ammo, Wolf is making steel ammo that's VERY competitive with 5.56 and 7.62x39. As time passes and more people jump on the train, more ammo manufacturers will cater to the demand and prices will drop. In a couple of years, it'll (with the exception of the cheap Wolf) be the same price as everything else you see on the shelves of your local sporting goods store. If only the same could be said for the .300aacblk... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 7:41:43 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So many levels, and you're wrong on most of them. Five years ago, before we got the Wolf steel, you may have had a point. Everybody was hanging fire, waiting for that promise, and the Russians took their good ol' time bringing it to market. The ONLY reason 5.56 is cheaper is NATO and the ginormous pool of ARs that never see anything beyond Walmart shelf stats. That almost invariably means 5.56/.223. .308 is much the same. No non-military chambering can hope (in brass, at least) to match them for price. If price point of the ammo is your only metric and you refuse to use steel in spite of just about everybody else using it in just about everything else, then, yes, 6.5 makes no real sense. I'm not sure where you're getting your stats from, but I suspect they're largely from the very early rifles with the 'type 1' chamber and bolt. Modern 6.5 doesn't have any of those problems. Yes the ammo is heavier You're firing a projectile that's twice the weight of the M855 in exchange for all of the benefits that larger bullet conveys. The rifle itself doesn't weigh noticeably more than its 5.56 counterpart. And, seriously, unless you're Force Recon or LLRP, is the weight difference seriously an issue? I mean, seriously? It's certainly lighter than .308.
These days, more and more manufacturers are making barrels and rifles for the 6.5, Federal has started making ammo, Wolf is making steel ammo that's VERY competitive with 5.56 and 7.62x39. As time passes and more people jump on the train, more ammo manufacturers will cater to the demand and prices will drop. In a couple of years, it'll (with the exception of the cheap Wolf) be the same price as everything else you see on the shelves of your local sporting goods store. If only the same could be said for the .300aacblk... .300 BLK is a ridiculously narrow niche round whereas 6.5 Grendel is an almost do-anything round. Apples and orangutans. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 7:53:53 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes it's lighter than 7.62 but doesn't do the same role The 7.62 was accepted by the military because it sends a lot of f/lb with very long barrel life And yes fair enough on terminal performance if were talking medium-big game (I meant more for general purpose). I just mean the 5.56 under 200m is a nasty lil bastard lol ... Parts wear no way because the pressure is similar but the recoil impulse isn't The same way that 9mm and 40 are both 35000psi rounds but the 40 is much harder on parts because the pressure is held longer and with a stronger recoil impulse ... I guess what I mean is that there are two great rounds just below and above the 6.5 You talk like the .308 went head to head with the 6.5 in military trials. The .308 was adopted in 1959. AT THAT TIME, it was a breakthrough because it performed just about as well as the longer .30-06 in a slightly shorter platform. And still, even then, there was controversy, since most nations were looking for something with a smaller bore, while the US stuck stubbornly to our .30 cal doctrine. Things have advanced just a little bit since 1959. 6.5 bullets perform markedly better than 7.62 even in .308 sized cases. The 6.5 grendel was designed from the ground up to get as much benefit from that as possible while still being short enough to get into the mag well/chamber of an AR15. Why an AR15? Because 6 pounds is less than 9 pounds, the recoil, and particularly the muzzle blast from an 18" barrel is substantially less. Seriously, I, too, was once a .308 fanboy. I sold my G3 to finance a 6.5. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 7:57:39 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
.300 BLK is a ridiculously narrow niche round whereas 6.5 Grendel is an almost do-anything round. Apples and orangutans. I know. Hence my sadness. I've inured myself to reloading for the blk. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 8:05:41 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You talk like the .308 went head to head with the 6.5 in military trials. The .308 was adopted in 1959. AT THAT TIME, it was a breakthrough because it performed just about as well as the longer .30-06 in a slightly shorter platform. And still, even then, there was controversy, since most nations were looking for something with a smaller bore, while the US stuck stubbornly to our .30 cal doctrine. Things have advanced just a little bit since 1959. 6.5 bullets perform markedly better than 7.62 even in .308 sized cases. The 6.5 grendel was designed from the ground up to get as much benefit from that as possible while still being short enough to get into the mag well/chamber of an AR15. Why an AR15? Because 6 pounds is less than 9 pounds, the recoil, and particularly the muzzle blast from an 18" barrel is substantially less. Seriously, I, too, was once a .308 fanboy. I sold my G3 to finance a 6.5. True, and now you got me thinking.... (And I'm genuinely curious I don't mean this snarky) What kind of barrel life difference are we looking at for 6.5 vs 7.62? Best info I could find was around 5k for the 6.5 and 9k for the 7.62 Though I read that some could get as much as 30k with 7.62 with mediocre accuracy
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 8:19:32 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
True, and now you got me thinking.... (And I'm genuinely curious I don't mean this snarky) What kind of barrel life difference are we looking at for 6.5 vs 7.62? Best info I could find was around 5k for the 6.5 and 9k for the 7.62 Though I read that some could get as much as 30k with 7.62 with mediocre accuracy as it appears you have not done so, I recommend you read the whole thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 10:28:09 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
True, and now you got me thinking.... (And I'm genuinely curious I don't mean this snarky) What kind of barrel life difference are we looking at for 6.5 vs 7.62? Best info I could find was around 5k for the 6.5 and 9k for the 7.62 Though I read that some could get as much as 30k with 7.62 with mediocre accuracy The 5k figure is old, and (if I read it correctly) partially the result of the old chamber/bolt, and partly due to the nature of shooters of 'experimental' or new cartridges where they were testing the boundaries and fire reaming throats. I do not have the current expected life span of the 6.5 grendel handy, but I expect it won't take long for somebody to give you a definitive answer. As has been pointed out, it's also been mentioned earlier in this thread, which is well worth reading in its entirety. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 10:33:40 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes it's lighter than 7.62 but doesn't do the same role The 7.62 was accepted by the military because it sends a lot of f/lb with very long barrel life And yes fair enough on terminal performance if were talking medium-big game (I meant more for general purpose). I just mean the 5.56 under 200m is a nasty lil bastard lol ... Parts wear no way because the pressure is similar but the recoil impulse isn't The same way that 9mm and 40 are both 35000psi rounds but the 40 is much harder on parts because the pressure is held longer and with a stronger recoil impulse ... I guess what I mean is that there are two great rounds just below and above the 6.5 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
OK I'll bite. There was no patent, there was a trademark and it proved the right decision until a major company, in this case Hornady would SAAMI it. If he had not protected the chamber design it would have never been made SAAMI. 1. Yes, it weighs more than 5.56 but less than 7.62x51 2. No barrel life is longer than 5.56. 3. Recoil is heavier than 5.56 but less than 7.62x51 4. Parts wear is going to be less than 5.56 as Grendel is a lower pressure cartridge. 5. Weight is going to be about the same between 5.56 and 6.5 Grendel, AA offered a 5 pound rifle. 6. Terminal performance under 200 yards is not the same as 5.56, terminal performance of 6.5mm Grendel is drastically better, especially on big game. Grendel flattens things. 7. The advantage of the Grendel over the 5.56 starts at the muzzle not at 800 yards. It launches a heavier payload and has more retained energy at 300 yards than the 5.56 has at the muzzle. Yes it's lighter than 7.62 but doesn't do the same role The 7.62 was accepted by the military because it sends a lot of f/lb with very long barrel life And yes fair enough on terminal performance if were talking medium-big game (I meant more for general purpose). I just mean the 5.56 under 200m is a nasty lil bastard lol ... Parts wear no way because the pressure is similar but the recoil impulse isn't The same way that 9mm and 40 are both 35000psi rounds but the 40 is much harder on parts because the pressure is held longer and with a stronger recoil impulse ... I guess what I mean is that there are two great rounds just below and above the 6.5 Your information is very dated and biased. .30 cal bullets are absolutely terrible, they're simply too fat to be aerodynamic. Go to a ballistic calculator and run .308 vs .243 win vs 6.5 creedmor vs 6.5 Grendel and see what kind of numbers you're looking at. In similar length cartridges .308 gets absolutely smoked by 6mm 6.5mm 6.8mm 7mm. In shorter cartridges vs .308 you get extremely comparable numbers. The only thing .308 has going for it and HAD at the time too btw, Military studies BEFORE WWII recommend a smaller diameter (.276 Penderson to be exact), is that it's not 30-06 and we have alot of .30 cal components available. Don't kid yourself that .308 is in anyway a good cartridge, just about the only thing it's got going for it is it's ubiquity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 12:05:21 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know. Hence my sadness. I've inured myself to reloading for the blk. It's funny, some buddies read all the .300 BLK nonsense in the gun rags and ask me "hey man why don't you have one? I'm gonna build one next!" Then they tell me how it shoots through Mack trucks quoted than a mouse fart and expands like a Minie ball on impact... And then I go on a 20 minute diatribe about how if I wanted a round that did what .300 BLK does id pull bullets from wolf AK rounds and reload them with 200 grain pills and fire them through my VZ-58 and enjoy sucking at life. Hell, You're better off ballistically with a lever action .45LC Marlin and hot loads than a .300 BLK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 1:26:56 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's funny, some buddies read all the .300 BLK nonsense in the gun rags and ask me "hey man why don't you have one? I'm gonna build one next!" Then they tell me how it shoots through Mack trucks quoted than a mouse fart and expands like a Minie ball on impact... And then I go on a 20 minute diatribe about how if I wanted a round that did what .300 BLK does id pull bullets from wolf AK rounds and reload them with 200 grain pills and fire them through my VZ-58 and enjoy sucking at life. Hell, You're better off ballistically with a lever action .45LC Marlin and hot loads than a .300 BLK. I've built 3 300blk rifles with friends, and talked to a few others about it. I still have no desire for one. I think if I have a Grendel in 12" with an Acog, 16" with a 1-8x, and an 18" with a 16ish power optic, that's about perfect for all my variant needs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 2:23:30 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's funny, some buddies read all the .300 BLK nonsense in the gun rags and ask me "hey man why don't you have one? I'm gonna build one next!" Then they tell me how it shoots through Mack trucks quoted than a mouse fart and expands like a Minie ball on impact... And then I go on a 20 minute diatribe about how if I wanted a round that did what .300 BLK does id pull bullets from wolf AK rounds and reload them with 200 grain pills and fire them through my VZ-58 and enjoy sucking at life. Hell, You're better off ballistically with a lever action .45LC Marlin and hot loads than a .300 BLK. I like the idea of being able to shoot relatively quiet subsonics, or relatively effective supers with only a mag change. I also find it amusing that the ballistics are almost a dead match for the 7.92kurtz that the original STG was chambered for. It tickles my "everything old is new again" funnybone. What I don't find amusing is the near total lack of sub $1 per round ammo, and the very small variety and high price of even just bullets for reloading. I'm trying to figure out how stupid it might be to hard cast some heavy lead bullets for it. I've never contemplated shooting lead out of an AR, and I have no idea whether it's even feasible. Fortunately, I have a few options and some of those chamber very cheap ammo for plinking. Maybe by the time the HPA finally passes the variety will be greater. Meanwhile, I've got the 6.5. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 2:42:21 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
True, and now you got me thinking.... (And I'm genuinely curious I don't mean this snarky) What kind of barrel life difference are we looking at for 6.5 vs 7.62? Best info I could find was around 5k for the 6.5 and 9k for the 7.62 Though I read that some could get as much as 30k with 7.62 with mediocre accuracy Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You talk like the .308 went head to head with the 6.5 in military trials. The .308 was adopted in 1959. AT THAT TIME, it was a breakthrough because it performed just about as well as the longer .30-06 in a slightly shorter platform. And still, even then, there was controversy, since most nations were looking for something with a smaller bore, while the US stuck stubbornly to our .30 cal doctrine. Things have advanced just a little bit since 1959. 6.5 bullets perform markedly better than 7.62 even in .308 sized cases. The 6.5 grendel was designed from the ground up to get as much benefit from that as possible while still being short enough to get into the mag well/chamber of an AR15. Why an AR15? Because 6 pounds is less than 9 pounds, the recoil, and particularly the muzzle blast from an 18" barrel is substantially less. Seriously, I, too, was once a .308 fanboy. I sold my G3 to finance a 6.5. True, and now you got me thinking.... (And I'm genuinely curious I don't mean this snarky) What kind of barrel life difference are we looking at for 6.5 vs 7.62? Best info I could find was around 5k for the 6.5 and 9k for the 7.62 Though I read that some could get as much as 30k with 7.62 with mediocre accuracy Exactly what 6.5 Grendel chambered rifle, and how many rounds of 6.5 Grendel, have you fired? I'm going to bet ZERO.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 2:58:25 AM EDT
[#44]
You can fit it into a standard lower, GAME CHANGA for those who can't afford a $110 aero M5 lower
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 3:57:56 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good to see people are emotionally-attached... Yes the OP was why isn't it more common, and lists major AR manufacturers .... So pointing out disadvantages to the 5.56 seems pretty reasonable.... as that's its main competitor Point was missed about the 7.62 apparently... ... that people who want something more powerful tend to go with a much cheaper 7.62x51 rifle in the first place Much cheaper? Not really, unless we're talking about DPMS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 8:15:50 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I like the idea of being able to shoot relatively quiet subsonics, or relatively effective supers with only a mag change. I also find it amusing that the ballistics are almost a dead match for the 7.92kurtz that the original STG was chambered for. It tickles my "everything old is new again" funnybone. What I don't find amusing is the near total lack of sub $1 per round ammo, and the very small variety and high price of even just bullets for reloading. I'm trying to figure out how stupid it might be to hard cast some heavy lead bullets for it. I've never contemplated shooting lead out of an AR, and I have no idea whether it's even feasible. Fortunately, I have a few options and some of those chamber very cheap ammo for plinking. Maybe by the time the HPA finally passes the variety will be greater. Meanwhile, I've got the 6.5. As far as the super loads go, I really don't see any difference between them and 7.62x39 loads, which I can get for stupid cheap steel, or I can buy high end hunting Ammo that actually works. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 8:23:40 AM EDT
[#47]
You guys got me all disappointed about my new 300BO build.
Good thing I'm also doing the 12" Grendel. Get both |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 8:55:33 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Your information is very dated and biased. .30 cal bullets are absolutely terrible, they're simply too fat to be aerodynamic. Go to a ballistic calculator and run .308 vs .243 win vs 6.5 creedmor vs 6.5 Grendel and see what kind of numbers you're looking at. In similar length cartridges .308 gets absolutely smoked by 6mm 6.5mm 6.8mm 7mm. In shorter cartridges vs .308 you get extremely comparable numbers. The only thing .308 has going for it and HAD at the time too btw, Military studies BEFORE WWII recommend a smaller diameter (.276 Penderson to be exact), is that it's not 30-06 and we have alot of .30 cal components available. Don't kid yourself that .308 is in anyway a good cartridge, just about the only thing it's got going for it is it's ubiquity. My mag length 20" bbl .308 load still performs better than my single feed length 24" bbl 6.5 Grendel load. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 9:17:58 AM EDT
[#49]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 9:20:39 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You guys got me all disappointed about my new 300BO build. Good thing I'm also doing the 12" Grendel. Get both I did. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
Attached File