AR Sponsor
6.8SPC or 6.5G? Which one should I buy? (Page 9 of 14)
|
In response to OLDJOE,
You have your information wrong about the SPC chambers, they all have the exact same headspace and all 6.8 ammo will fit in all 6.8 chambers. Only the throat and neck diameters are different. ALL 6.8 ammo fits in all 6.8 chambers < unprofessional comment removed - F > All 6.8 ammo, resize dies and brass works in all chambers All 223 ammo will fit in all 5.56 chambers and the other way around. All 308 ammo will fit in 7.62x51 chambers and the other way around. edited to add dies and brass and remove comment about the Grendel family of cartridges |
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
|
< Non Relevant Post Removed - F >
|
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
|
< Non Revalant Post Removed - F >
|
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:
I brought it up was Joe was saying he was glad the Grendel issues weren't as bad as the 6.8s when they are worse Come on, this is complete BS. There are ZERO problems with the Grendel. ALL Grendel ammo will fit ALL Grendel rifles........PERIOD. You are a manufacturer, please don't spread misinformation. Some of the copycats may not properly chamber 6.5mm Grendel ammunition, but they are not Grendels. The whole idea of licensed built Grendel rifles are they have to be built to spec. So it doesn't matter who made it, it's built to the AA spec. The copycats are built however that person/company feels is best. There is a difference. But there are zero problems regarding Grendel rifles or Grendel ammunition. Actually, Hornady's 6.5mm Grendel ammo has proven to be extremely accurate. |
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.
|
Originally Posted By Gunwritr:
Originally Posted By AR-Performance:
I brought it up was Joe was saying he was glad the Grendel issues weren't as bad as the 6.8s when they are worse Come on, this is complete BS. There are ZERO problems with the Grendel. ALL Grendel ammo will fit ALL Grendel rifles........PERIOD. You are a manufacturer, please don't spread misinformation. Some of the copycats may not properly chamber 6.5mm Grendel ammunition, but they are not Grendels. The whole idea of licensed built Grendel rifles are they have to be built to spec. So it doesn't matter who made it, it's built to the AA spec. The copycats are built however that person/company feels is best. There is a difference. But there are zero problems regarding Grendel rifles or Grendel ammunition. Actually, Hornady's 6.5mm Grendel ammo has proven to be extremely accurate. OK Grendel specific not an issue(it's a Generic term just like AR15 even though Bill doesn't think so), the 6.5CSS, 264LBC, 6.5x39, 6.5ETC group then, they are having a little problem with the hornady made brass fitting all of the chambers, They have been arguing about it for weeks on the Grendel forum. I know the brass has .008 difference in headspace between Lapua and Hornady and I chamber mine (264LBC)to work with the Hornady/Black Hills so I don't have problems but some are. As I said above Old Joe posted the 6.8 had bigger problems and some that have never had a 6.8 think each chamber uses different brass but, that is not the case. All 6.8 chambers use the same ammo, same resize dies and same brass from Rem, Hornady or SSA. The differences in the 6.8 chambers are in the throat area which has nothing to do with the brass size. I haven't shot the hornady 6.5 but I have shot the Black Hills 123 AMAX, sub-moa easy enough with the 264LBC chambered PacNor barrel. |
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
| Im going to send staff emails asking for the next person who uses profanity or attacks anyone else, be removed from posting in this forum. End it now. Get right or get removed. No one has time for this petty stuff any longer. |
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...
|
< Non Relevant Post Removed - F >
< Side Note, Paul I don't know if there is a problem unless the REPORT button is used. I don't have the time to read each and every thread every day looking for problems (especially when I see two well respected contributers posting). - F > |
|
< Non Relevant Post Removed - F >
In other news, both calibers perform great for me for what I use them for, although I tend to use the 6.8 more since I can't really shoot out to 600+ yards anywhere around me. I also need to get a bunch more 6.5 bullets as well (damn near out of all types). The only thing I have left are the 123gr Sierras, which are damn fine shooters. I've not yet hunted any game with this cartridge, but I'm thinking about hunting over a couple of big fields near my properties (hog killin') in a couple weeks. I might try som 100gr Barnes TTSX for that purpose (need to get some load development in with that particular bullet)... |
|
Ok I got a call via the [REPORT] button and came into this thread with a bunch of off topic posts - such posts were deleted with my comments added.
IF you want to discuss an issue that was vendor/manufacturer related then I humbly suggest starting a thread on the subject and keeping it civil. It looks like a valid topic of discussion, but NOT in this thread. |
'98 Jeep XJ Owner
6.8 > 6.5
6.8 > 6.5
Well I'm new to this thread (but not ARs - USMC 1985 - 1996) or either of these 2 calibers, since I've been thinking about a build using one of them.
I recently realized I have no setup with which to go pig hunting with (or any other similar situation  ). The closest thing I have is a Remington 700 in .308; however it is a 700P in an AICS with a 26" barrel that isn't best suited for this type is use.
My goal is to build an upper in either 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel using a Mega Monolithic upper. The real question is with setup to go with (6.8 or 6.5). I beleive the 6.8 SPC would allow me to build a lighter and shorter configuration for the best balance (thinking either a 16 or 18 inch barrel). The 6.5 Grendel would probably need a longer barrel to get the best out of that round (18 to 22 inches or longer). So I'd like to hear some opinions for the wise ones. Thx |
|
6.8 SPC would indeed be a fine choice, great cartridge.
But the 6.5mm Grendel does work very well from barrels shorter than 18-20 inches. I have a 16 inch gun which performs very well. Very light and handy, accurate, reliable and hits hard. |
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.
|
whichever caliber take a look at the Barnes bullets 95TTSX for the 6.8 or 100gr TTSX for the 6.5.
Nothing works better on hogs. check, check |
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 Aramark:
for people that don't reload how ammo coming along for the 6.5mm Grendel? is it becoming easier to find online? Both cartridges have had teething problems when it comes to factory available ammunition. With Hornady stepping up to the plate and offering Grendel ammunition, we expected things to improve. The cartridge is apparently even more popular than anyone suspected though, and Hornady's initial run of a reported 500,000 rounds sold out in just a couple very short weeks. However, it did show up in stores that had never stocked it before, a very good sign that Hornady loading the ammunition will give much more effective market penetration. I even found it in my little hole in the wall, mom and pop operation! Hornady will be taking it back to the assembly line very shortly, and there are reliable rumors that another large manufacturer will tool up and also build a lower cost line of ammunition. There are multiple loads that probably make good "pig killers" for the Grendel, including the 100 grain Barnes. I personally like the thought of the Beowulf on pigs at shorter ranges, though!  Nothing like .50 caliber goodness on hard targets!
Bill |
|
Originally Posted By bwaites:
Both cartridges have had teething problems when it comes to factory available ammunition. With Hornady stepping up to the plate and offering Grendel ammunition, we expected things to improve. The cartridge is apparently even more popular than anyone suspected though, and Hornady's initial run of a reported 500,000 rounds sold out in just a couple very short weeks. However, it did show up in stores that had never stocked it before, a very good sign that Hornady loading the ammunition will give much more effective market penetration. I even found it in my little hole in the wall, mom and pop operation! Hornady will be taking it back to the assembly line very shortly, and there are reliable rumors that another large manufacturer will tool up and also build a lower cost line of ammunition. There are multiple loads that probably make good "pig killers" for the Grendel, including the 100 grain Barnes. I personally like the thought of the Beowulf on pigs at shorter ranges, though! Nothing like .50 caliber goodness on hard targets!
Bill What kind of maximum effective range (prior to the projectile dropping below supersonic speed) would a 16 inch barrelled Grendel using the 100gr TTSX or that Barnes have? And I have the same question about the 6.8 SPC using the 95gr TTSX. I'm trying to decide which would have the edge in performance from a 16 " barrel using a good hunting load. 
|
|
If the 6.5 Grendel with a 100gr TTSX (BC of .34) had an MV of 2600fps (this is estimated but it should be close) it would go trans sonic somewhere around 700 to 750 yards.
I can't tell you specifically for the 6.8 SPC using the 95gr TTSX because I don't know the BC. Assuming a BC of .3 (I suspect it will be slightly higher but I don't know) and an MV of 2700fps (this is estimated but should be close) it would go tran sconic between 650 and 700 yards. From those numbers I don't think the difference will amount to much, especially since neither bullet would still be going fast enough to expand at those ranges. IIRC the .277 95gr TTSX will expand down to 1600fps, making it viable to about 390 yards with an MV of 2700fps. This bullet was designed specifically for the 6.8 and was made with a lower velocity in mind. I'm not sure what velocity the 6.5 100gr TTSX will expand to but for most Barnes bullets it is somewhere around 1800, which would limit expansion range to about 320 yards with an MV of 2600fps. If it was also capable of expanding at 1600 the range would be more like 410 yards. |
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
|
Originally Posted By Altair:
If the 6.5 Grendel with a 100gr TTSX (BC of .34) had an MV of 2600fps (this is estimated but it should be close) it would go trans sonic somewhere around 700 to 750 yards. I can't tell you specifically for the 6.8 SPC using the 95gr TTSX because I don't know the BC. Assuming a BC of .3 (I suspect it will be slightly higher but I don't know) and an MV of 2700fps (this is estimated but should be close) it would go tran sconic between 650 and 700 yards. From those numbers I don't think the difference will amount to much, especially since neither bullet would still be going fast enough to expand at those ranges. IIRC the .277 95gr TTSX will expand down to 1600fps, making it viable to about 390 yards with an MV of 2700fps. This bullet was designed specifically for the 6.8 and was made with a lower velocity in mind. I'm not sure what velocity the 6.5 100gr TTSX will expand to but for most Barnes bullets it is somewhere around 1800, which would limit expansion range to about 320 yards with an MV of 2600fps. If it was also capable of expanding at 1600 the range would be more like 410 yards. This is almost exactly correct, except that we are now capable of driving the 95 TTSX to over 2800 FPS, from a 16" barrel. With my 12 twist 3 groove, 20" barrel, I have personally reached 3000 FPS with SSA's powder, as I am testing with them, in parallel, for the development of their first factory offering. The fastest powder I used allowed for a MV of 3120 FPS with a 20" barrel, but that load was producing mild swipes so I backed down a little. This load was accurate as well, to 3/4 MOA @ 100 yards. Reloder 7 and 10X will also allow for 2800 FPS. I have found that this bullet gives best accuracy when loaded to velocities of 2800- 2900 FPS. I have now shot some 1/2 MOA groups with them as well. From my 16" ARP 5R 6.8 barrel, I was able to get them going 2880 FPS, so this will extend the performance range, i,e the expansion range, to right at 400 yards. The BC is .296, so the estimate of .300 is correct. Again, it must be stated that when you drive a 95 grain bullet to 2900 FPS, from one rifle, and the same 100 grain bullet from another, at 2600, there will be some compensation for the higher BC of the 6.5 cal bullet. I'd like Dave or Bill to chime in here if my velocities are low for the Grendel (presuming we're talking about a 16" barrel). I own page 18
|
"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 hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By Altair:
If the 6.5 Grendel with a 100gr TTSX (BC of .34) had an MV of 2600fps (this is estimated but it should be close) it would go trans sonic somewhere around 700 to 750 yards. I can't tell you specifically for the 6.8 SPC using the 95gr TTSX because I don't know the BC. Assuming a BC of .3 (I suspect it will be slightly higher but I don't know) and an MV of 2700fps (this is estimated but should be close) it would go tran sconic between 650 and 700 yards. From those numbers I don't think the difference will amount to much, especially since neither bullet would still be going fast enough to expand at those ranges. IIRC the .277 95gr TTSX will expand down to 1600fps, making it viable to about 390 yards with an MV of 2700fps. This bullet was designed specifically for the 6.8 and was made with a lower velocity in mind. I'm not sure what velocity the 6.5 100gr TTSX will expand to but for most Barnes bullets it is somewhere around 1800, which would limit expansion range to about 320 yards with an MV of 2600fps. If it was also capable of expanding at 1600 the range would be more like 410 yards. This is almost exactly correct, except that we are now capable of driving the 95 TTSX to over 2800 FPS, from a 16" barrel. With my 12 twist 3 groove, 20" barrel, I have personally reached 3000 FPS with SSA's powder, as I am testing with them, in parallel, for the development of their first factory offering. The fastest powder I used allowed for a MV of 3120 FPS with a 20" barrel, but that load was producing mild swipes so I backed down a little. This load was accurate as well, to 3/4 MOA @ 100 yards. Reloder 7 and 10X will also allow for 2800 FPS. I have found that this bullet gives best accuracy when loaded to velocities of 2800- 2900 FPS. I have now shot some 1/2 MOA groups with them as well. From my 16" ARP 5R 6.8 barrel, I was able to get them going 2880 FPS, so this will extend the performance range, i,e the expansion range, to right at 400 yards. The BC is .296, so the estimate of .300 is correct. Again, it must be stated that when you drive a 95 grain bullet to 2900 FPS, from one rifle, and the same 100 grain bullet from another, at 2600, there will be some compensation for the higher BC of the 6.5 cal bullet. I'd like Dave or Bill to chime in here if my velocities are low for the Grendel (presuming we're talking about a 16" barrel). I own page 18 I'm able to load the Barnes 95gr TTSX to 2910 +/- 9fps out of my 18" 1:11 upper. That should give me plenty of effective game harvesting range... ETA - forgot to say for the 6.8x43 |
|
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By Altair:
If the 6.5 Grendel with a 100gr TTSX (BC of .34) had an MV of 2600fps (this is estimated but it should be close) it would go trans sonic somewhere around 700 to 750 yards. I can't tell you specifically for the 6.8 SPC using the 95gr TTSX because I don't know the BC. Assuming a BC of .3 (I suspect it will be slightly higher but I don't know) and an MV of 2700fps (this is estimated but should be close) it would go tran sconic between 650 and 700 yards. From those numbers I don't think the difference will amount to much, especially since neither bullet would still be going fast enough to expand at those ranges. IIRC the .277 95gr TTSX will expand down to 1600fps, making it viable to about 390 yards with an MV of 2700fps. This bullet was designed specifically for the 6.8 and was made with a lower velocity in mind. I'm not sure what velocity the 6.5 100gr TTSX will expand to but for most Barnes bullets it is somewhere around 1800, which would limit expansion range to about 320 yards with an MV of 2600fps. If it was also capable of expanding at 1600 the range would be more like 410 yards. This is almost exactly correct, except that we are now capable of driving the 95 TTSX to over 2800 FPS, from a 16" barrel. With my 12 twist 3 groove, 20" barrel, I have personally reached 3000 FPS with SSA's powder, as I am testing with them, in parallel, for the development of their first factory offering. The fastest powder I used allowed for a MV of 3120 FPS with a 20" barrel, but that load was producing mild swipes so I backed down a little. This load was accurate as well, to 3/4 MOA @ 100 yards. Reloder 7 and 10X will also allow for 2800 FPS. I have found that this bullet gives best accuracy when loaded to velocities of 2800- 2900 FPS. I have now shot some 1/2 MOA groups with them as well. From my 16" ARP 5R 6.8 barrel, I was able to get them going 2880 FPS, so this will extend the performance range, i,e the expansion range, to right at 400 yards. The BC is .296, so the estimate of .300 is correct. Again, it must be stated that when you drive a 95 grain bullet to 2900 FPS, from one rifle, and the same 100 grain bullet from another, at 2600, there will be some compensation for the higher BC of the 6.5 cal bullet. I'd like Dave or Bill to chime in here if my velocities are low for the Grendel (presuming we're talking about a 16" barrel). I own page 18 With the corrected BC of .296 and MV of 2800 for the 6.8 95 TTSX I get expansion range of 420 yards and it goes trans sconic at about 700 yards. |
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
|
Originally Posted By Altair:
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
Originally Posted By Altair:
If the 6.5 Grendel with a 100gr TTSX (BC of .34) had an MV of 2600fps (this is estimated but it should be close) it would go trans sonic somewhere around 700 to 750 yards. I can't tell you specifically for the 6.8 SPC using the 95gr TTSX because I don't know the BC. Assuming a BC of .3 (I suspect it will be slightly higher but I don't know) and an MV of 2700fps (this is estimated but should be close) it would go tran sconic between 650 and 700 yards. From those numbers I don't think the difference will amount to much, especially since neither bullet would still be going fast enough to expand at those ranges. IIRC the .277 95gr TTSX will expand down to 1600fps, making it viable to about 390 yards with an MV of 2700fps. This bullet was designed specifically for the 6.8 and was made with a lower velocity in mind. I'm not sure what velocity the 6.5 100gr TTSX will expand to but for most Barnes bullets it is somewhere around 1800, which would limit expansion range to about 320 yards with an MV of 2600fps. If it was also capable of expanding at 1600 the range would be more like 410 yards. This is almost exactly correct, except that we are now capable of driving the 95 TTSX to over 2800 FPS, from a 16" barrel. With my 12 twist 3 groove, 20" barrel, I have personally reached 3000 FPS with SSA's powder, as I am testing with them, in parallel, for the development of their first factory offering. The fastest powder I used allowed for a MV of 3120 FPS with a 20" barrel, but that load was producing mild swipes so I backed down a little. This load was accurate as well, to 3/4 MOA @ 100 yards. Reloder 7 and 10X will also allow for 2800 FPS. I have found that this bullet gives best accuracy when loaded to velocities of 2800- 2900 FPS. I have now shot some 1/2 MOA groups with them as well. From my 16" ARP 5R 6.8 barrel, I was able to get them going 2880 FPS, so this will extend the performance range, i,e the expansion range, to right at 400 yards. The BC is .296, so the estimate of .300 is correct. Again, it must be stated that when you drive a 95 grain bullet to 2900 FPS, from one rifle, and the same 100 grain bullet from another, at 2600, there will be some compensation for the higher BC of the 6.5 cal bullet. I'd like Dave or Bill to chime in here if my velocities are low for the Grendel (presuming we're talking about a 16" barrel). I own page 18 With the corrected BC of .296 and MV of 2800 for the 6.8 95 TTSX I get expansion range of 420 yards and it goes trans sconic at about 700 yards. That sounds exactly right. Thank you for adding that. This is exactly why I lobbied Barnes so hard for this bullet. There is nothing at all wrong with the 85 TSX, but it does not expand down to 1600 FPS, so just the expansile characteristics, and the reduced bearing surface were able to make up for a lower BC, that is generally inherent to 6.8 X 43, .277 caliber bullets. I find it interesting that effective range could be increased by bullet features other than BC alone. In that department, no one can argue that the Grendel & its 6.5mm bullets have the advantage. My hat is off to Barnes. They actually improved one of the weaknesses of the 6.8 X 43, simply by giving it better bullets. |
"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"
|
The development of many cartridges has taken place of many decades, the 6.8x43 and the 6.5 Grendel are just newborns, and there will be many great developments to come for both in the future. I don't think it will take as long for these two, since technology breeds technology, and any advancements in the past with older calibers can probably already be incorporated into these two. One thing that is has working for it in development terms and in the increases it may yet achieve, is that the correct chambers have only been around for a short while as that type of thing goes, so as more people, ( shooters and hunters in general), and government agencies of one sort or another see the advantages of the real specs, the more they will give credence to the purchase of it. We just need more manufacturers to see the advantage in loading to the new capabilities. I think that will happen in the not too distant future, as more people are buying this caliber and there is money to made feeding them.
I know there are some majors saying not now, and maybe not ever, but, I've heard that before. I know it's a little different, but here's a story. Years ago our phone company told us that it would be a cold day in hell before we got cable t.v.. In those exact words, even if we paid up front for the extra cost of bringing it out to our community. Several years later, and many more hell noes later as well, a smaller cable company came in here and started signing everyone up. The locals saw that they would be losing money and market share to another company, and was out in force in a weeks time running the lines and hooking everyone up at a very low price. The big guys can see market share, money, and loyalty leaving, and it's just a matter of time before they decide that it's in their beast interests to load for us. |
|
I agree with the free market approach. It does take time for the legal dept. to be outvoted by the marketing dept. Who the heck is buying Model 1 or any of the other 6.8 SAMMI chamber/1 in 10 twist makers? I waited until after the big 6.8 study of various chambers & twists.....which now was what, 2 years ago?
Even after all manufacturers get on board, there are still different muzzle thread patterns. I think that major ammo companies will be the last to get on board with hotter ammo for the improved chambers/twists. When all the above happens, then I'll consider the 6.8 to have reached maturity. My fingers are crossed. Sure, the 6.8 camp has had some fun lately with the problems facing the 6.5G fanboys. That is just a little payback from the grief they dished out 1-2 years ago. Once again, the market will decide who "wins". |
|
Looking forward to a "win' is the exact wrong point in the discussion. Too many have weighed in to "win" for their caliber, when the calibers were designed to help the user do that. 6.8 is a combat carbine caliber, 6.5 a precision rifle caliber.
The designers of the 6.8 deliberately chose a slight taper case and short bullet for higher lethality and superior feed in the M4 mag well. Range was already a non issue, the designers could step up to 7.62 x 51 and get that. It also would be contrary to doctrine and combat studies with research going back to WW I, which was the impetus behind the entire trial for small caliber assault rifles. The 6.8 does a great job as an enhanced combat carbine caliber in the M4, and is already proving it's use by hunters. The designer of the 6.5 chose a shorter, larger diameter case and accepted more taper because of it's benefit - it left room for a longer bullet without needing to conform to high reliability feed rates in automatic fire. A longer bullet gave less aerodynamic drag, and allowed a longer, flatter trajectory. It would have better flight characteristics for long range in a non combat competitve arena. It certainly does do that, and holds the 600M record shooting at paper. What becomes a huge distraction in the discussion is making a case either caliber will do as well as the other. Making that case is like attempting to prove a a short barrel carbine and long barrel rifle can do the same job equally well. It's apparent they don't, or there wouldn't be tWo different forms of the weapon. Professionals have made them distinctively different for good reasons. Carbines don't do rifle jobs or vice versa, I don't see 14.5" barreled Squad Designated Marksman rifles, or 20" barreled fixed stock rifles recommended for vehicular carry or MOUT. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous. That's the major "fail" in comparing the calibers, no matter what, it's apples and oranges. Attempting to turn one into the other makes it less effective, not more so, and that's contrary to the designers intent. A lot of time and money went into making each do what it does best, and making them more alike so that one can "win" is really no win at all. Unless you can get your cash register to ring more often, right? |
|
Originally Posted By tirod:
Looking forward to a "win' is the exact wrong point in the discussion. Too many have weighed in to "win" for their caliber, when the calibers were designed to help the user do that. 6.8 is a combat carbine caliber, 6.5 a precision rifle caliber. The designers of the 6.8 deliberately chose a slight taper case and short bullet for higher lethality and superior feed in the M4 mag well. Range was already a non issue, the designers could step up to 7.62 x 51 and get that. It also would be contrary to doctrine and combat studies with research going back to WW I, which was the impetus behind the entire trial for small caliber assault rifles. The 6.8 does a great job as an enhanced combat carbine caliber in the M4, and is already proving it's use by hunters. The designer of the 6.5 chose a shorter, larger diameter case and accepted more taper because of it's benefit - it left room for a longer bullet without needing to conform to high reliability feed rates in automatic fire. A longer bullet gave less aerodynamic drag, and allowed a longer, flatter trajectory. It would have better flight characteristics for long range in a non combat competitve arena. It certainly does do that, and holds the 600M record shooting at paper. What becomes a huge distraction in the discussion is making a case either caliber will do as well as the other. Making that case is like attempting to prove a a short barrel carbine and long barrel rifle can do the same job equally well. It's apparent they don't, or there wouldn't be tWo different forms of the weapon. Professionals have made them distinctively different for good reasons. Carbines don't do rifle jobs or vice versa, I don't see 14.5" barreled Squad Designated Marksman rifles, or 20" barreled fixed stock rifles recommended for vehicular carry or MOUT. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous. That's the major "fail" in comparing the calibers, no matter what, it's apples and oranges. Attempting to turn one into the other makes it less effective, not more so, and that's contrary to the designers intent. A lot of time and money went into making each do what it does best, and making them more alike so that one can "win" is really no win at all. Unless you can get your cash register to ring more often, right? Are you saying a 6.5 caliber rifle as in 6.5-284 holds the world record at 600M? There is a BIG difference between a 6.5 Grendel and a 6.5x284 the 6.5x284 is about 400fps faster. http://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek051.html That article said the 6.5-284 record was beat by a 6BR. |
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
|
Several posters have hit the nail on the head with these cartridges being for different purposes. Both fulfill their design goals exceptionally well.
My personal choice was 6.8, based on cost and ammo availability- At the time I made my decision -several years ago, there were 3 companies for ammo in the 6.8 vs 1 in the grend. builders were about double also at 5 to 2. cost for a nice free floated upper in 6.8 was about 2/3rds what a basic Grendel would've been, and with less than a 2 week wait as opposed to 2-6 months. I am very happy with that decision as I have developed sub moa loads with bullets from 85 to 130 grains. The other important detail to me is the longest public range within 2-300 miles is 600 yards, so long range trajectory doesn't matter as much to me as it does to others. I personally cannot, nor Do I know of anyone who would honestly be able to take an ethical(as in a 85-90% or better chance of a one shot kill) with either package beyond 400-500m, on anything larger than a prairie dog or coyote (or other vermin). There are a few here and there who could, but most have very little experience working that long and can't. That being said, thanks to the mods for keeping this one clean 
When will we as a shooting community let this bull-s of cal-vs-cal die and spend our time where it belongs,shooting, reloading and shooting more, and fighting to protect our hobby, sport and rights. Getting real tired of some a-holes on here and other forums who haven't been to a range but twice in the last 3 years and yet has 50 million meaningless posts on 10 forums, saying nothing with alot of letters.You all know who they are; you can just imagine them, looking like some drunk trucker who swaggers into a bar and lays it down on a table and starts screaming 'BUT MINE IS BIGGER', ' MINE IS LONGER' or 'MINE IS FASTER' Most modern cartridges will do what you want them to do.... We as a community have so much more to worry about in today's world than what the FELLOW SHOOTER on the next lane, next blind or the next treestand is launching downrange. |
|
The original developers knew of most of it then. Remington, dropped the ball by using the wrong barrels, wrong chamber drawings, and then having to drop the charge down to the lower velocities that are on average 200fps slower than what they should be. They had no interest in the success of the 6.8 as a successor tot the 5.56 in my opinion, and still don't, or they would change their barrels, and load ammo to the new specs just as SSA does and mark them accordingly. They have too much to lose for their investment by losing a lot of 5.56/.223 orders where they already have protection in place to meet demands. A big company like that could easily get saami to accept the correct drawings as spec if they were to push for it.
I may have a couple of things out of whack here, since my memory can be a little off at times, but I'm sure H or HTR will be along shortly to sort it out. |
|
I would say politics plays a bigger role than back-stock and production issues.
-For the money the army and usmc have dumped into their new 'green bullet' programs they probably could have fielded new uppers and sufficient ammo to make the changeover fairly painlessly for deployed active duty and used the stockpiles to improve training for soldiers stationed within our borders or reserve/guard. Most non-infantry only get a few hours a year, if that, of range time beyond qualification/ basic training and the added value of additional rounds downrange would probably help immensely. the problem is the decision makers are mostly outside the military itself and are very happy with the status quo, with very little to zero interest in the idea of fielding a more effective round. |
|
Originally Posted By aceranch:
I would buy which ever one fires economical, plentiful ammo,........oh, was .308 a choice? Stick to the rules of the thread. Seriously, people like you are what makes threads like this more of a PITA to read... It doesn't matter which one you pick, so long as you intent is to find more stopping power with same accuracy and similar recoil as the 5.56. They both kick the hell out of the 5.56 in any barrel length... |
|
Originally Posted By TACKDRIVER68:
Originally Posted By hi-tech-rancher:
My hat is off to Barnes. They actually improved one of the weaknesses of the 6.8 X 43, simply by giving it better bullets. I just wonder, if knowing what we know now( about things like what the proper chamber and twist rate is, combined with quantum leaps in bullets like the SSA 97gr AP and 85/95gr barnes bullets) would have made any difference in the military's testing of the 6.8. The answer is "maybe." Moreover, it aint over, yet. With the fielding of the Mk319 and the surprising velocities it can achieve from shorter barrels, we will know soon whether or not this "fix" really solves the problem of the M4. After all, we are all reading from the same playbook. It may be that the MK319 (very similar to a TBBC or TTSX) will do for the 5.56, what the 95 grain TTSX did for the 6.8.
With the Mil. finally embracing "OTM" rounds and expanding ammo, the 6.8 may never be needed. But, in time, the cream rises to the top, and I suspect that we will be hearing more about the 6.8 SPC and perhaps the 6.5 G, as it regards military applications. All in all, it does not matter if the military adopts it, since it has forever cemented its place as a hunting round. W/r/t LE, the 6.8 still has one major problem....it still needs cheap plinking and practice ammo. So, it isn't always about raw performance, its about practicality and whether the cheaper round is good enough. |
"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 Sniper3142:
Originally Posted By bwaites:
Both cartridges have had teething problems when it comes to factory available ammunition. With Hornady stepping up to the plate and offering Grendel ammunition, we expected things to improve. The cartridge is apparently even more popular than anyone suspected though, and Hornady's initial run of a reported 500,000 rounds sold out in just a couple very short weeks. However, it did show up in stores that had never stocked it before, a very good sign that Hornady loading the ammunition will give much more effective market penetration. I even found it in my little hole in the wall, mom and pop operation! Hornady will be taking it back to the assembly line very shortly, and there are reliable rumors that another large manufacturer will tool up and also build a lower cost line of ammunition. There are multiple loads that probably make good "pig killers" for the Grendel, including the 100 grain Barnes. I personally like the thought of the Beowulf on pigs at shorter ranges, though! Nothing like .50 caliber goodness on hard targets!
Bill What kind of maximum effective range (prior to the projectile dropping below supersonic speed) would a 16 inch barrelled Grendel using the 100gr TTSX or that Barnes have? And I have the same question about the 6.8 SPC using the 95gr TTSX. I'm trying to decide which would have the edge in performance from a 16 " barrel using a good hunting load.
My 16 inch gun runs a 100 grain Berger at around 2730 fps with factory ammo. I would expect a 100 grain Barnes to run 2,700-2,750 fps with a hand load from a Grendel. Maybe more, but dunno yet as I have not played with it. If the .342 BC for this projectile is correct then if launched from a 16 inch barrel at 2,750 fps it will have 1679 ft-lbs at the muzzle at 100 yards it will have 1370 ft-lbs at 200 yards it will have 1109 ft-lbs at 300 yards it will have 888 ft-lbs at 400 yards it will have 704 ft-lbs If it expands down to 1600 fps that would be good out to about 500 yards where it would have 554 ft-lbs and go subsonic around 800 yards. I personally think the 120 Barnes would be a better load...but I have not played with the 100 grain TTSX and have not seen gel pics yet. |
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.
|
I bought a 6.8 upper to get something with more power than the 5.56. I looked at the 6.5 as well. I chose the 6.8 over the 6.5 because I believe that the 6.8 has achieved critical mass. Just check the number of name brand AR manufacturers that offer the 6.8. I just chose the one that had bigger market share because I think there will be more parts and ammo available in the 6.8 caliber in the years to come.
I recognize my decision may not be the “right” decision for everyone else. As noted above, the 6.5 has some advantages over the 6.8 at longer ranges. If that’s more important to you than availability of parts from lots of sources, get a 6.5. While you may notice that some are inclined to debate the differences between these calibers over and over again, I think they have more in common with each other than differences when compared to any 223 or 30 caliber round. They are both excellent rounds. Just go buy one or the other and don‘t let this endless debate cause you to not buy either one. |
NRA Life Member
|
Gunwritr,
I do not have 6.5 100gr ttsx gel data, but I did fire some at 2775 and about 2000 fps into water filled jugs. I was not able to capture the reduced velocity TTSX load, but I did recover the 2775 fps bullet. I posted results and pics here including a few other bullets: 6.5 ttsx terminal ballistics results Here are a couple of pictures of the 100gr TTSX at 2775 fps, the 100 gr Nosler Part. at 2100 fps and the 120 Nosler BT at 1910 fps http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m214/NASA_45/grendel/sideview.jpg http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m214/NASA_45/grendel/topview.jpg By the destruction done to the jugs, I would say that the 100 TTSX was still expanding nicely at the 2000 fps that I tested it at ( I just wish I could have captured the bullet!) Best, PA |
|
<Please read the rules in the OP and keep posts related to helping people pick between the two calibers - Z> |
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
|
<Please read the rules in the OP and keep posts related to helping people pick between the two calibers - Z> |
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
| FInd a friend with a quality 6.8 and shoot it for yourself, and if you're not capable of testing the accuracy of a well made rifle, have some one who is shoot it for you. Go to 68 forums and look at what's being done there. I've got three 5 shot groups from a sandbag at 100 yards where the largest group was .6 and change, with a called flyer, the second was under .5 , and the best of the day was .433. I'm a good shot, but not the best in the world by a very long shot. The rifle is way better than I can shoot. I have a 16" recon upper from AR Performance. The load was a 90TNT SSA brass, CCI #41 primers, 29.8 gr of Re7, loaded to an oal of 2.305 in a PRI mag. Velocity is @ 2950 |
|
I'll give you some real world experience with all of them:
1) the 6.8 SPC with 95 grain TTSX's knocks down hogs better than any other AR-15 cartridge I've fired in over 30 years of hunting (I have not yet shot the 100 TTSX from the Grendel, but I expect it to be excellent, as well) . I have killed > 700 hogs with the 6.8 now, and it bears no resemblance to the 7.62 X 39, especially when you consider the bullet trajectory, and the lack of good .310" bullets for X 39. I used to watch hogs run off with crappy X39 bullets in them, especially using soft points, which failed often to penetrate the shoulder blade. 2) The 6.8 has so many good bullets available that I am not sure I see the comparison with X 39 or even .30-30. LeverEvolution (FTX) bullets are excellent, but you can't shoot .30-30 in a 6.5 lb., 12"bbl AR-15. I have killed lots of animals with .30-30, but again the trajectory of most .30-30 bullets will not be as flat as the 85 TSX, 95 TTSX, 90 grain TNT, or even the 110 SPH. A much more educated statement would have been that the .30RAR ( as was tested by Bill Wilson recently) is actually duplicating .30-30 ballistics even in SBR's, but they are scarce and its future is uncertain. 3) I find it much more realistic to say that the 6.8 SPC and the 6.5 Grendel are both similar to each other, superior to the 5.56 in killing power and that all of them are capable of excellent accuracy, completely dependent upon the barrel, the optic / sights, the shooter and the conditions. No one caliber is so much more inherently accurate than the others to make such silly statements. |
"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"
6.8SPC or 6.5G? Which one should I buy? (Page 9 of 14)
AR Sponsor