I never want this to end!  It's such a quality source of entertainment

There is that.  And it's free, more or less...

From SAAMI:

Maximum cartridge & minimal chamber for the 6.5 Grendel both show about 0.010" taper.



Maximum cartridge & minimal chamber for the 6.8 SPC both show about 0.020" taper.



Maximum cartridge & minimal chamber for the .223 Remington (couldn't find 5.56 in SAAMI) both show about 0.021" taper.



Non-SAAMI comparison of .223 and 5.56...showing basically the same except in the neck and throat.



But...LRR wants you to look at the magazine to verify case taper for some reason to verify they have the same amount taper? smh. Why? Who knows, but considering he has written not one but two books on reloading the 6.5, he should know the proper way to measure case dimensions is not by looking at a magazine...so why would he suggest that? I am certain it is because he is cherry picking and lying. Just look at his history on the subject and you can see his agenda as clear as day.

The data...the truth...is right there in those photos. He has done the same thing with bolt strength and load data...cherry picked and misrepresented what has been repeatedly verified.

The false claim is that 6.5 Grendel does not have enough case taper for reliable extraction, especially for automatic weapons.

6.5 Grendel left, 5.56 middle, 7.62 NATO right.  The data is right there in this photo:


Other logical fallacies you see in this thread:

Argument from ignorance: assuming banned sociopath vendor's claims are true without checking them against hard data, for example.

Argument from repetition (ad nauseam):   "The 6.5 Grendel has less performance than 6.8 within common hunting distances."  Show your math.

Begging the question by assuming that the as nauseam arguments are true, then moving forward with them without any substantiation.

Onus probandi, "If I repeatedly claim a falsehood, the burden of proof is on you, not me."  Example:  6.5 Grendel doesn't have enough case taper for automatic weapons.  Video of multiple 6.5 Grendels running full auto ensues, let alone that AA has at least one full auto test gun that they've run for years.

Circular reasoning:  "6.8 has better performance than 6.5 Grendel for hunting..." (because some discredited moron told me so), therefore I will continue to arrive at this conclusion without doing due diligence.  Another one is 6.8 has less bolt thrust because of the case head diameter being less, while ignoring the higher chamber pressure that raises the bolt thrust.


Fallacy of false attribution and false authority:  Continuously sourcing the claims of discredited vendors who have a financial interest in 6.8 who can't behave like normal adults in any profession they've been in, who are caught repeatedly lying, but somehow are a reputable source.

We can do this all day long, but why is a thread where a cheap and incorrectly made part breaking a fly trap for 6.hate?

5.56 CLGS 10.3-10.5" guns break extractors at very low round counts when you compress the volume.

7.62 NATO guns with excessive gas and violent extraction break extractors, or even RLGS with poorly-made extractors.

6.5 Grendel with CLGS 16" with a poorly-made extractor breaks extractors.

Therefore, 6.5 Grendel has inherently weak extractors, which are the weak link of the system, making in unsuitable for full auto use or military use.

It helps if you don't think about it and just repeat lies that have been spoon-fed to you by sociopathic dredges of society who lie, attack people's characters, punish customers by publishing their personal information, and have a habit of getting banned from forum after forum like Dumb and Dumber at the end of their workday losing their jobs.

I had one years back with a bad radius.

Grendel bolts and subassemblies will not last like 223 or 308 bolts. Look at the three together. Grendel bolts are clearly much thinner.

That being said, it’s a fun round.

I think discussing raw change in diameter offers no meaningful data considering 3 cartridges of various length are being compared.

http://196800revolutionsperminute.blogspot.com/2012/11/case-taper-in-military-cartridges.html?m=1

I found this fascinating. I have not verified the numbers but they appear accurate. I suspect the few thousandths in difference in radians is not material to the performance of any of these cartridges.

I should be seeing broken extractors then over the course of 2009-present in all the higher volume shooting courses I've attended, run, or helped run.

Not just a sample size of one or two or six of my rifles, but dozens of rifles with many thousands of rounds fired in very short time compression cycles within a 2-3 day course, where all we do is shoot all day.

If you source a bolt and extractor from a lower-end vendor, or one that uses .125" bolt face depths, your chances of breaking extractors in Grendel or 7.62x39 goes up.

Colt already knew that in the 1980s when they did the RDT&E on the x39 Sporter II.

Did the after-market look at that data and apply it?  Nope, other than AA with the .50 Beowulf, and later 6.5 Grendel.

When someone tells you that thinner walled bolts are the problem, they are then left with the burden of explaining the longevity of the full auto rated 7.62 NATO SCAR-H or SCAR-17.  Crack open a SCAR-17 and look at the bolt.  It has extremely thin walls and fires cartridges rated to 12,000psi higher than 6.5 Grendel, with substantially more bolt thrust.

Then crack open a POF Revolution, which has an even smaller bolt with even thinner walls firing .308 Winchester.  They have video of them doing mag-dump after mag-dump with that system on full auto (although they are using steel cased ammo).
Bolt thrust is still much higher than Grendel ever could be.

You can make a stronger cork for the back end of the system using specific alloys like one of the better 9310 variants for the aviation industry.

That's what all my Grendel bolts are made from, with quality tool steel extractors that have yet to show any signs of fatigue.

If you try to cut corners, even on 5.56, you're going to run into lower life cycles of the parts, which is why the Military has such a strict TDP.

When someone makes an argument from ignorance about bolt strength, help elevate them by showing them this:






The 6.5 Grendel was fleet-tested with very high round counts through multiple rifles and carbines, to include 10.5" full auto carbines that have run endurance testing dating back to early 2000s.  If you take pride in your products, source the components from the correct alloys, and do your due diligence in testing, you will have a long-lasting part.

If you source cheap, questionable parts and don't do the testing, then you roll the dice.  These principles apply to any cartridge being chambered in the AR15.

It will run, in chamber that isn't too hot, when the brass is clean, and the chamber is clean...but when things get hot and dirty, parallel cases are more prone to have feeding and extraction issues than a more tapered chamber.

I posted the data, you post a photo...while it is clearly visible the 6.5 has less taper, it isn't as if someone can visually see the measurements of the taper better than the math. LOL. Do the math.

I have never once spoken to that vendor about what has happened here, nor do I care to...however, there is a lot of data out there about the 6.8 SPC-II from other places. Why do you ignore them and try to pin it all on one person you have issues with?

I have shown a lot of math. haha.

Again, I have shown the math...and I showed your math was outdated 10 years ago.

Do you expect the manufacturer to show you dirty hot guns getting suck? lol. Meanwhile, just now in the last few minutes another person reported issues with theirs. Bet you will overlook it without being pressured to address it.

Apparently you don't know what circular reasoning is. Circular reasoning is when the concept gives birth to its own proof/verification...which by the way is something you did several times...such as reporting load data that you wrote. haha.

Bolt pressures on the 6.5 are low not because of circular reasoning...but because they are rated lower...50K psi was it? That is 5-8.5K less than all 6.8 ratings. That isn't circular reasoning. That is math.
And well...thinner metal is thinner metal. It takes metal to make strength.

Red herring there. I have only reported one set of his data. The majority of data I reported came from other sources.

Because it is about time for a liar with an agenda to be exposed for well...lying.

Your issues with some vendor have nothing to do with me. And who is losing their job?

The only name calling I've seen here is by americansentinelk9.  I think it's stupid to get into pissing matches about things of this nature.  Both are fine rounds and a white tail isn't going to give a shit whether it's hit by a 6.5 or a 6.8.  With good shot placement it's going to be dead either way.  I'm going to build an 18" grendel for my next deer gun.  I'm sure 6.8 would fit the bill too but they're so close in performance at shorter ranges I figured I'd go with the one that can also reach out a little farther.  I'm sure as hell not going to get into a internet spat with someone else if they choose a different caliber.
As far as the extractor goes I'll probably buy a couple of spares as well as a spare bolt.  Cheap insurance if you're out in the field and something goes wrong.

We've been over this over the years and that reference pops up.

Most people don't do the math, so they put themselves out for an easy argument win when you run the taper angle, not the difference between the base and the shoulder datum diameters.  

If we are to accept the argument made in ignorance or repetition, then we just declared the 7.62 NATO unsuitable for full auto use as well, as they are within the margin of error when you look at 6.5 Grendel and 7.62 NATO.

I lost track of how many rounds of 7.62 NATO I've burned through in belt-feds, the M240 being the most reliable of them all.

The more important thing for reliable extraction is timing.  You want case de-obturation to have transpired before the extraction cycle begins.

A lot of the Russian and foreign cartridges rely a lot on case taper because they are so heavily gassed.  Look at an AKM gas port diameter, for example.

6.5 Grendel has a more generous neck in the chamber than any other 6.5mm I'm aware of, so it runs really well on auto, especially with steel cased ammo at 22 cents per round.

Hot chambers expand.  This shows your lack of fundamental understanding of applied physics as it relates to metallurgy.

Think of the chamber in terms of cellular units.  When the cellular units expand, what happens to the inner diameter of the chamber?

A. It shrinks, or....

B. It expands.

Grendel isn't parallel.  It has case taper within the margin of error of the 7.62 NATO.

Now you are left with the burden of explaining why 7.62 NATO runs so well, especially in well-designed firearms like the MAG 58, SS77, and M240.

6.5 Grendel SAAMI chamber also uses a .300" neck for reliable feeding and extraction in the AR15, to include automatic fire.

Just like overlooking the 30° shoulder and its contribution to efficient burning, you are overlooking many aspects of the 6.5 Grendel, as well as basics of metallurgy and applied physics related to firearms.

I you really want see where guns choke, go into extreme cold weather where dimensions and temp shifts are all over the map.  In hot conditions, firearms behave very well, very predictably.

Now look at the surface area purchase during obturation of a 6.8 and a 6.5 Grendel.

I'll let you dust off your surface area of a cylinder formula.

Also, remember that internet thing you're talking about?

Funny how I see your same arguments being handed to you by the banned vendor when I look up your other handle on the forum we're not allowed to mention anymore.

His handle over there is American Sentinel, for anyone that wants to check.

Notice who posted right above him, and the lies that are being told by that sociopath.

Then magically, AmericanSentinelK9 pops up here and has his own, independent thoughts that are purely generated on his own, while attacking my character as the banned member above him has done for years now.

My question still remains:

Why do people insist on defecating all over a thread about a member who had a cheap extractor failure?

All I'm seeing is it being used as a lever to push the attack ad that 6.5 Grendel is inherently a poorly-designed system, while promoting the virtues of 6.8, without even having an underlying understanding of basic math, how firearms work, or the design metrics of the 6.5 Grendel.

What's the motive?

Who said lug size, thickness and length didn't matter? I didn't see anyone say that.

But never the less, remove metal, you remove strength.

In this link, Bill Alexander stated the PSI rating for the 6.5 Grendel is 50K psi.
Scroll down on the link to "Bill Alexander" to see his own words.

It is pretty much accepted 50K for the Grendel, 62K for the 5.56, and 58-58.5K for the 6.8.
But, keep posting your nonsense if you want.

I guess you didn't look at the angle then. The angle was less on the grendel as well. LOL. Go do the math. smh. Another poor attempt by a reloading manual author that should know better...so is this an error caused by your foolishness, or is it an intentional deception? If an error, then come on man...you wrote a reloading manual...and should know better. If an intentional deception, well, then you are lying via misrepresentation.

Even the 7.62 still has more case taper than the 6.5 Grendel.

I find it odd that you assign a more generous neck as a benefit for full auto use, while you say case taper doesn't matter.

Nice try...but hot brass expands more...because it not only expands from heat, and considering we all know the concept of FIRE FORMING...the smaller object loses the fight. That would be the brass. This is also why you don't want to shoot hot loads in hot weather...because they run at higher pressures, and can cause pressure issues...which show up on the BRASS FIRST...before you blow a barrel. The brass is the weak link.

Cases are not sticking before they are shot. They are sticking after they are shot. Read my comments before this quote about brass being the weak link and why reloaders are warned not to shoot hot loads on hot days (or in hot barrels).

That's a lie. Where did any vender address me about the 6.5 Grendel?

Nothing "magical" about it. Just start telling the truth and maybe you will stop being targeted for making false statements.

I never said the 6.5 Grendel was poorly designed. That is a lie. Please find that.

In fact, I said both (which includes the 6.5 grendel) are great rounds that excel in different areas. You are the one pissing on one of the rounds, not me.

I heard you are sponsored by Alexander Arms, add to that I think you are trying to promote the Grendel by any means to help sell your book.

Hey straw man.  You can't find anywhere where I said case taper doesn't matter.  

Yup, 7.62 NATO has .006 Rads of taper, while 6.5 Grendel has .005 rads.  Is your argument that this is a huge difference, or are you splitting hairs to save face?

The statement in this thread was made that 6.5 Grendel is not suitable for full auto use.  (I personally see zero need for this in the AR15, but it works fine.)

Then you went to an argument about case tapers being the reason why the working full auto Grendel doesn't work.  This is called stubbornness and refusal to accept evidence of working full auto Grendel carbines, which have been running for well over a decade now.

Best to go back to construction failure and get your next argument.

Alexander Arms sponsored me?  Where is my sponsorship then, because I'd really like to see it.

You've been lied to again, and instead of vetting your sources, you then attacked my character, again, and added another lie to your constant string of lies in this thread.

Where do you get this retarded BS?

Good job.  I've been stating that 6.5 Grendel uses 50ksi working pressure for how many years now?

You can even verify this in Volume I of the Grendel Handbooks, my shameless firebrand of obscene profits.  LOL!

What a total and colossal failure of an argument you have.  

Everyone can see you getting your arguments from that vermin over there, your freaking handle is right under his for crying out loud.

You're caught.  Maybe this will help jostle your memory:

Who can count all the lies in that retard abortion post?

Next post directly under the above retardation:

Your next post in that thread:

All your claimed factual data is wrong, by the way, as is the vendor who was banned from here.

Do you deny that that is your handle, or it's just a coincidence?  

What I would do is whipe the slate clean from all the garbage you've been fed from construction-reject.

Pull out a ballistics calculator.

Enter in 123gr .493 G1 BC, or even handicap it to .462 G1 Litz (averaged over a 1000yd range, not 200yd hunting distance where the G1 actually works)
2440fps (16" Grendel average speed)

Enter in a 120gr SST with .400 G1 (untested, unverified) for the 6.8 SPC II at 2460fps.

Now compare the numbers.  You have a speed advantage to 25yds, no energy advantage, no drift advantage, no PBZ advantage, no expansion threshold advantage, no penetration advantage, no impact speed advantage.

You've been duped into following a bad source of information, and now you have allowed that to lead you into a place where you openly attack strangers online in a technical forum, calling their character into question and blasting their reputation repeatedly.

That must feel horrible.  Think about it for a minute.  What kind of man does that?

Its not really "his" book. The word I got is he was the proof reader, that's where his credits came from. No load development.
He just offers it on his website.

Like practically everything else you've been fed, it's erroneous beyond recognition.

I launched the 6.5 Grendel Handbook project on the Grendel forum many years ago, which turned into a small group effort.  Many gave support, but only a few were able to dedicate their time to it.  Being debt-free and self-employed helped with that, as I have revenue from other product lines and services.

We had a guest author to write the intros, a former Alaskan Brooks Range guide, Grand Slam hunter and NRA High Power Distinguished Rifleman, and 3 additional co-authors, including me.

They aren't just reloading data pamphlets like you see in the One Caliber, unauthorized photocopy series.  They have many chapters on chamber variations, commercial manufacturers of rifles and ammo, AR15 gas system considerations, barrel length metrics, detecting excessive pressure signs, hunting reach, reloading guidelines, component selection, and the actual data.

Volume II has:

Commercial rifles and ammo
Sights for hunting
Barrel lengths: Handling versus velocity
Muzzle Devices

Hunting bullets
Terminal ballistics
Why 6.5mm is a good caliber

Hunting Projectile list

Hunting loads
Why do we reload for hunting?
Reloading Guidelines (this includes everything from component selection to procedures)
The actual Load data in data book format

Pages of notes where you can write your own loads and relevant details.

The lead author submitted the ISBN registration and wrote some of the chapters, like why 6.5 Grendel is a good caliber and Why do we reload for 6.5 Grendel.  He also put up tens of thousands of dollars for the printing costs.  He's retired, so this was something he was willing to do and had the time.

I wrote a lot of the Commercial Rifles and ammo chapter, a lot of the chamber variants chapter, the sighting system chapter, most of the barrel length handling and velocity chapter, the muzzle device chapter, a lot of the reloading guidelines chapter, and sent requests to many of the manufacturers for use of their data.

Another author did the terminal ballistics gel testing and results across a wide range of impact speeds, in calibrated gel, did the layout, indesign work, and formatting of fonts, margins, page count, and working with the first printer.  We all did editing, proof-reading, and sent sample files to be proof-read by independent people.



Between the 4 Authors, I would put our combined reloading experience at easily over 150 years.  Just between the guest author and the registered author is well over 100 years of experience, and the lead author was an engineer for weapons RDT&E within DoD after an interesting career in the USAF.

We're talking about years of work between the 2 handbooks.  

We got no financing or material support from any manufacturer-this was totally done independently on our own.

We did get a lot of support from forum members, to include sending bullets that we didn't have, load data, and permissions gained from Site Admin to use any data for the project.   We didn't just accept random data at face value.  Everything had to be run through a protocol checked against existing data, so a lot of the loads were actually reduced or rejected if they were in a place that seemed excessive.

If someone tells you I was a "proof reader", they don't know what they're talking about and should be put in the bin of uninformed detractors.

Because of the detail and level of quality in these handbooks, we've had requests from 6.8 SPC fans, 300 BLK fans, 6.5 Creedmoor fans, and even .458 SOCOM fans to do the same thing for them.  There's no money in it, so I know I have zero interest in doing another project like this without funding, and all the people who are in position to fund it already have the large reloading handbooks as loss-leaders for their bullets.

A loss-leader is a product that you know isn't profitable, but you sell anyway as a leader to your actual profitable products.  We don't have any 6.5 Grendel hard goods, so it's just a service project that doesn't even pay for shelf space.

Most of the critiques I've seen come from people who have never held the handbooks in their hands, like the one above.  Biggest mistake I commonly see is that people assume they are just load data.  In Volume II, as an example, only 16 of the 98 pages are load data, with over 200 loads.

Critic on the sidelines and all....

Thank you for confirming that while you claim to be an expert on load data, pressures, component strength etc. You have only read all of this and not done the actual testing yourself.
Interesting.....

I know how to use Google.

I can see what's going on as well.

Several new members jump in and start attacking another member. When called on it, one immediately cites Google as his resource for past topics....stalk much?
What this looks like, whether you intend it or not, is you and others stalking LRRP52 (via Google) and posting here with no other purpose than harassment.

You guys have a number of posts on this thread that do nothing to answer the OP's question. Instead, they are attacks on a guy you apparently have personal problems with. Hence, the Join Date/Post Count comment. Additionally, your exact wording makes it sound like you've been following him here, "on A public forum for years and years".

Nope, not suspicious at all.

I have no idea what your real intent here is, but you you look like a retread or a stalking troll who here to do nothing but stir up trouble.

And I've been shooting and working on AR's since I was a 19 year old Marine in 1993. So what?
That doesnt change the fact that you suddenly appear and start stalking another member and derailing and hijacking a thread with sole purpose of attacking another member.
You havent contributed to this thread other than to attack LRRP52. Just like the other guy, whether you intend to or not, it looks like a troll from another board who just joined up to harass another member.

I do find it interesting that someone who knows so much about guns, owned machine guns, and can happily point to posts on other forums just recently joined the board in time to dogpile on LRRP52.

Certainly convenient.

I said nothing to LRR on this post until after he replied to me. My three posts before he replied to me were all to the OP. True or false?

It was only after LRR referred to my posts that I referred to him, true or false?

Go check.

So you searched for posts by LRRP52 on search engines.......

Again, I dont know what you're intent was, but I know what it looks like.

I own 5.56 AR's, a dedicated 22 LR by CMMG, and a 308 AR. I dont own anything in 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel. I dont have an allegiance one way or another. Other than disliking people who come in with the express intent of starting shit to create drama.

Really? I am "caught" because you found something that I have NEVER referred to?
Where did I ever refer to the "6.8 having better usable hunting bullets?"
Where did I ever refer to there being "10,000 6.5 bullets usable in the grendel" or anything of the sort...or even more bullets...or any bullets? That hasn't happened.
Where did I ever say the "most" of the 6.5 bullets are "target bullets?" That hasn't happened.
Where did I ever say "most are too heavy" in reference to the 6.5 bullets? That hasn't happened.
Where did I ever say the 6.5 bullets are too slow to "expand properly at yardage it is claimed to perform better?" That hasn't happened.

You have me mistaken with someone else if you think he couched me about the 6.5.
How about these questions though? Will you answer them? I doubt it.

1. Does case taper influence reliability during extraction?
2. Does this have anything to do with being considered for full auto use?
3. Do bullets fired in hot guns have more case expansion and pressure than those shot in cold guns?
4. Are dirty guns more likely to have stuck cases than clean guns?
5. Is the PSI rating for the 6.8 at least 10% higher than the 6.5 Grendel?
   (be honest, 50K vs 55K for SAAMI, and 50K vs 58.5K for SPC-II...or even if you go hot with 52K for grendel and 58.5-60K for SPC-II)
6. Is the 5.56 bolt stronger than the 6.8 bolt?
7. Is the 6.8 bolt stronger than the 6.5 Grendel bolt?
8. Are broken extractors and bolts reported more often in the 6.5 Grendel?
9. What range is the shot for most hunters of whitetail deer or hogs?
10. Do you condone hunting deer or hog with either gun over 400 yards?

I suspect you won't answer with yes or no. haha

And there it is....


MY shocked face.....

Not even close.  I searched the 6.8. Try it, and you see him popping up in those conversations. He spams those topics...on many forums, even on youtube.

Except he wasn't in my targets until after he replied to me. I said nothing to him until then. Don't overlook that. You cannot start nonsense and post lies in response to someone, and then get upset when people call you on it.

If only this was a thread in GD

You just admitted to "targeting" him.

Dude, just stop.

Seriously, I dont care which one you feel is superior, I think they're both good rounds. But you, woodsmoke, and Yama-Raja come in here start jumping all over LRRP52....you look like insecure little children. It doesnt take a rocket surgeon to see this is personal for you three. Why is that?

ED308 disagrees with LRRP52 but I dont see any name calling or shit posting from him?
Why is that?

Maybe it isnt personal for him?

Why is it personal for you?

Calling someone on something you disagree with is fine....targeting them....hmmmm...different thing all together.

Yup, my point from the get go......this isnt a thread in GD, it's a thread in Tech.

Yet certain people are acting like it's GD.

Clownshoes....

Have I followed him on any other discussions? NO. I am targeting his nonsense replies. When he stops posting nonsense here, I will leave it be. Comprehend?

Let's see if he will do the same with 6.8 discussions. I bet you he won't. What would you like to bet?

Maybe you are selective in your reading. He has name called many times, but that doesn't bother me one bit.

What bothers me is promotion of lies. It isn't about "superior." It is about truth. I, like you, also stated they are both good rounds. Just being honest about the data is all I expect.

You stated he's been making false statements for years, you've targeted him, and youv'e used google to search for him.

You should just stop, you're not making yourself look any better here.

At the risk of participating in this terrible thread about anything but broken extractors, I'll chime in with some experience.

I am the forum member and class participant LRRFP52 mentioned clear back on page 1 that has broken 2 extractors.  Actually I've broken 3, all of them in the last few months and all of the older Grendels are running fine with many thousands of cumulative rounds through them.

The first breakage came after about 300 rounds of steel and broke again in the same gun after another 250 or so rounds, again steel cased ammo.  

The third one was in a different run but built of the same parts list at nearly the same timeframe.  It broke an extractor after about 900 rounds of primarily steel cased ammo and has not broken again.

As I mentioned, several others have been running flawlessly for several years and far higher round counts.

I attribute these breakages to a bad batch of extractors.

You may now go back to your internet dick swinging hoping to prove whatever any of you have to prove.  Having been to LRRFP52's house several times I cannot think of a time when I've been misled on any aspect of any subject by him, so I'll simply vouch for him and bow out.

Edited to stop derailing the thread.

Thanks SCW.

LRR doesn't need to stop posting false data then huh. You must be one of his pals.

No response to these questions though...hmmm

What make bolt/extractor broke on you.  I'm piling up parts and want to know what to avoid.  Thanks.

Sir this is a McDonald's Drive-thru.

aww dont stop now keep it going. best thread i've read in years.

All three were from AA, however several of the others that have held up for years are also from AA.

I intend to buy several more as replacements, but I'd be willing to bet that there is only a single source of them and everyone is re-selling the same stuff.  In which case, I'm not sure where, or more appropriately WHEN to buy some.  I'd like that bad production batch to be out of the system when I stock up again.  AA did replace one of the bad ones and Bill Alexander asked to see the bad one, then they said they'd replace the second broken one (but I don't think I ever got a second one from them) and didn't even respond to my emails after the third, lol.

I tend to agree with this one. No need to keep telling others 6.5G is better in threads on other calibers. Obviously not appreciated.

It is one of the craziest tech threads I have ever seen.  
It would be like if I wanted some info on a broken extractor on my '42 Swede 6.5x55 and some clown cars rolled in and squawked about the 8mm Mauser being the only way to roll!  Trade out your inferior piece of shit, now!    LMAO

Holy moly! It's been YEARS since a online forum thread has legitimately made me bust out laughing, and I have no dog in this fight, love both rounds, but between the" purse" fight comment and the "6.Hate" I'm dying here...

Guess I split the difference here because I not only have 1400+ HARD rounds downrange with super nova hot Grendel handloads with no breakages, but I also recently built and been on a 6.8 kick... lol...

If we all joined forces as black rifle loving dudes, imagen the info we could share!!

These two cartridges certainly inspire alot of passion!

You never see this much disputing between the 450 Bushmaster, 458 Socom and 50 Beowulf... those guys just share hugs and stories lol..

< COC Violation - F >