User Panel
Is this just the commercialized version of 6mm AR? 6mm AR is the best 6mm round out of an AR-package that I've seen.
I don't think there is enough of a change from the Grendel for it to become widely popular, especially with the limited data that's been published. 24" test barrel doesn't help anybody. |
|
|
Is it designed for longer barrels? I’m not nearly as buff as that Secret Service guy to walk around with a 24 inch rifle and suppressor.
|
|
Quoted: I still can't figure out if AMU or 5th Group actually "adopted" 6.8SPC way back when... I'm assuming 6ARC was a Program of Record. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: US Military Adopts 6mm ARC I still can't figure out if AMU or 5th Group actually "adopted" 6.8SPC way back when... I'm assuming 6ARC was a Program of Record. AMU definitely didn't adopt it. Quite the opposite really. 5th Group had at least one Commander who authorized studies and testing to be done with the proposed cartridge, not much beyond that. JSOC acquired a large sample of 6.8 SPC carbines, ammunition, and magazines and did their own in-house high volume testing without some promoter trying to influence the tests, and wanted nothing to do with it after they were blowing up guns repeatedly. No responsible entity really had control and ownership over 6.8 at the time, so all kinds of deviations from any of the initial 3 chambers, bore specs, and cartridge loadings were happening and colliding with each other. Promoters of the 6.8 had to be escorted off of Bragg at least once by uniformed MPs at the request of units who were tired of being approached without solicitation. There were several of the early 6.8 proponents who then traveled to the UK Ministry of Defense small arms people (without any official business orders or status) and told them, "This is the new 6.8x43 NATO cartridge developed by SOCOM, and that you had better get on board or get left behind." These MoD people, having had a continual relationship with the US for generations prior to this, wondered what was going on because they never had these types of interactions before. If something was actually sanctioned for R&D for NATO testing pre-standardization, they would have been notified through official channels and representatives and asked to participate. They contacted the official DoD reps in the US who said, "What?" It ended up resulting in threats of Courts Martial for anyone who was caught with 6.8 uppers, mags, or even as much as a piece of spent brass downrange. They ticked off a lot of people across services, within multiple elements of SOF, and foreign partners, as well as the FBI ballistics lab. If someone wanted to write a historical account of how not to promote a cartridge, the material available on the 6.8 "proponency" would make you shake your head from page-to-page asking if people could actually be that ridiculous. People were fired over it and PNG'd from multiple locations and agencies within DoD and Federal LE for misconduct, misrepresentation, and attempts at fraud. |
|
Quoted: Is this just the commercialized version of 6mm AR? 6mm AR is the best 6mm round out of an AR-package that I've seen. I don't think there is enough of a change from the Grendel for it to become widely popular, especially with the limited data that's been published. 24" test barrel doesn't help anybody. View Quote Shoulder location is shorter than the 6mm AR. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: More like plagiarism; Alexander spent like a decade developing & marketing Grendel LOL he ripped of the 6.5mm PPC. If you put the 2 next to each other, as well as compare the chamber development and extensive testing efforts from Alexander, you'd see how mistaken that is. |
|
Quoted: Is this just the commercialized version of 6mm AR? 6mm AR is the best 6mm round out of an AR-package that I've seen. I don't think there is enough of a change from the Grendel for it to become widely popular, especially with the limited data that's been published. 24" test barrel doesn't help anybody. View Quote Guess it will depend on its success with the DoD buy. If it performs well and spreads some, you'll see 6.5G forgotten and the 6mm ARC be the mainstay. People love to flock to military/government adopted rounds. |
|
So a necked down Grendel.
No advantage over a Grendel and the 6mm Grendel has been a thing for a few years. 6mm at reduced velocity/energy compared to a .243Win, nope. |
|
Quoted:...6mm Creedmoor did the same to 243 but with as popular as 243 is its staying power probably beats 260... View Quote The 243 will remain popular but rifles came with too slow a twist to handle heavy bullets. The 6mm CM is very near the 243 in performance but with a faster twist it can handle both light and heavy bullets. This is a significant improvement and worthy of a new cartridge. |
|
|
Quoted: Is it designed for longer barrels? I’m not nearly as buff as that Secret Service guy to walk around with a 24 inch rifle and suppressor. View Quote If you set a specific muzzle velocity as one of the main performance metrics for a cartridge, you might be able to say "designed for longer barrels", but most bottle neck centerfire rifle cartridges have similar curves when looking at barrel length. If you go to the extremes where you have low case volume and no real overbore on one end, then you can hit a place where more barrel length just doesn't give you a lot of velocity increase like with 300 Whisper. But for bottleneck cases, they generally have very similar velocity curves relative to barrel length. Less case volume, shorter barrels. More case volume and you can increase the barrel length past 24" and still get performance gains, like with magnums and more overbore cartridges that have case capacity similar to .308 Win. An 18" 6mm ARC will still push a 107gr high BC bullet in the .530 G1/.270 G7 range over 2600fps (2617fps). That will be flatter and have less drift than a 24" Grendel shooting the best 123gr bullets (.527 G1/.263 G7) That's supersonic to 1075yds, and still has 900ft-lbs at 425yds, 1 mil of wind drift at 500yds. A 16" 6mm ARC Recce Carbine with spit 107gr at 2560fps That's supersonic to 1025yds. 14.5": 2508fps Super to 1000yds 13": 2451fps Super to 975yds |
|
Quoted: Guess it will depend on its success with the DoD buy. If it performs well and spreads some, you'll see 6.5G forgotten and the 6mm ARC be the mainstay. People love to flock to military/government adopted rounds. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Is this just the commercialized version of 6mm AR? 6mm AR is the best 6mm round out of an AR-package that I've seen. I don't think there is enough of a change from the Grendel for it to become widely popular, especially with the limited data that's been published. 24" test barrel doesn't help anybody. Guess it will depend on its success with the DoD buy. If it performs well and spreads some, you'll see 6.5G forgotten and the 6mm ARC be the mainstay. People love to flock to military/government adopted rounds. Yeah, Grendel isn't going anywhere but up due to the amount of market support it has. 6mm Grendel variants like this are already proven as to performance. The market isn't going to just up and forget 90+ factory loads and steel case availability, plus the benefits for hunting that a lot of people have gotten into Grendel for. I see a lot of people who are new to firearms, or are just barely getting a peek into some things that have been happening over the past 2 decades pop in and think things are a certain way because they haven't heard of it before, so now their experiential reality somehow translates to reality in the market. Just to be able to get a new cartridge to break through into temporary recognition is a huge hurdle. To get SAAMI approval is even bigger than that since they get approached with so many different wildcats by individuals and small shops throughout the year. They have to turn people away as a rule if they don't have big manufacturer support. Then to get one major ammo manufacturer to adopt your cartridge and put it into their schedule is another huge hurdle. To get market traction with consumers based on the performance or marketing is even bigger. To get other cartridge manufacturers to take notice and then start filling the rising demand is the next major hurdle. Once you see all the major manufacturers getting on board year-after-year, then it has become mainstream. Of the few cartridges that have been introduced over the last 2 decades, how many have steel case option? That took 7 years of back-and-forth between Bill A. and Barnaul engineers working through an intermediary just to get the steel case specs dialed in correctly. |
|
Quoted: Yeah, Grendel isn't going anywhere but up due to the amount of market support it has. 6mm Grendel variants like this are already proven as to performance. The market isn't going to just up and forget 90+ factory loads and steel case availability, plus the benefits for hunting that a lot of people have gotten into Grendel for. I see a lot of people who are new to firearms, or are just barely getting a peek into some things that have been happening over the past 2 decades pop in and think things are a certain way because they haven't heard of it before, so now their experiential reality somehow translates to reality in the market. Just to be able to get a new cartridge to break through into temporary recognition is a huge hurdle. To get SAAMI approval is even bigger than that since they get approached with so many different wildcats by individuals and small shops throughout the year. They have to turn people away as a rule if they don't have big manufacturer support. Then to get one major ammo manufacturer to adopt your cartridge and put it into their schedule is another huge hurdle. To get market traction with consumers based on the performance or marketing is even bigger. To get other cartridge manufacturers to take notice and then start filling the rising demand is the next major hurdle. Once you see all the major manufacturers getting on board year-after-year, then it has become mainstream. Of the few cartridges that have been introduced over the last 2 decades, how many have steel case option? That took 7 years of back-and-forth between Bill A. and Barnaul engineers working through an intermediary just to get the steel case specs dialed in correctly. View Quote The availability of steel cased ammo for 6.5 Grendel is really, really compelling. And I do mean availability -- even now it's in stock in multiple places at reasonable prices. |
|
Quoted: Yeah, Grendel isn't going anywhere but up due to the amount of market support it has. 6mm Grendel variants like this are already proven as to performance. The market isn't going to just up and forget 90+ factory loads and steel case availability, plus the benefits for hunting that a lot of people have gotten into Grendel for. I see a lot of people who are new to firearms, or are just barely getting a peek into some things that have been happening over the past 2 decades pop in and think things are a certain way because they haven't heard of it before, so now their experiential reality somehow translates to reality in the market. Just to be able to get a new cartridge to break through into temporary recognition is a huge hurdle. To get SAAMI approval is even bigger than that since they get approached with so many different wildcats by individuals and small shops throughout the year. They have to turn people away as a rule if they don't have big manufacturer support. Then to get one major ammo manufacturer to adopt your cartridge and put it into their schedule is another huge hurdle. To get market traction with consumers based on the performance or marketing is even bigger. To get other cartridge manufacturers to take notice and then start filling the rising demand is the next major hurdle. Once you see all the major manufacturers getting on board year-after-year, then it has become mainstream. Of the few cartridges that have been introduced over the last 2 decades, how many have steel case option? That took 7 years of back-and-forth between Bill A. and Barnaul engineers working through an intermediary just to get the steel case specs dialed in correctly. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Is this just the commercialized version of 6mm AR? 6mm AR is the best 6mm round out of an AR-package that I've seen. I don't think there is enough of a change from the Grendel for it to become widely popular, especially with the limited data that's been published. 24" test barrel doesn't help anybody. Guess it will depend on its success with the DoD buy. If it performs well and spreads some, you'll see 6.5G forgotten and the 6mm ARC be the mainstay. People love to flock to military/government adopted rounds. Yeah, Grendel isn't going anywhere but up due to the amount of market support it has. 6mm Grendel variants like this are already proven as to performance. The market isn't going to just up and forget 90+ factory loads and steel case availability, plus the benefits for hunting that a lot of people have gotten into Grendel for. I see a lot of people who are new to firearms, or are just barely getting a peek into some things that have been happening over the past 2 decades pop in and think things are a certain way because they haven't heard of it before, so now their experiential reality somehow translates to reality in the market. Just to be able to get a new cartridge to break through into temporary recognition is a huge hurdle. To get SAAMI approval is even bigger than that since they get approached with so many different wildcats by individuals and small shops throughout the year. They have to turn people away as a rule if they don't have big manufacturer support. Then to get one major ammo manufacturer to adopt your cartridge and put it into their schedule is another huge hurdle. To get market traction with consumers based on the performance or marketing is even bigger. To get other cartridge manufacturers to take notice and then start filling the rising demand is the next major hurdle. Once you see all the major manufacturers getting on board year-after-year, then it has become mainstream. Of the few cartridges that have been introduced over the last 2 decades, how many have steel case option? That took 7 years of back-and-forth between Bill A. and Barnaul engineers working through an intermediary just to get the steel case specs dialed in correctly. Time will tell but the adoption of a cartridge by government entities appears to be a massive driving force. 6.5G has failed to do so and with 6mm ARC now gaining adoption before even hitting commercial side, it doesn't look good for it ever getting adopted. |
|
Quoted: Yes! Wolf steel case 6.5G is the bees knees for plinking. As I am reading more about the ARC it appears that a specialized magazine will be needed just like with the Grendel. Honestly it seems Hornady is stretching themselves thin by coming out with all these new "innovative" cartridges without the backing of other companies. For example my 6.5 PRC. What is it? Long action? Short action? Mine is a short action. Some are long. And if I handload anything over a153 grain bullet it won't even fit in a short action mag. It's really a wild cat cartridge with Hornady branded on it. With that said, the ARC isn't innovative. It's based off the 220 Russian with the shoulder set back and with a reformed shoulder angle. Ballistic wise the Grendel has more energy but slightly more wind drift. Now if Hornady could actually get backing from other companies like magpul to make specific magazines for this cartridge I might be in but that's highly unlikely when we have 100,000 different AR-15 platform cartridges. I wish Hornady the best of luck with their ARC but the Grendel is too similar for me to change. TLDR: the ARC is the Grendel's sister cartridge. Nothing innovative to see here. Ballistics are so very close to each other View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Right on. I have to wonder why the "specialized DoD unit" for whom this round was developed decided 6.5 Grendel wouldn't do the job. Everything is pretty much the same except the projectile. ETA: 6.5 Grendel also has inexpensive brass and steel cased factory ammo loads available. Yes! Wolf steel case 6.5G is the bees knees for plinking. As I am reading more about the ARC it appears that a specialized magazine will be needed just like with the Grendel. Honestly it seems Hornady is stretching themselves thin by coming out with all these new "innovative" cartridges without the backing of other companies. For example my 6.5 PRC. What is it? Long action? Short action? Mine is a short action. Some are long. And if I handload anything over a153 grain bullet it won't even fit in a short action mag. It's really a wild cat cartridge with Hornady branded on it. With that said, the ARC isn't innovative. It's based off the 220 Russian with the shoulder set back and with a reformed shoulder angle. Ballistic wise the Grendel has more energy but slightly more wind drift. Now if Hornady could actually get backing from other companies like magpul to make specific magazines for this cartridge I might be in but that's highly unlikely when we have 100,000 different AR-15 platform cartridges. I wish Hornady the best of luck with their ARC but the Grendel is too similar for me to change. TLDR: the ARC is the Grendel's sister cartridge. Nothing innovative to see here. Ballistics are so very close to each other Special magazines would require a different lower, such as the LWRC Six-8 lower. |
|
Quoted: Time will tell but the adoption of a cartridge by government entities appears to be a massive driving force. 6.5G has failed to do so and with 6mm ARC now gaining adoption before even hitting commercial side, it doesn't look good for it ever getting adopted. View Quote Big Green, yes. But a component of JSOC? That's kinda different. LWRCi probably made more Six8 guns for their Saudi and Jordanian contracts than DoD is ever going to buy in 6ARC, but you don't see a ton of Six8 stuff out there in the commercial market. Magpul even made Six8 mags and Federal made 90gr Gold Dot contract ammo, IIRC. |
|
Quoted: Big Green, yes. But a component of JSOC? That's kinda different. LWRCi probably made more Six8 guns for their Saudi and Jordanian contracts than DoD is ever going to buy in 6ARC, but you don't see a ton of Six8 stuff out there in the commercial market. Magpul even made Six8 mags and Federal made 95gr contract ammo, IIRC. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Time will tell but the adoption of a cartridge by government entities appears to be a massive driving force. 6.5G has failed to do so and with 6mm ARC now gaining adoption before even hitting commercial side, it doesn't look good for it ever getting adopted. Big Green, yes. But a component of JSOC? That's kinda different. LWRCi probably made more Six8 guns for their Saudi and Jordanian contracts than DoD is ever going to buy in 6ARC, but you don't see a ton of Six8 stuff out there in the commercial market. Magpul even made Six8 mags and Federal made 95gr contract ammo, IIRC. 90 grain, was the XM68GD load, does rather well from short barrel setups too. As for the Six8, there are two other companies now making receiver sets that use the mags. There was a company that was going to make steel mags for it, to take advantage of a longer round but it's been quiet from them for a bit. I do agree though, on the 6ARC having limited adoption. |
|
|
|
Quoted: What dod problem does it solve View Quote Apparently some Tier 1 dudes wanted a rifle/cartridge combo that drops bad guys at 800+ meters without the weight or size penalty of a .308-based rifle. The cartridge is the 6ARC. The rifle is the Barrett Rec7 DI with an 18" Proof CF barrel. |
|
A whole new generation of checking lot numbers, popped primers and "your rifle was dirty that's why it kaboomed," exciting!
|
|
Quoted: Apparently some Tier 1 dudes wanted a rifle/cartridge combo that drops bad guys at 800+ meters without the weight or size penalty of a .308-based rifle. The cartridge is the 6ARC. The rifle is the Barrett Rec7 DI with an 18" Proof CF barrel. View Quote sounds like 6.5g would have fit the bill then. |
|
Quoted: sounds like 6.5g would have fit the bill then. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Apparently some Tier 1 dudes wanted a rifle/cartridge combo that drops bad guys at 800+ meters without the weight or size penalty of a .308-based rifle. The cartridge is the 6ARC. The rifle is the Barrett Rec7 DI with an 18" Proof CF barrel. sounds like 6.5g would have fit the bill then. |
|
Quoted: 6mm ARC Just Released by Hornady Hornady 6mm ARC Info Page COMPARISONWHAT MAKES THE 6MM ARC BETTER? 308 Win The 6mm ARC delivers substantially less recoil allowing shooters to spot their own shots. The AR-15 platform features a higher magazine capacity. The 6mm ARC offers a 30 to 35% lighter-weight package (gun and ammo). 223/5.56 The 6mm ARC achieves substantially better ballistics than the 223/5.56. It delivers less drop, less wind deflection and the ability to shoot accurate groups at much greater distance (1000+ yds). 224 Valkyrie The 6mm ARC gives hunters the ability to successfully hunt varmints and deer. The 6mm ARC produces a larger splash signature that allows shooters to self-spot impacts and make rapid adjustments. 6.5 Grendel The 6mm ARC delivers comparable performance from a wider assortment of bullets, making it a more versatile choice. 6.8 SPC The 6mm ARC is a better long-range performer. Rifle Components Now Available View Quote Reported. |
|
I was told one of the Seal Teams have been using it over the last year
|
|
I was one of those who fell to the allure of the .224 V and built a top tier rig, only to never fire it. I was about to sell the .224 components and rebuild as a 6.5G. I may have to wait and see if the ARC offers anything better. For my needs, I doubt it.
|
|
Quoted: I was one of those who fell to the allure of the .224 V and built a top tier rig, only to never fire it. I was about to sell the .224 components and rebuild as a 6.5G. I may have to wait and see if the ARC offers anything better. For my needs, I doubt it. View Quote Why not just shoot the Valkyrie? |
|
Bunch of luddites in here.
“This thing I know almost nothing about and have no experience with sucks.” |
|
Quoted: Why not just shoot the Valkyrie? View Quote The internet told him it’s not cool anymore. Apparently a bunch of early adopters whose guns see the range once a year got tired of spending more than 25 cpr to punch holes in paper, sold their uppers for pennies on the dollar and that means it’s a “dead cartridge”. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I was one of those who fell to the allure of the .224 V and built a top tier rig, only to never fire it. I was about to sell the .224 components and rebuild as a 6.5G. I may have to wait and see if the ARC offers anything better. For my needs, I doubt it. Why not just shoot the Valkyrie? Good question. I guess after our 1000 yard range here closed I had trouble seeing how the 224 V offered much over a 5.56 with 77 grainer. Maybe I'm wrong? At least with a 6.5G I would have a decent deer rig. |
|
Quoted: The internet told him it’s not cool anymore. Apparently a bunch of early adopters whose guns see the range once a year got tired of spending more than 25 cpr to punch holes in paper, sold their uppers for pennies on the dollar and that means it’s a “dead cartridge”. View Quote Funny, I don't ever remember talking to you. |
|
Quoted: Good question. I guess after our 1000 yard range here closed I had trouble seeing how the 224 V offered much over a 5.56 with 77 grainer. Maybe I'm wrong? At least with a 6.5G I would have a decent deer rig. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I was one of those who fell to the allure of the .224 V and built a top tier rig, only to never fire it. I was about to sell the .224 components and rebuild as a 6.5G. I may have to wait and see if the ARC offers anything better. For my needs, I doubt it. Why not just shoot the Valkyrie? Good question. I guess after our 1000 yard range here closed I had trouble seeing how the 224 V offered much over a 5.56 with 77 grainer. Maybe I'm wrong? At least with a 6.5G I would have a decent deer rig. Inside 300, I wouldn't bother with anything fancy. 600 on out, the Valkyrie will do a lot better than a 77gr (although Berger apparently has a new 83.5 grain or such that is supposed to be pretty good, use a 1/7 twist, intended for either the Valkyrie or 5.56 single loaded). I've only shot to 600 in XTC and 3x600 matches, so don't have anything I'd want to stretch to 1000. I now have access to a 1000 yard range, so once I can finish rebuilding reserves from being unemployed, I'll get something set up and go for it. Might even get back in to service rifle competition again. |
|
Quoted: Inside 300, I wouldn't bother with anything fancy. 600 on out, the Valkyrie will do a lot better than a 77gr (although Berger apparently has a new 83.5 grain or such that is supposed to be pretty good, use a 1/7 twist, intended for either the Valkyrie or 5.56 single loaded). I've only shot to 600 in XTC and 3x600 matches, so don't have anything I'd want to stretch to 1000. I now have access to a 1000 yard range, so once I can finish rebuilding reserves from being unemployed, I'll get something set up and go for it. Might even get back in to service rifle competition again. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I was one of those who fell to the allure of the .224 V and built a top tier rig, only to never fire it. I was about to sell the .224 components and rebuild as a 6.5G. I may have to wait and see if the ARC offers anything better. For my needs, I doubt it. Why not just shoot the Valkyrie? Good question. I guess after our 1000 yard range here closed I had trouble seeing how the 224 V offered much over a 5.56 with 77 grainer. Maybe I'm wrong? At least with a 6.5G I would have a decent deer rig. Inside 300, I wouldn't bother with anything fancy. 600 on out, the Valkyrie will do a lot better than a 77gr (although Berger apparently has a new 83.5 grain or such that is supposed to be pretty good, use a 1/7 twist, intended for either the Valkyrie or 5.56 single loaded). I've only shot to 600 in XTC and 3x600 matches, so don't have anything I'd want to stretch to 1000. I now have access to a 1000 yard range, so once I can finish rebuilding reserves from being unemployed, I'll get something set up and go for it. Might even get back in to service rifle competition again. Thanks for the feedback. I haven't sold any of the 224V stuff off yet so may give it a go yet. I can shoot out to about 600 on our ranch without bulldozing a lane. I can always convert it later if it doesn't fill a need. I am going to keep my eye on the 6 ARC to see where it goes. Although the 6.5G seems to fill a real need and I like the idea of cheap steel case for practice. |
|
Quoted: Good question. I guess after our 1000 yard range here closed I had trouble seeing how the 224 V offered much over a 5.56 with 77 grainer. Maybe I'm wrong? At least with a 6.5G I would have a decent deer rig. View Quote This is why I havent bothered with anything other than 5.56. I have only one place I can consistently shoot at, and there isnt 100 yards to shoot, there isnt even enough to properly sight in the scope I have for my rifle. There was a gun club I was going to join, but then Covid happened, and they decided to shutdown for the time period (now im rethinking joining for a number of reasons). |
|
Quoted: Thanks for the feedback. I haven't sold any of the 224V stuff off yet so may give it a go yet. I can shoot out to about 600 on our ranch without bulldozing a lane. I can always convert it later if it doesn't fill a need. I am going to keep my eye on the 6 ARC to see where it goes. Although the 6.5G seems to fill a real need and I like the idea of cheap steel case for practice. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I was one of those who fell to the allure of the .224 V and built a top tier rig, only to never fire it. I was about to sell the .224 components and rebuild as a 6.5G. I may have to wait and see if the ARC offers anything better. For my needs, I doubt it. Why not just shoot the Valkyrie? Good question. I guess after our 1000 yard range here closed I had trouble seeing how the 224 V offered much over a 5.56 with 77 grainer. Maybe I'm wrong? At least with a 6.5G I would have a decent deer rig. Inside 300, I wouldn't bother with anything fancy. 600 on out, the Valkyrie will do a lot better than a 77gr (although Berger apparently has a new 83.5 grain or such that is supposed to be pretty good, use a 1/7 twist, intended for either the Valkyrie or 5.56 single loaded). I've only shot to 600 in XTC and 3x600 matches, so don't have anything I'd want to stretch to 1000. I now have access to a 1000 yard range, so once I can finish rebuilding reserves from being unemployed, I'll get something set up and go for it. Might even get back in to service rifle competition again. Thanks for the feedback. I haven't sold any of the 224V stuff off yet so may give it a go yet. I can shoot out to about 600 on our ranch without bulldozing a lane. I can always convert it later if it doesn't fill a need. I am going to keep my eye on the 6 ARC to see where it goes. Although the 6.5G seems to fill a real need and I like the idea of cheap steel case for practice. I'll say that I've seen some people claiming they're having difficulty getting good loads worked up with the Valkyrie, don't remember whether it was here or one of the other gun sites I visit, which is why they claim they've quit working with it. I've got AR's in 6.8x43 and 5.56, with all the reloading gear, so Valkyrie has some attraction to me, but I've also always planned to add a Grendel to the mix and have some magazines and even a box of ammo for it, just haven't had the spare cycles or money to build one up, or anyplace close to stretch it's legs. If this new contract goes long-term, I'll be moving about 45 minutes from a 1000 yard electronic target range, otherwise it's over a two hour drive right now to anything over 100 yards. |
|
For the most part 1000 yard accuracy is fantasy land bullshit. I hand load and enjoy benchrest but outside of matches what's the point? What's the point of cramming it into an AR? Pure fantasy.
There's practical and then there's on paper horseshit. I'm filing this in the latter.. |
|
|
Quoted: It's a major problem we've had with small arms since the abandonment of the 6mm Lee Navy and .276 Pedersen, neither of which was given an opportunity to have staying power in the cartridge mix of dismounted US soldiers. 5.56 is great for a lot of basic infantry work within 200-300m. It allowed units that used to be liabilities carrying 7.62 NATO rifles to have far more staying power and combat endurance just working out of the soldier's load they left the wire with. You make contact once with 7.62 NATO rifles, and after one magazine, you're already thinking about how close you are to running black, how will you withdraw or resupply, consolidate and defend a hasty position, versus being offensive. Equipped with 5.56 rifles enabled units to make multiple contacts and continue the attack, continue mission without need of resupply, and in worst case scenarios, have substantial ammunition to be able to defend until indirect fires or CAS can be called upon. If I have 3 mutually-supporting maneuver elements and my lead element makes contact, after the contact is resolved, I can leap-frog my middle or trail element to lead with 100% UP on LACE (Liquid, Ammunition, Casualties=0, and Equipment). If I need to redistribute ammo from a lead element that spent more than 25% of their ammo, our overall ammo state will not be that drastically affected once we've cross-loaded mags with the elements that didn't spend any ammo. With 7.62 NATO, the numbers start off so small that even one lead element making contact significantly reduces our ability to fight if they burnt through 2 or more mags. With 5.56 though, I don't have the reach and energy of 7.62 NATO, so we've always had a mix of 7.62 NATO weapons in the units, whether that was belt-fed or sniper systems. But now my snipers are either carrying 2 weapons, or have a hard time fighting the close fight when we take down and occupy buildings or huts. What if there was a way to have my cake and eat it too? It would be great to have a light-recoiling cartridge that fits inside my existing M4 profile, but reaches out as well or better than 7.62 NATO. Enter 6.5 Grendel and 6mm ARC. 6mm ARC has less recoil comparing 108gr to 123gr 6.5mm, flatter trajectory, less wind drift, and maybe marginally-less barrier defeat, but plenty to get the job done. A lot of targets are fleeting or partially exposed targets anyway, so designated shooters need to be able to hit small at distance at UKD, which is easier with 6mm than 6.5mm for the same reasons it's easier with 6.5mm than 7.62 NATO. The big difference is that designated hitters with 6mm ARC Recce-configured blasters can still clear rooms with about the same profile gun as an M4 or suppressor-equipped Mk.18. Throw a modern LPVO on it and go to town. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thefirearmblog.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F10%2F42936455_2270436869664847_2879554213648531456_o-660x660.jpg&f=1&nofb=1 View Quote So are you ditching 6.5g for 6mm arc? |
|
|
Quoted: Talk me through the applied physics of how that's going to happen with a 52,000psi SAAMI MAP. That's way under 5.56 and 7.62 NATO MAP. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: A whole new generation of checking lot numbers, popped primers and "your rifle was dirty that's why it kaboomed," exciting! Talk me through the applied physics of how that's going to happen with a 52,000psi SAAMI MAP. That's way under 5.56 and 7.62 NATO MAP. I think it was a joke and reference to the 6.8 fiasco and possible the knockoff Grendel problems as well. |
|
Quoted: Kind of. Why not call it 6mm Grendel?!?!? That would make it more popular to begin with. Saying "ARC" means shit to anybody. View Quote Because the owner of the "grendel" name for cartridges is prone to getting into legal fights if someone so much as looks at something similar to his intellectual property. |
|
Quoted: For the most part 1000 yard accuracy is fantasy land bullshit. I hand load and enjoy benchrest but outside of matches what's the point? What's the point of cramming it into an AR? Pure fantasy. There's practical and then there's on paper horseshit. I'm filing this in the latter.. View Quote If you ever get the chance to attend an 8-13 week course where you spend every day of 2-5 weeks doing nothing but precision and LR shoot work, then get to attend all the shoot work-up sniper sustainment training ranges on your pre-deployment schedule, shoot real-world for 150 out of 180 days on deployment, come back and go to whatever reputable civilian training facility courses, USMC high angle courses, and Team training there is, go to military sniper matches, then deploy again for more of the same, you start to get an idea of the caliber of shooters that wanted this capability versus the internet guy who rolls up to a local 1000yd range maybe once a year. When you start to focus on a particular skill set like that and get more than 7000 good reps in regularly, dudes actually get pretty impressive with a rifle not only out to 1000yds, but well beyond that, even from an AR15 chassis with the right cartridge. Certain elements within the SOF community do everything I described above. If you know how to read the wind and apply LR fundamentals, making consistent hits at 1000m isn't particularly difficult, within certain wind conditions parameters. As the wind gets faster and at full value orientation to your bullet path, the effective range pulls in noticeably, but 800m shots are still high hit probability with a good shooter in those more challenging conditions. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: It's a major problem we've had with small arms since the abandonment of the 6mm Lee Navy and .276 Pedersen, neither of which was given an opportunity to have staying power in the cartridge mix of dismounted US soldiers. 5.56 is great for a lot of basic infantry work within 200-300m. It allowed units that used to be liabilities carrying 7.62 NATO rifles to have far more staying power and combat endurance just working out of the soldier's load they left the wire with. You make contact once with 7.62 NATO rifles, and after one magazine, you're already thinking about how close you are to running black, how will you withdraw or resupply, consolidate and defend a hasty position, versus being offensive. Equipped with 5.56 rifles enabled units to make multiple contacts and continue the attack, continue mission without need of resupply, and in worst case scenarios, have substantial ammunition to be able to defend until indirect fires or CAS can be called upon. If I have 3 mutually-supporting maneuver elements and my lead element makes contact, after the contact is resolved, I can leap-frog my middle or trail element to lead with 100% UP on LACE (Liquid, Ammunition, Casualties=0, and Equipment). If I need to redistribute ammo from a lead element that spent more than 25% of their ammo, our overall ammo state will not be that drastically affected once we've cross-loaded mags with the elements that didn't spend any ammo. With 7.62 NATO, the numbers start off so small that even one lead element making contact significantly reduces our ability to fight if they burnt through 2 or more mags. With 5.56 though, I don't have the reach and energy of 7.62 NATO, so we've always had a mix of 7.62 NATO weapons in the units, whether that was belt-fed or sniper systems. But now my snipers are either carrying 2 weapons, or have a hard time fighting the close fight when we take down and occupy buildings or huts. What if there was a way to have my cake and eat it too? It would be great to have a light-recoiling cartridge that fits inside my existing M4 profile, but reaches out as well or better than 7.62 NATO. Enter 6.5 Grendel and 6mm ARC. 6mm ARC has less recoil comparing 108gr to 123gr 6.5mm, flatter trajectory, less wind drift, and maybe marginally-less barrier defeat, but plenty to get the job done. A lot of targets are fleeting or partially exposed targets anyway, so designated shooters need to be able to hit small at distance at UKD, which is easier with 6mm than 6.5mm for the same reasons it's easier with 6.5mm than 7.62 NATO. The big difference is that designated hitters with 6mm ARC Recce-configured blasters can still clear rooms with about the same profile gun as an M4 or suppressor-equipped Mk.18. Throw a modern LPVO on it and go to town. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thefirearmblog.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F10%2F42936455_2270436869664847_2879554213648531456_o-660x660.jpg&f=1&nofb=1 Not sure how someone would conclude that based on what I posted. I have a bunch of Grendels ranging from 22" down to 12" with a 10.5" in the works. I've always wanted a 6mm Grendel in addition to all my Grendels that will be an addition, not either/or. Same with 5.56 NATO. 6.5 Grendel smokes 5.56 ballistically looking at energy, supersonic reach, etc. I still have loads of 5.56 blasters, primarily for CQM work and loaners in my DM courses. |
|
Quoted: Because the owner of the "grendel" name for cartridges is prone to getting into legal fights if someone so much as looks at something similar to his intellectual property. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Kind of. Why not call it 6mm Grendel?!?!? That would make it more popular to begin with. Saying "ARC" means shit to anybody. Because the owner of the "grendel" name for cartridges is prone to getting into legal fights if someone so much as looks at something similar to his intellectual property. First I've heard of that. People didn't like that Bill A. worked the front end to control the standards before SAAMI approval. If there was a lawsuit filed against anyone, it slipped by me as a close follower of what has been happening since before 6.5 Grendel was introduced. |
|
Quoted: If you ever get the chance to attend an 8-13 week course where you spend every day of 2-5 weeks doing nothing but precision and LR shoot work, then get to attend all the shoot work-up sniper sustainment training ranges on your pre-deployment schedule, shoot real-world for 150 out of 180 days on deployment, come back and go to whatever reputable civilian training facility courses, USMC high angle courses, and Team training there is, go to military sniper matches, then deploy again for more of the same, you start to get an idea of the caliber of shooters that wanted this capability versus the internet guy who rolls up to a local 1000yd range maybe once a year. When you start to focus on a particular skill set like that and get more than 7000 good reps in regularly, dudes actually get pretty impressive with a rifle not only out to 1000yds, but well beyond that, even from an AR15 chassis with the right cartridge. Certain elements within the SOF community do everything I described above. If you know how to read the wind and apply LR fundamentals, making consistent hits at 1000m isn't particularly difficult, within certain wind conditions parameters. As the wind gets faster and at full value orientation to your bullet path, the effective range pulls in noticeably, but 800m shots are still high hit probability with a good shooter in those more challenging conditions. View Quote Way to jerk yourself off. Shocking as ever. Hes not talking about military deployments. Hes talking about 99% of shooters out there that can't hit shit past 500. Everything in life is not back in the good old days. Options are good thing and if this round works for people than more power to them. I would rather have a 77 grain normal ar15 or 6.5 grendel. If I need more than that I'll take a 6.5cm in a 16 inch gas gun. |
|
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.