6.5 grendel / 7.62x39 AR15 bolts?

[R.W.Dale]

i'll have to keep the information in mind, ive been considering a 6.5 grendel rifle but im pretty picky when it comes to things like reliability and durability.. the idea of anything breaking at any point tends to push me away though. unfortunately there arent many choices for a 6.5 rifle besides the one that can barely handle it at best

If this is the case you should stick to cartridges on a .223 case head. As magazine as well as parts availability is vastly superior and vetted over "alternative calibers"

Something along the lines of the 25-45 may be up your alley

 

[justin22885]

i really like the 6.5 bullet though, i think for smaller intermediate calibers its the perfect balance of bullet weight (for barrier penetration, energy, momentum) coupled with significant ballistic coefficients (i believe hornadys 123 grain SST has a BC of .510).. unfortunately i cant help but view the grendel as a complete flop it had potential.. it had a LOT of potential but unfortunately they made serious sacrifices they shouldnt have in order to pander to the limitations of the AR-15

and to be fair, im getting tired of hearing hype about the latest and great cartridges only to find out none of them can ever lip up to it because after hyping it the developers of said cartridge realize they have to nerf it so people wont break their ARs.. now we have all this crap, 6.5 grendel, 6.8 SPC, .277 wolvering, 6.5 PCC, 25-45 sharps and probably a dozen or so others that really just fall short of what they could be, or are nothing more than .22 wildcats

6.8 SPC isnt that bad of a cartridge but it really doesnt offer anything 7.62x39 doesnt, and it has a BC about as low as the 123 grain 7.62x39 bullets and a case family that is frankly quite rare and uncommon, not as readily available as the 9.6, 11.35, and 12mm cases so because of this you cant make brass from anything else and its going to take a VERY long time, if ever for prices to become reasonable on 6.8 SPC or any of its derivatives.. heck, grendel is already available at $0.35 cents a round

if i was going to wildcat something, figure .223 is completely tapped out and taken to its limits, i would begin with the 7.62x39 or .308 case, necked down to 6.5 mil, and for gods sake put SOME taper and shoulder into it... getting tired of people removing all taper and shoulder in an attempt to squeeze a bit more powder capacity while making serious sacrifices to reliability and then trying to pass their benchrest abominations off as military semi auto cartridges

i would probably take 7.62x39 and just neck it down to 6.5mm, taper, shoulders the same, increase pressures to 62kpsi and pack them into AK mags fired out something stronger than the AR-15 such as a sig 556r, PTR32, AKM, or galil ace

i apologize ahead of time for the rant

 

[crazysccrmd]

The whole point of the Grendel is to fit in an AR15, that's why the limits are set as they are. It didn't flop because it does what it's supposed to within the framework of an AR15. If you want a better performer in an AR15 you'd have to sacrifice magazine capacity to use a .473 case head and use hard to source redesigned bolts.

 

[SuperNaut]

The whole point of the Grendel is to fit in an AR15, that's why the limits are set as they are. It didn't flop because it does what it's supposed to within the framework of an AR15. If you want a better performer in an AR15 you'd have to sacrifice magazine capacity to use a .473 case head and use hard to source redesigned bolts.

Yep, otherwise just go up to .308.

 

[CarJunkieLS1]

It's funny that someone mention the .473 head size and having to source redesigned bolts...

It's been done by Remington. The 30 Remington AR it was a big flop by commercial standards. I however love my 30RAR and wouldn't trade it for anything

 

[justin22885]

the .30 RAR would have been a pretty cool cartridge if it had at least remained a 12mm base diameter as well so you could make it up out of .308 brass.. then youd have sort of a modern version of a 7.92x33mm

unfortunately though if you stick with a 5.56 case head and 5.56 wildcats theres really nothing there to make it an 800 yard rifle like you can get out of the grendel.. makes you wonder though, if theyre going to use specially headspaced barrels and bolts for the grendel, why not improve the lug design as well?

 

[SuperNaut]

makes you wonder though, if theyre going to use specially headspaced barrels and bolts for the grendel, why not improve the lug design as well?

I've only heard about lug breakage with the TYPE II Grendel. I've not heard about any problems (other than the usual AR-15 specific issues) with TYPE I. Since I have offered you a reliable option with TYPE I and you are still focusing on the problems of TYPE II, it appears that you are more interested in debating hypotheticals than building a rifle.

At a certain point one needs to stop talking and start doing.

 

[justin22885]

youve already admitted type ones have problems with broken extractors or at least an increased potential of such, doesnt seem like theyre any more reliable than type 2, just cheaper to fix.. im not sure i want to put that question mark into such a rifle right now. besides, never said i wanted to build one, i was seeing if there had been any significant improvements on them and it seems like its just one tradeoff for another

 

[rbernie]

That's the truth. If you load within the pressure limitations of the round you won't be breaking anything. The people breaking bolts are the ones hot rodding beyond the designed limits of the cartridge.

In fairness, there have been over the last decade a number of folk who reported that their 7.62x39 AR bolts were breaking lugs at an accelerated rate relative to 5.56NATO bolts, given the same round count through either. These failures were not traced to 'overpressure' use - it was just normal use and the failures were attributed to the thinner lug area of the bolt necessitated by the larger rim of the 7.62x39 (.443", compared to .378" of the 5.56NATO).

This is one of the reasons that the 6.8SPC chambering was reportedly designed as it was - to create a cartridge that had a larger diameter than the 5.56 (for case capacity) but not so large that it thinned the AR bolt face too much.....

 

[justin22885]

im still going to persue the idea of a 6.5 grendel rifle, but im really picky about reliability and things not breaking.. i will look into other options for a 6.5 chambering though, shouldnt be too hard to put a 556R bolt in a sig 556 and rebarrel it to 6.5 grendel, i could always have a custom barrel made up for the AK, add an AR-15 mag adapter with it and im certain the VZ58 and SKS are options too

 

[d2wing]

I don't think you should fault the AR because people are trying to expand it's capability.
If you find fault with it you should go ahead and get what you want. Saiga's and Vepr's are available in more potent cartridges. Go for it. You have said many times you hate AR's, don't get one.

 

[justin22885]

its not the rifle itself i dislike so much, its mostly the oversaturation of nothing but snakeoil coming from the latest greatest manufacturer of the week with all these products that are supposed to turn ARs into gods gift to small arms and all they ever do is make weapons heavier or less reliable

i will probably still get an AR at some point because i think its a good idea to have a backup weapon the for the most part matches the military standards, and im really liking some of the new options coming out such as side charging uppers (always HATED the t-handle) as well as the aero precision monolithic uppers, so since 6.5 grendel would basically just be a bolt and a barrel away i will probably still end up trying it in an AR at some point

but since i dont feel comfortable going with 6.5 grendel in it right from the start, i will wait on that project until after i get a better 7.62x39 rifle first and i have to admit the biggest attraction for me with the AR was 6.5 grendel, especially when its $0.35 cents a round

 

[Dean1818]

6.8 SPC isnt that bad of a cartridge but it really doesnt offer anything 7.62x39 doesnt,

We may agree to disagree on this comment.

Look at the best Hornady 7.62x39 bullet for hunting

Look at the best Hornady 6.8 bullet for hunting

At 300 Yards the 6.8 has 40% more energy than a 7.62x39

Not sure what you are looking at .... but that's a LARGE difference at least to me
for what I use the gun for.

If you are looking for the cheapest bullet to shoot....... go 223 (or even cheaper...22)

If you want to ring the bell at 800 yards (and stay AR15).... get a 20 inch plus barrel and go Grendel

I think most people worry about things that never happen, especially since most people are NOT running
2k rounds down pipe every weekend.

Do you have a spare tire in your car? If you are worried about a bolt break, a backup is relatively cheap.

The Grendel is a great choice and has some advantages and disadvantages (As all calibers do)

To me, I went 6.8 because I wanted to hunt Mr Pig. At the time, 6.5 was very expensive.

And..... at the distances I hunt, (under 300 yards) the difference in ballistics between the two calibers was minimal

It also appears that to wring the max out of the Grendal, you need a longer barrel. (22" plus) I like the
compactness of the 6.8 at 16 inches


My solution (not for everyone) is a 223 for plinking, and a 6.8 for hunting.

My reload cost on the 6.8 is well under .50 cents per (around 30 cents)


To the OP....... dont try to fit everything into one box....... sometimes (most times).... it just doesnt fit

 

[justin22885]

We may agree to disagree on this comment.

Look at the best Hornady 7.62x39 bullet for hunting

Look at the best Hornady 6.8 bullet for hunting

At 300 Yards the 6.8 has 40% more energy than a 7.62x39

Not sure what you are looking at .... but that's a LARGE difference at least to me
for what I use the gun for.

If you are looking for the cheapest bullet to shoot....... go 223 (or even cheaper...22)

If you want to ring the bell at 800 yards (and stay AR15).... get a 20 inch plus barrel and go Grendel

I think most people worry about things that never happen, especially since most people are NOT running
2k rounds down pipe every weekend.

Do you have a spare tire in your car? If you are worried about a bolt break, a backup is relatively cheap.

The Grendel is a great choice and has some advantages and disadvantages (As all calibers do)

To me, I went 6.8 because I wanted to hunt Mr Pig. At the time, 6.5 was very expensive.

And..... at the distances I hunt, (under 300 yards) the difference in ballistics between the two calibers was minimal

It also appears that to wring the max out of the Grendal, you need a longer barrel. (22" plus) I like the
compactness of the 6.8 at 16 inches


My solution (not for everyone) is a 223 for plinking, and a 6.8 for hunting.

My reload cost on the 6.8 is well under .50 cents per (around 30 cents)


To the OP....... dont try to fit everything into one box....... sometimes (most times).... it just doesnt fit

well, i just looked up the load data and ballistics for the specific wolf 6.5 grendel load in question, and 6.8 SPC at any range performs better than this.. it also has a higher BC in a 120 grain bullet than the 7.62x39 even in a 150 grain bullet, so it would in fact be a ballistic superior to 7.62x39.. it just costs 4x as much, unfortunately, though with 6.8 SPC at what? 54,000 PSI vs the .277 wolverine at 62kpsi the ballistics are actually about the same, and pricing all components to load up .277 wolverine it would actually cost me less than 6.5 grendel and offer much better ballistics than wolfs 6.5 grendel load.. but yes, you were right

but considering the REALLY low cost of .223/5.56 brass and how much higher pressures it can handle vs the 6.5 grendel, 6.8 SPC, 7.62x39, etc.. i think the absolute best performance for the cost available would in fact be a .223/5.56 wildcat like the 277 wolverine or perhaps some other

generally speaking though a proper 75-80 grain .223 handload will have more energy and a MUCH flatter trajectory than most these other cartridges, i guess an 80 grain hornady a-max would be cheaper with a flatter trajectory and more energy downrange than wolfs 6.5 grendel load

 

[crazysccrmd]

A 277WLV will not outperform a 6.8SPC in equal barrel lengths, ever. It's just not possible with the reduction in case capacity. A 6.8 can be safely run at 58k psi and hot rodding the 5.56 case a little more doesn't make enough difference. You also need to consider that the WLV isn't designed to handle the long 120SST, the 95TTSX probably has the highest BC of the useable bullets. Shorty story, the WLV will not outperform the Grendel at long range.

I replaced my 12.5" 6.8 SBR with a 12.5" 277 SBR because it gives me close to the same performance at a cheaper cost of brass and smaller powder charge. For my purpose (less than 200yd deer and pig hunting) the loss in velocity had no real impact.

 

[d2wing]

My comments may not be relevant but I considered the same thing some time ago. I do like AR's, but decided for hunting I wanted a more compact lighter weapon with more power than what is available in the AR package. The 6.8 and 6.5 are an improvement for hunting but not greatly so. I went with a Tikka bolt action in 7-08. Yes I did give up quick follow up shots but I seldom miss. Again not an answer to the op question but another approach to the issue. That and I am satisfied that with correct bullet choice the .223 works as well as I need in a limited role.

 

[justin22885]

A 277WLV will not outperform a 6.8SPC in equal barrel lengths, ever. It's just not possible with the reduction in case capacity. A 6.8 can be safely run at 58k psi and hot rodding the 5.56 case a little more doesn't make enough difference. You also need to consider that the WLV isn't designed to handle the long 120SST, the 95TTSX probably has the highest BC of the useable bullets. Shorty story, the WLV will not outperform the Grendel at long range.

I replaced my 12.5" 6.8 SBR with a 12.5" 277 SBR because it gives me close to the same performance at a cheaper cost of brass and smaller powder charge. For my purpose (less than 200yd deer and pig hunting) the loss in velocity had no real impact.

what i said was the .277 wolverine outperforms the specific 100 grain 6.5 grendel load offered by wolf at .35 cents each, and the .277 wolverine with the much cheaper brass can be handloaded for the same price

what i compared it against the 6.8 SPC with was the 110 grain hornady v-max at 2500fps vs the 120 grain SST at about 2460fps with the 6.8SPC, there wasnt a huge drop in ballistc coefficients between the two bullet weights, nor that much of a difference in bullet weight or velocity between the two... which is almost exactly 95% the kinetic energy.. so you get 95% the performance of 6.8 SPC at about 40% the cost