Grendelizer
Member
What is your rationale for saying this?
Are you saying the 6.5 Grendel can't do what the 7.62x39 can do?
John
6.8 Spc
- Thread starter TX65
- Start date
- Status
What is your rationale for saying this?
Are you saying the 6.5 Grendel can't do what the 7.62x39 can do?
John
When using hunting bullets, there really isn't much difference between 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel - Grendel has a slight advantage thanks to a wider range of bullets. However, it's hard to find 6.5 Grendel ammo at your local gun shop.
woof
Member
I'm curious also. The above question was whether you were saying the Grendel (or the 6.8) couldn't do what x39 can. Seems to me either would be equally as effective on deer and more versatile beyond that, yes?
GunTech,
The data I've seen on the 7x46 looks a little hot also. I think the 7x46 may be close to the ultimate combat round but think a 139gr. bullet at between 2550 and 2600 FPS. They could offer special purpose rounds similar to M118, pushing a 150gr. boat tail to say 2650 in a 24" barrel bolt action. Maybe?
I like to see all these options being discussed.
The data I've seen on the 7x46 looks a little hot also. I think the 7x46 may be close to the ultimate combat round but think a 139gr. bullet at between 2550 and 2600 FPS. They could offer special purpose rounds similar to M118, pushing a 150gr. boat tail to say 2650 in a 24" barrel bolt action. Maybe?
I like to see all these options being discussed.
My concern is recoil. A fast 7mm looks great, but may end up being uncontrollable for burst or auto fire. Keep in mind that the 7.62 Russian is a 123gn bullet at about 2400 fps.
I played around with 6.5x45 (6.5 is right between 223 and 308) but went with a 100gn FMJ at 3000 fps. for LR applications, the 123gn match has an exceptional BC (510) and heavier bullets in the 130-144 gn weight exceed 0.600 by a good piece. To get equivalent BC in a 7mm, you have to go to 168gns.
I played around with 6.5x45 (6.5 is right between 223 and 308) but went with a 100gn FMJ at 3000 fps. for LR applications, the 123gn match has an exceptional BC (510) and heavier bullets in the 130-144 gn weight exceed 0.600 by a good piece. To get equivalent BC in a 7mm, you have to go to 168gns.
Guntech,
A different means to the same end. What is telling in these discussions is the utter lack of people advocating a smaller caliber. Why no 20 cal. Super Streak at 3,500 FPS? Because most people realize that there are benefits to be had with larger calibers, mostly .264, .277, and .284.
Do I think we could adopt one caliber for everything? No. I think a lot of things will remain 7.62x51 for a long, long, time. We COULD adopt a new cartridge that replaces the 5.56 and 7.62 for infantry rifles and even infantry portable belt feds, but I think different loadings would be beneficial. Tactical long range stuff is special stuff anyway so no reason it couldn't be a 6.5 or 7mm loaded with a different bullet to a slightly higher velocity. No reason we couldn't have a dedicated load for the belt feds too, something that you could use in an infantry rifle but would be a little hotter than regular stuff.
The primary concern is performance of the infantry rifle and especially the M4 carbine. The fix is in going to a larger caliber with more power, while still being somewhat controllable in three round burst. Using bullets with a high BC will allow fexibility of the cartridge, but for distance it will likely be a special round anyway. I guess I'm trying to say that getting maximum BC in the "standard" rifle isn't going to be a priority.
A different means to the same end. What is telling in these discussions is the utter lack of people advocating a smaller caliber. Why no 20 cal. Super Streak at 3,500 FPS? Because most people realize that there are benefits to be had with larger calibers, mostly .264, .277, and .284.
Do I think we could adopt one caliber for everything? No. I think a lot of things will remain 7.62x51 for a long, long, time. We COULD adopt a new cartridge that replaces the 5.56 and 7.62 for infantry rifles and even infantry portable belt feds, but I think different loadings would be beneficial. Tactical long range stuff is special stuff anyway so no reason it couldn't be a 6.5 or 7mm loaded with a different bullet to a slightly higher velocity. No reason we couldn't have a dedicated load for the belt feds too, something that you could use in an infantry rifle but would be a little hotter than regular stuff.
The primary concern is performance of the infantry rifle and especially the M4 carbine. The fix is in going to a larger caliber with more power, while still being somewhat controllable in three round burst. Using bullets with a high BC will allow fexibility of the cartridge, but for distance it will likely be a special round anyway. I guess I'm trying to say that getting maximum BC in the "standard" rifle isn't going to be a priority.
Agreed. The 100gn 6.5 at 3000 that I mentioned actually has a fairly low BC, but it obviously has more energy than the current M855, better BC and better sectional density for improved penetration. I would reserve the 123 or 139gn high BC bullet for DMR.
This whole topic came up earlier and was dissected in detail. You might search old posts.
To get back to 6.8, it seems an interesting intermediate cartridge and may stick around for a while thanks to Ruger's new Mini-14. I think 6.5 Grendel is destined to remain a specialty cartridge unless some big time maker adopts it. These cartridges are similar to the redoubtable 257 Roberts, but advertising money and mindshare seem to favor the magnums. Too bad, because either could make a nice little mountain rifle. If Remington were to chamber their 799 mini-mauser in 6.8, or CZ their 527 in 6.8 or 6.5 Grendel, theyt could create a nice little market for a sub 6 lbs easy to pack deer rifle.
This whole topic came up earlier and was dissected in detail. You might search old posts.
To get back to 6.8, it seems an interesting intermediate cartridge and may stick around for a while thanks to Ruger's new Mini-14. I think 6.5 Grendel is destined to remain a specialty cartridge unless some big time maker adopts it. These cartridges are similar to the redoubtable 257 Roberts, but advertising money and mindshare seem to favor the magnums. Too bad, because either could make a nice little mountain rifle. If Remington were to chamber their 799 mini-mauser in 6.8, or CZ their 527 in 6.8 or 6.5 Grendel, theyt could create a nice little market for a sub 6 lbs easy to pack deer rifle.
salty
Member
Fast forward the thread almost a year - we now find 6.5 and 6.8 complete rifles and single uppers are available from a variety of sources. Ammunition and reloading supplies are available. Several animals have been harvested by both calibers and at least the 6.8 is being used in sandy locals. All in all a good year for both of these midcaliber newcomers.
Lobotomy Boy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,449
So it looks like both calibers are here to stay? I've been holding out on getting a 6.8 upper until I was certain I wouldn't be buying an orphan.
salty
Member
I enjoy both of the calibers and I believe they will both be around in the future as they have different capabilities. The 6.5 Grendel is more comparable to the 308 WIN as it has good ballistics, is very accurate and makes for a good choice for benchrest shooting and up to mid size big game animal and longe range varmit hunting. You get 308 level performance at long range in a milder recoiling rifle. The 6.8 SPC is a great alternative to using the AK/SKS 7.62x39 or AR 5.56 for a 300 yard and under CQB defensive application. In addition it is a replacement for your 223 REM or 243/ 6 mm as a closer range mid size game hunting / varmit shooting round. In terms of which to buy first - if you have a lower then a 6.8 SPC will cost you about $1000 and a Grendel about $1500 to get set up with the required upper, a few mags and additional reloading components. The 6.8 brass is cheaper by about 40% as is the upper. Unless you are a dedicated benchrest shooter I would buy the 6.8 first then a Grendel as funds allow.
Grendelizer
Member
Salty, there are more 6.5 Grendel products than expensive, high-end competition rigs. Click here for Alexander Arms Website.
A Tactical 16 upper is $589. Wolf Ammunition 6.5 Grendel reloadable brass-cased is $10.77 per box of 20.
If you want to get into an intermediate caliber for the AR that is the cheapest to operate, get into 6.5 Grendel.
John
P.S. You're right that certain 6.5 Grendel match loads can meet or beat the ballistics of military 7.62 M80 and M118LR, but I don't understand why you pigeon-hole it as a long-range cartridge.
With the Black Hills Ammunition 6.5 Grendel 123 Sierra MatchKing load, it gives awesome terminal effects at short range. (This is a load that, additionally, out-shoots the 7.62 at long-range, so you get it all in one package! This loading, however, is NOT cheap.)
A Tactical 16 upper is $589. Wolf Ammunition 6.5 Grendel reloadable brass-cased is $10.77 per box of 20.
If you want to get into an intermediate caliber for the AR that is the cheapest to operate, get into 6.5 Grendel.
John
P.S. You're right that certain 6.5 Grendel match loads can meet or beat the ballistics of military 7.62 M80 and M118LR, but I don't understand why you pigeon-hole it as a long-range cartridge.
With the Black Hills Ammunition 6.5 Grendel 123 Sierra MatchKing load, it gives awesome terminal effects at short range. (This is a load that, additionally, out-shoots the 7.62 at long-range, so you get it all in one package! This loading, however, is NOT cheap.)
rbernie
Contributing Member
At the end of the day, the 6.8SPC has:
- factory loads provided by at least three different major ammo manufacturers (Hornady, Remington, and Silver State)
- is offered in at least two different style of semiautomatic (AR and Mini)
- is available factory chambered in bolt guns and single shot rifles
- has AR barrels and complete uppers available from DPMS, Rock River and Bushmaster as well as from parts shops such as KoTonics, M1S (Shaw), WO, and others
kentucky_smith
Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2005
- Messages
- 1,686
I've had one of each (Grendel, SPC and a 7.62x39) lately. A DPMS AP4 kinda trumped them all though. Sold uppers and am back to just .223 and .308.
rbernie
Contributing Member
I can't blame ya, but I do like my deer/hog rifles to weigh in under 8lbs, and I can't get my AR10s to do that. Until 223 becomes enough gun for hog and such, I'm sticking with the larger-diameter intermediate chamberings.
So far, I've tried 7.62x39 (which worked very well save for the lack of hi-cap mags) and the 6.8SPC (which is pretty much looking like the end of my search for a not-too-much 250-300 yard huntin' chambering).
As noted earlier, someone is really missing the boat with 6.8 and 6.5 Grendel. Right now they are basically alternate loadings for AR-15s. It seems that Remington has dropped the 6.8 from it's bolt gun line up, and while Ruger has added 6.8 to the mini-14 rifles, I don't think demand will elevate either cartridge to the role of mainstream rifle round.
It too bad, because these rounds are as useful as the once popular 257 Roberts, and fill the same role. There is a definite place for these cartridges with compact and light rifles with actions designed for the 223 like the Sako, and Mini-Mausers.
In order for these cartridges to succeed, there needs to be rifles made for them.
It too bad, because these rounds are as useful as the once popular 257 Roberts, and fill the same role. There is a definite place for these cartridges with compact and light rifles with actions designed for the 223 like the Sako, and Mini-Mausers.
In order for these cartridges to succeed, there needs to be rifles made for them.
JesseL
Member
Does Remington have plans to offer their AR in 6.8?
JesseL, I'm not sure that Remington is an AR manufacturer worth their salt! That's not truly a Remington. It's a re-branded Bushmaster. Both companies are owned by Cerberus. Bushmaster does indeed have a 6.8SPC carbine and upper available.
The differences are that the Remington Predator is available with an 18" or 22" barrel, and the Bushmaster Predator only a 20".
The differences are that the Remington Predator is available with an 18" or 22" barrel, and the Bushmaster Predator only a 20".
JesseL
Member
I know.
I just thought that if Remington is going to enter the AR market (albeit through rebadged Bushmasters), it might make sense for them to push one as a deer/medium game rifle, rather than just going after the varmint market. A lot of deer hunters that have never heard of Bushmaster might just take notice of a new lightweight autoloading deer rifle from Remington.
- Status
Similar threads
