Anyone know about 6.5 grendel?

[beerslurpy]

Right now I am thinking 6.5 grendel with a 20 inch barrel. The barrels looked really thick, but I hear they are threaded in 9/16ths 24tpi, which seems really small. 308 is 5/8ths 24 with a non-bull barrel. How much trouble would it be to get a 6.5 grendel with 5/8ths threads? Would this hurt accuracy? I would like to be able to reuse my 308 suppressor.

Also, any advice on lowers?

I was going to go the AR10 route, but 6.5 grendel just seems to beat the pants off 308. Also, since Wolf is manufacturing it now, there really seems no reason not to go this way.

 

[db_tanker]

Alexander Arms is where you want to look... www.alexanderarms.com



The caliber has been discussed on here and on several other boards...the big "battle" is what is better...6.5 G or 6.8 SPC...

I think its tied right now...no one is caring too much. Or so I surmise...


Personally, I think both have their merits and detractions...the Grendel would be easier to reload for, IMO due to the fact that, in a pinch, you can use 7.62x39 boxer brass to make your caliber....the 6.8 SPC is based on the 30 Remington...not exactly a wal-mart caliber...

D

 

[only1asterisk]

You can have a barrel turned to your spec by Randall at www.ar15barrels.com. 5/8" threads will not matter a hill of beans when it comes to accuracy. There are lots of threads here and at AR15.com.

How does the 6.5 Grendel appear to beat the pants off of a .308?

David

 

[beerslurpy]

While 6.8SPC has ballistic coefficients mildly better than 7.62x39, 6.5 grendel has BCs about as good as 7mm rem bullets. The bullets retain more energy past 600 yards than 308 and remain supersonic past 1000 yards.

6.5 grendel solves the problem of crappy BC in assault rifle cartridges. 6.8 doesnt.

 

[Sam Adams]

Here's another website on the Grendel. http://www.65grendel.com/

I'm so impressed with the ballistics and the accuracy reported for this round that I'd already have one if the money wasn't an issue (new business + small kids and stay-at-home wife = very little money for shooting). I personally think that we ought to replace the 5.56mm with it, both for infantry rifles and LMGs. It'd ease logistics, esp. since the Designated Marksman can use either an M-16 with a long barrel or a boltie in the same caliber.

 

[only1asterisk]

The bullets retain more energy past 600 yards than 308 and remain supersonic past 1000 yards.

I'm sure that some people would have you believe this, but the the truth is that if you load bullets of like design and sectional density in both the .308 and 6.5 you get about the same velocity, the same trajectory and you end up subsonic at about the same range. Since the .308 bullet is heavier, it retains about 35% more energy velocity being equal. There is no magic in 6.5 Grendel, it does the same thing the .308 has been doing for 50 years just with 35% less bullet. The only thing the 6.5 Grendel does that better than a .308 is fit in an AR15.

David

 

[rangerruck]

the big reason that the mil doesn't watn to adopt the grendel, is the cart design, will be very difficult to use in a saw type weapon. there is very little clearance between the end of a link, and where the neck starts. So they worry about bigtime jams with this setup. otherwise they would have it, and we would have the bullets and rifles cheaper by the dozen.

 

[Langenator]

Sam-

The SDM doesn't use a bolt action rifle. Only actual snipers have those-the M24 for the Army and the M40A3 for the Marines.

The SDM is, but doctrine, assigned to every squad (snipers are found at the company and battalion level). They're generally the best shot in the squad. Really the only thing that distinguishes them from any other rifleman in the squad is that they've got a scope for their rifle-maybe only a 4x ACOG, or maybe an actual tactical sniper type scope. But it's put on a standard M16 or M4.

The lucky SDMs get M14s, and maybe scopes, for extra reach out and touch someone power.

Granted, adoption of the 6.5G would mean less need to give the SDMs less need for the M14. But I think it unlikely, for the exact reason listed above-the short case isn't well suited for use in belt-fed weapons, and the Army recently issued an RFP for a new, belt-fed LMG, assumedly to replace the M249 SAW.

 

[beerslurpy]

Have they considered going to drum fed LMGs like the soviets and chinese did? You lose the cool factor of having teh belt fed, but you gain the balancing cool factor of reliability with less hassles.

Those 90 rder snail mags would hold 80 or so rounds of grendel with no modification. The 458 socom guys already use them as 45 rders.

Or does the M249 hold a ton more ammo per belt than I think it does? Would only 80-90 rds per mag really be that big a disability? Could they tone down the cyclic rate a bit to make up for it? They could probably stretch the limits of decency and make a 150 rd drum or something similar if they wanted. I would buy one.

 

[Langenator]

Actually, last summer the Marines apparently issued a requirement for what they're calling an Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR) that isn't belt fed. A couple of articles I've seen refering to it, one in print, one on the web, seem to think the Ultimax 100 Mk4 is the frontrunner. The Ultimax 100 Mk 4 can use either 100 rnd drums or standard M16 mags.

And actually, I mentioned exactly what you're thinking in my blog post on it. Yes, I'm pimping my blog.

My only concern with the drums is that, just from looking at it, the 100 round drum looks like it's almost as large, size-wise, as the plastic box the, on the M249, holds 200 rounds of belted ammo. Everyone worries about weight, but space is a concern, too, when it comes to how much ammo grunts can carry. There's only so much room on the web gear, and only so much in his ruck. Cutting the ammount he can carry by 50%, or even 25%,is going to reduce the squad's firepower by a good bit.

 

[beerslurpy]

Hmm sounds like we just reinvented the RPK.

 

[Detritus]

You can have a barrel turned to your spec by Randall at www.ar15barrels.com.

edited to correct my own mistake

nevermind read that and thought you were saying www.ar15barrels.com was selling uppers..

they're not, just barrels. i guess Alexander Arms can't stop them from doing the barrels, i Know AA was demanding a rather high price for (possibly refusing to grant) a license to produce complete uppers. and that the guys at AR15Barrels weren't going to be selling any untill they got that.

 

[Langenator]

Hmm sounds like we just reinvented the RPK.

Not entirely. The IAR specs call for an open bolt weapon, plus a quick change barrel. So it's somewhere between the RPK and the M249.

 

[Grump]

Langenator: is your sig line from Pinky and the Brain?

Anyway, I'm less interested in the uber-heavy bullet weights in both the 6.5 G and the 6.8 SPC, because their lower velocities lose much of the uber-velocity trajectory features I value in M193 and M855 ammo.

Plus, the really heavy ones also use more lead and copper per round, reducing (but by far not eliminating!) one of the more important STRATEGIC advantages all of them have over 7.62 NATO.

AFAI'mConcerned, the Grendell is best on paper and in theory if you stick with the 90- to 105-gr bullets with the slickest profiles that work, to keep the speeds up. As long as you can beat, even marginally, the wind drift AND trajectory of the M80 round, a switch to a single caliber for all rifles and GPMGs/SAWs would have immense overall benefits.

Get back to two small arms calibers: a 6.5 or 6.8 (the 6.8, IMNSHO, cheats the troops out of too much that *could* be gained by just choosing the BEST), and whatever pistol/PDW round we go with. I see a good case for going with the FN round, but want to see some combat use before committing to it. If it hits more like a .40 than a 9mm, pierces better than a .22 WRF, and stacks tighter than a .45, that could finish our optimizing efforts.

The 6.5 also lends itself better to having lighter bullets for general issue, and heavier, accurate ones for the DM and sniper roles--just like we had with .30-06....after WWII and Korea...

 

[Langenator]

Actually, it's from Get Fuzzy.