Too little for Elk?

[Pancho Villa]

Hi all,

I am still on my "one rifle" kick, and so I'd like any reports on elk taken cleanly (or not cleanly) with 6.5 grendel.

Traditional thinking is that the cartridge is way too light for elk, but modern advances in bullet tech in particular (ie Barnes TTSX and other copper alloy pills) along with some crazy AARs (and the historical fact that elk and other large game were, especially before the advent of smokeless powder, taken cleanly with cartridges we would think are ludicrously inadequate) are making me think this isn't necessarily the case.

So, does anyone have any thoughts on grendel as an adequate or inadequate cartridge for large game? Elk is about as high as I'll go.

[rasp65]

Pancho There is a story of the owner of LaRue Tactical building a Grendel and taking an elk at 405 yds. The key will be in your ability to deliver the bullet to get a clean kill. It is doubtful there is enough energy to kill with a less than perfect shot. You will have to know the range of your abilities, environmentals and bullet drop charts for any long shots. No doubt Wayne La Rue knew all these before he took that shot.

[Von Gruff]

Hi all,

I am still on my "one rifle" kick, and so I'd like any reports on elk taken cleanly (or not cleanly) with 6.5 grendel.

Traditional thinking is that the cartridge is way too light for elk, but modern advances in bullet tech in particular (ie Barnes TTSX and other copper alloy pills) along with some crazy AARs (and the historical fact that elk and other large game were, especially before the advent of smokeless powder, taken cleanly with cartridges we would think are ludicrously inadequate) are making me think this isn't necessarily the case.

So, does anyone have any thoughts on grendel as an adequate or inadequate cartridge for large game? Elk is about as high as I'll go.

The big difference between some of the historical reports and now is that now a cartridge must be capable of killing an elk DRT out to unimaginable distances to count as an elk cartridge, whereas the historical hunters were actually hunting and stalking in on an animal. The Grendel is capable of cleanly taking and elk (or wapiti as they are called here in NZ) with bullet selection, shot placement and distance all playing parts in whether a shot is good to go or not.

[Pancho Villa]

The big difference between some of the historical reports and now is that now a cartridge must be capable of killing an elk DRT out to unimaginable distances to count as an elk cartridge, whereas the historical hunters were actually hunting and stalking in on an animal. The Grendel is capable of cleanly taking and elk (or wapiti as they are called here in NZ) with bullet selection, shot placement and distance all playing parts in whether a shot is good to go or not.

I cannot speak for any of the Heroes that seem to populate every hunting forum known to man, but I'm not confident in my ability to take an animal, under time pressure, from a field position, way out there anyway.

I would prefer a 75 yard shot to a 275 yard shot any day and I would hope I can spend enough time stalking around in the woods before next hunting season to accomplish that.

[Variable]

I cannot speak for any of the Heroes that seem to populate every hunting forum known to man, but I'm not confident in my ability to take an animal, under time pressure, from a field position, way out there anyway.

I would prefer a 75 yard shot to a 275 yard shot any day and I would hope I can spend enough time stalking around in the woods before next hunting season to accomplish that.

Then you are in luck. It's at least good enough out to 405 yards....

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_2_219/164444_Elk______Pics__pg__2_and_8_____LaRue_s_Great_American_Safari_.html

[LRRPF52]

There are forum members that have taken elk with the Grendel. One key thing to point out from Mark LaRue's story is that he used a BOG tripod, with a rock-solid position. I remember getting the Christmas card from him with that picture of him and the elk's head in his Navion. That was the coolest Christmas card ever.

LaRue needs to make a 6.5 Grendel Stealth/OBR/PredatAR line-up, although they are swamped with filling demand for the 7.62 and 5.56 guns currently.

[BjornF16]

LaRue needs to make a 6.5 Grendel Stealth/OBR/PredatAR line-up, although they are swamped with filling demand for the 7.62 and 5.56 guns currently.

Reading through the entire AR15.com thread on his taking the elk, it sounded like he was going to roll out a Grendel line-up...wonder what happened.

[Zach987]

I didn't get my Grendel built this year in time to go elk hunting, but I won't have any concerns as long as I stay within my limits like Von Gruff says. My personal limits are going to be: proper bulllet (most likely the hornady SST), my effective range based on this bullet (terminal performance) most likely under 250 yds. and shot placement, (waiting for broadside or high percentage shot). within these limitations, I see no reason why the Grendel isn't an elk capable cartridge. After thinking long and hard, this is going to be my do-it-all rifle instead of my 7mm Rem Mag.

[Von Gruff]

A real hunters decission and no doubt elk next season , a sucessful huter as well.

[stokesrj]

My very first introduction to the 6.5 caliber family of rifles was on the Brooks Range of Alaska, the northern most mountain range in a state as big as the next 11 largest states combined. The year was 1977 and I was working as an assistant guide, for a guide who specialized in guiding wealthy European hunters for Dall Sheep, Caribou, Mose and inland Grizzly.
The first clients who showed up had rifles chambered in a caliber I was unfamiliar with, the 6.5 X55 Swede. I thought to myself that it was not big enough, maybe okay for the Dall and Caribou but certainly inadequate for the Moose and Grizzly. But I was wrong, that season I saw more than 25 head of big game taken with the caliber and 100% were one shot kills. I didn't see that decisive of a performance by the traditional calibers, the .270, 30-06, and 7mm Rem Mag. And in fact I could not distinguish the results from clients using .375 H&H chambered rifles.
That experience began my love of the 6.5 caliber bore diameter.
I found the 6.5 to be the ideal balance between power, accuracy, and recoil. The 6.5 Grendel approaches the 6.5x55 ballistics, so it would be identical to the 6.5x55 at a reduced range. It certainly has the capability to perform on game at 400 yards as well as the 6.5 X55, or .260 Remington or 6.5 Creedmoor does at 600yards. I often refer to this video of Wayne Zwoell shooting an elk at 608 yards with the 6.5 Creedmoor firing the 129 grain Hornady SST bullet. The Grendel firing the same bullet has more energy at 400 yards and would be much easier to place properly. Watch the video for yourself and make up your own mind. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2COAcHZRlI
Bob

[Schwag173]

I believe everything rj just said and would add another consideration. The big bores can be punishing to do a lot of practicing with. An afternoon of putting a couple hundred rounds of .300 Weatherby or even .30/'06 downrange always makes me sore for a day or two afterward. Nobody gives a second thought to shooting an AR that much; 200 rds is almost nothing. A lighter cartridge, like the Grendel, will allow for much more comfortable practice. That practice, hopefully, will equate to better bullet placement. If a shooter does HIS job, the Grendel will do IT'S job.

[LRRPF52]

I believe everything rj just said and would add another consideration. The big bores can be punishing to do a lot of practicing with. An afternoon of putting a couple hundred rounds of .300 Weatherby or even .30/'06 downrange always makes me sore for a day or two afterward. Nobody gives a second thought to shooting an AR that much; 200 rds is almost nothing. A lighter cartridge, like the Grendel, will allow for much more comfortable practice. That practice, hopefully, will equate to better bullet placement. If a shooter does HIS job, the Grendel will do IT'S job.

Holy crap! Ain't no way I'm going to get behind that volume of shooting through a featherweight rifle in a magnum, '06, or even my .270 Winchester. I can do 40 rounds of .270, then I'm done. After 3 rounds of a featherweight .300 Win Mag, I'm no longer having fun, and I have to really sacrifice my shoulder to focus on a great sight picture.

I did this a few weeks ago at the range, shooting at 200yds with my friend's .300 WM, and my 16" Grendel. I had a hard time registering the shots at 200yds with the .300 WM, but was drilling under and around 2" groups with the Grendel, right where I wanted them. I could literally sit there all day and blast away without any recoil issues. I had the strong conviction that every hunter on that range would have been better served with an AR15 chambered in 6.5 Grendel. Everyone else was having a hard time seeing where they were hitting with their magnums as well at 200yds, and those featherweight barrels were heating up.

[Schwag173]

Exactly. I once had a smart-ass pop off at me on a range because I was wearing a shoulder recoil pad. Without averting my gaze I just pointed to the open 100rd box of .30/'06 reloads next to me on the bench. The light evaporated from the bozo's eyes and he slinked off to bother someone else. Of course, I'm older now and that Grendel feels so much nicer.