+- 6.5 Grendel Forum (https://65grendel.com)
+-- Forum: MARKSMANSHIP TRAINING FORUM (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Technical Knowledge (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=28)
+--- Thread: 6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? (/showthread.php?tid=1113)
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - JASmith - 09-29-2011
I like your plans B & C.
I understand that the primary motivator for the Creedmore is to give that little bit of extra space needed to seat long, heavy bullets (AMAX & VLD) in the .308 magazine length. Hornady made up the loss of powder volume by using a blended propellant like SuperFormance, hence factory loads are close to the .260 Remington in muzzle velocity.
Are you reloading for these calibers?
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - warped - 09-29-2011
30-06 is truly not more capable than the .260rem. it runs out of gas sooner and is not nearly as sleek or flat shooting.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - JASmith - 09-29-2011
Ah, the beginnings of a new form of the 70+ year long .270 vs '06 debate!
I haven't run the comparative ballistics yet, but I suspect that the .260 is indeed flatter shooting than the '06 depending on bullet and load choices. There are also some loads that will closely match the trajectories. I would also agree that the .260, the Creedmore and the classic European 6.5's will take about any game animal you'd care to consider. Not so sure that most folks would consider a rifle with 6.5 caliber bullets appropriate for Brown Bear, Lions, elephants, etc.
The context of the comment laying out the '06 and the 375 as fall-backs suggests an interest in larger game. One's confidence in taking large bullets at moderate range is typically higher when using heavy bullets in the '06 or .375.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - Sniper20 - 09-29-2011
If you guys reload, and you are looking for cheaper brass, go with converting the 7.62x39 brass to Grendel. I plan on doing it, but have not gotten there yet. I'm not sure if anyone has done it, but if you have, can you give some input on it? I was going to get some, but the only brass I could find (with the company I was going to put my order through) was Lapua, and it was just as expensive to get 7.62x39 as it was Hornady Grendel... So I will wait to get some cheaper stuff to try it out and see if I can save some pennies on brass. I was told that the biggest thing is to get a neck trimmer to make sure you don't have it too thick... So I can leave some notes on what I find out when I do it, or someone else can give us an opinion on that.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - warped - 09-29-2011
If you consider your time and effort, that brass is not cheaper than Hornady brass.
Keep that 7.62x39mm brass for your AK or SKS, you will be glad you did, if reloaded it really does perform a lot better than the offerings in factory ammo.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - recon562001 - 09-29-2011
JASmith Wrote:Ah, the beginnings of a new form of the 70+ year long .270 vs '06 debate!...
...The context of the comment laying out the '06 and the 375 as fall-backs suggests an interest in larger game. One's confidence in taking large bullets at moderate range is typically higher when using heavy bullets in the '06 or .375.
I know right! Lets just agree they can take game and some of us like one over the other.
What I meant was the Creedmoor will take any thing I intend to hunt as long as I do my part and put the bullet where it needs to go.
Most of the arguments about long range and targets at 1000 yards do not apply to me. I know my ability and I also know that I will not be shooting beyond 400 meters at game (I may be opening another can of worms with that statement). That is just my limit to where I can ethically engage game.
You are right if I ever do go on a brown bear hunt or on a safari for the big five I will need to but that is another matter entirely.
And yes I reload for 5.56 and 6.5 Grendel I also plan on reloading for the creedmoor.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - Sniper20 - 09-29-2011
warped Wrote:If you consider your time and effort, that brass is not cheaper than Hornady brass.
Keep that 7.62x39mm brass for your AK or SKS, you will be glad you did, if reloaded it really does perform a lot better than the offerings in factory ammo.
I got an AK and don't do accuracy with it. I just have the steel case surplus. I don't think it's worth reloading for in my case. I don't really do anything with it other than go out playing and having fun. If I decide to put some decent optics on it and go for accuracy, then I might do brass and reload, but for now, just a toy...
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - JASmith - 09-29-2011
recon562001 Wrote:...If I end up needing any more gun then that I have a 30-06 witch will and has taken most North American game, and if I still need to step up its going to have to be in the 375H&H class.Reloading will give more flexibility for the suggestion here, but comparing factory loads makes the point. This information is part of an article I'm writing called "Paired Rifles for Practice and Hunting." It is a rewrite of an existing article: http://shootersnotes.com/articles/companion-rifles/. Among other things the ballistics data in the old article is no longer as current as I'd like.
Look at the 120 gr AMAX load for the Creedmore -- drop at 500 yds is 41.4" for the Hornady standard sight-in.
Look at the 165 gr GMX Superformance in 30-06 -- drop at 500 yds is 41.7" (The interbond is 40.7").
This means that by using the same model of glass on both bolt rifles, almost everything you do for Kentucky Windage and Tennessee elevation for the 6.5 Creedmore in this load will apply to the loads shown for the 30-06.
This will work at least out to the 400 meters you are interested in and will improve your shooting skills!
Nifty huh!
BTW Sighting in for the same drop at 400 meters will assure that small differences between published data and the performance in your rifles will be washed over.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - LRRPF52 - 09-29-2011
I have no problems loading any of the VLD type projectiles into mag length with the .260 Rem. To engage the lands with secant ogive VLDs like the Berger 140's, you will really be pushing COAL outside a lot of bolt-gun mags too. The 139gr Scenar, 140 SMK, 140 Berger, 142 SMK all fit just fine in the .260 Rem, and I can buy factory brass ready to go from Remington, 7mm-08 Winchester brass necked-down, Lapua .260 Rem brass now, Nosler, and Norma. Creedmore brass is only available from Hornady.
.260 Rem has become the standard cartridge for long-range shooters using short actions now. Not only does it smoke .30-06 ballistics, but .300 Win Mag as well, especially when you look at wind drift. The .30 cals are dying out really fast as shooters realize that you just don't get comparable ballistics without excessive gains in powder, bullet weight, and punishing recoil. The only short-action, long range calibers that out-do the 6.5x47 and .260 Rem are the 6.5x284 (bye-bye barrel life), and the 7mm WSM pushing the 180 Berger VLD's. This is why so many people are building .260's in droves.
I'm trying to get Lapua to make a .260 Palma with small rifle primers, so brass life will be extended even further, and pressures will be higher. At the end of the day, brass availability is what made me choose the .260 Rem over 6.5x47 and 6.5 Creedmore. The Lapua is probably the best performer, but only has one brass source, at over $1.10 a piece. I've had excellent results with necked-down 7mm-08 in my auto-loader, getting at least 5 loadings with high pressures.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - JASmith - 09-29-2011
In deference to the comments from LRRPF52 about the .260 Rem vs 6.5 Creedmore, here's a couple of numbers to consider for the .260 Remington:
.260 Rem Premier 120 gr Accutip, drop at 500 yds = 41.7 with 200 yd zero (Effectively the same as the post above for the Creedmore).
.260 Rem Federal 120 gr Nslr Ballistic Tip 500 yds = 42.1 with 200 yd zero (the same within any reasonable accuracy standard)
.260 Rem Federal 120 gr Triple Shock x at 500 yds = 44.7 with 200 yd zero (less than 0.6 MOA difference from 30-06 larger game loads)
BTW can do a similar story with the Grendel 123 gr AMAX and the .375 H&H Magnum Federal with 260 gr Accubond bullet. But at least one is likely to be the long bolt...
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - bwaites - 09-29-2011
Zak Smith did a great writeup on these three here:
http://demigodllc.com/articles/6.5-shootout-260-6.5x47-6.5-creedmoor/?p=1
Final result for those that don't feel like reading: There is nothing the Creedmoor or 6.5x47 will do that the .260 won't.
Advantage in brass to the .260, and small primer .260 brass would make it conclusively .260 in my thoughts!
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - JASmith - 09-29-2011
bwaites Wrote:...There is nothing the Creedmoor or 6.5x47 will do that the .260 won't...But you won't have the neat names---
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - recon562001 - 09-30-2011
[quote=bwaites]
Final result for those that don't feel like reading: There is nothing the Creedmoor or 6.5x47 will do that the .260 won't.
/QUOTE]
Yea my gun smith talked me in to the 260rem last night. So that is what hes going to build the rifle in.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - LRRPF52 - 09-30-2011
I don't know why they ever made the 6.5 Creedmore, to be honest. Everyone will either chamber in .260 Rem, or 6.5x47 Lapua. The Lapua is a higher pressure cartridge that is meant to work with a certain set of powders. I used to think the .260 Rem had too much case capacity, until I started using the Hodgon's powders. Zak told me most long range shooters using .260 Rem are using H4350, H4831SC, and RL17. He competes in or runs several invitation-only precision rifle field matches, like Steel Safari, and sees a lot of the Nation's top shooters when it comes to practical long-range marksmanship.
I had this same discussion with a buddy of mine who was a sniper in 10th Mountain Division. The only reason he chambered in Creedmore was that his brother-in-law is already set-up for it..brass, dies, etc. I started my load development with N500 series powders before I discovered that they were bad news for throats and barrels. I started playing with Hodgon's H4831, and immediately got a consistent string of sub .75 and sub .5 MOA groups, finding several accuracy nodes with the 139gr Scenars into 5-round groups, starting with a .65 MOA string right off the bat, and several .4 MOA groups. I'm now working with H4350 and AA4350, with 139gr Scenars, 142gr SMK's, 140gr AMAX's, and a bullet I didn't know exists...the Barnes 140gr Match Burner. They all weighed exactly 140.3gr, with no deviation, and they all appear and measure to exact external dimensions.
Most (90%) practical long range shooters running .260's are using either 139gr Scenars, or 142gr SMK's. The 139gr Scenar is the most popular long-range 6.5mm bullet over the pond as well.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - Hoot - 09-30-2011
+1 Reloader 17 in my 26" .260 Remington on a Savage Model 12 action.
I suspect the 6.5 Creedmoor is what we laughingly say at work, "Forget the delicious steak. Sell them more sizzle!"
![[Image: no.gif]](http://cdn.calguns.net/calguns.net/calgunforum/images/smilies/no.gif)
Hoot
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - LRRPF52 - 09-30-2011
My buddy Ray uses Reloader 17 in a 25" .260 Rem with the 139gr Scenars at 2980 fps, and has made 1st-round hits on steel at 1450 yards with it. I'm not sure if I should mess with Reloader 17 in my auto-loader until I get an adjustable gas block, since people are getting an average of 100-150fps advantage over H4831sc and H4350 in .260 Rem. I made a mistake by not going with one right off the bat when I had GA Precision build it for me. I just need to have a smith drill and tap the block for a set screw over the gas port.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - jwilson1985 - 10-02-2011
the 300 with a pantom on it is awesome 8.5-16"barrel is ll you need...but like above idk why the keep coming out with calibers
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - stanc - 10-14-2011
Speaking of .300 BLK, have you seen the AAC Honey Badger?
http://68forums.com/forums/showthread.php?18983-300-blackout-vs-6.8&p=249235&viewfull=1#post249235
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - YutYut - 10-14-2011
that honey badger video was funny as hell.
6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC? - jwilson1985 - 10-17-2011
umm that stock is really close to loki design i may need to bring that up ..but none the less funny video