Why is 6.8 SPC still a thing when 6.5 Grendel is more and more popular?

[just_john]

More likely, some of the major manufacturers put a lot of money into brand recognition for the 6.8 and no one wants to tell their board it was a bad idea. So, they just keep throwing money into the same hole, gotta save their job.

[wilecoyote]

I'm in the "get what you like" camp. Looked at the 6.8 long ago. The Grendel was new, cost a little more and wasn't as available. I waited and went with the Grendel because of all it's abilities. I'm glad I did, but still think the 6.8 is a fine cartridge. If the 6.8 is what you want in an AR, get it. Another black rifle in the mix all the better.

I should say, I have gone with a 6.5 Creedmoor. In addition I have builds in 6mm Creedmoor and 458 SOCOM in progress. Go with what you like and want. In the end it's a firearm and keeps our shooting hobby going. We all like and have different cars for different reasons, not much different.

[Kilco]

More likely, some of the major manufacturers put a lot of money into brand recognition for the 6.8 and no one wants to tell their board it was a bad idea. So, they just keep throwing money into the same hole, gotta save their job.

Unique perspective, however I respectfully disagree.

That "bad idea" has harvested more deer and hogs than any other AR15 variant cartridge at the moment, is enjoyed by thousands, and opened the door for other variants (22 Nosler/224 Valkyrie and a slew of wildcats).

Not to mention the more folks that go searching into the 6.8 stumble upon info regarding the Grendel as well.

As I mentioned before, pick your flavor, enjoy it, be careful not to pick on others choices. Different strokes, man.

[ahillock]

More likely, some of the major manufacturers put a lot of money into brand recognition for the 6.8 and no one wants to tell their board it was a bad idea. So, they just keep throwing money into the same hole, gotta save their job.

This is the most likely explanation. Not to mention the history of the 6.8SPC and the shenanigans (lying) that went on behind the scene of overpromising its capabilities and use to the military. The 6.8 was a bad idea from the beginning, especially with how the whole thing went down.

[JASmith]

This is the most likely explanation. Not to mention the history of the 6.8SPC and the shenanigans (lying) that went on behind the scene of overpromising its capabilities and use to the military. The 6.8 was a bad idea from the beginning, especially with how the whole thing went down.

There's a lot of truth in this observation. Nonetheless the 6.8 is, like the 30-30, "good enough" for most folks' interests. That makes choosing tihe cartridge for bandwagon, cosmetic, and other reasons easy to do. The bandwagon effect is strengthened by what I view as superb marketing campaigns on behalf of the 6.8 SPC.

The Grendel is also good enough, and I happen to thinkit could be THE ONLY cartridge one 'needs' for all-round shooting for about 90% of shooters wanting harvest medium game and to participate in varminting and casual shooting. I can quote all sorts of quantitative reasons why the qualitative conclusion is right. None of those arguments, however, override one's judgement after having 'fallen in love' with a particular cartridge.

That said, many of us, including me, have and enjoy shooting other cartridges as well. The pragmatist in me, however, suggests that I'll not likely go tihe 6.8 route even though I have a .270 Win. I like shooting the grendel a lot more.

[Frontier Gear]

As one who is new to the 6.5 Grendel, I chose it over the 6.8 simply because it looked to have much better industry support (at least from my point of view) and better performance for hunting. I was completely impartial and unbiased without knowing the history of either round. I'm a dealer for BCA and they only offer one 6.8 barrel, but they have about 36 different 6.5 Grendel barrels. I'm also a fan of Odin Works out of Boise, ID. They don't offer any 6.8 barrels but have a number of choices in 6.5 Grendel. There was just a lot more for me to chose from by going with the 6.5 Grendel....

Within a 200 mile radius, I don't see any 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 ammo in stores. Since I'm the only FFL/ammo dealer in our little town of 100 people, I now keep some 6.5 Grendel on hand but nobody uses it yet except for me. The other ammo that I keep in stock are more traditional rounds (30-30, 308, 270, 30-06, 22lr, 9mm, 223). I sell more 45LC ammo than 300blk ammo.

I'm not kidding when I say that the second most popular deer round here is a 20 Gauge smooth bore single shot (both break and bolt action). The most popular being the 270. Talk about a ballistically poor choice. Why do they use a single shot smooth bore shotgun? Simple, Grandpa was able to mail order (and could afford) a Montgomery Wards bolt action single shot or NEF break action and it still works. It also doubles as a bird gun. People have brought in their third generation shotgun with a broken firing pin for me to fix so they can go deer hunting next week. I only charge them the cost of parts. When you only make about $20k a year, you have 5 kids to feed and you live in the middle of a national forest you use what you have.

The 6.8 looks like a fine round and I hope that it stays here for those that use it.

[BluntForceTrauma]

I fought the 6.8 SPC tooth and nail back when it was being proposed as the Next Great Military Cartridge because its "performance" was based upon false promises (2800 fps for a 115gr SMK from a 16" bbl) and juiced testing (explosive performance in gel testing using tweaked varmint bullets), and because its basic premise — long case, short bullet versus short case, long bullet — was conceptually wrong for maximizing performance within the constraints of a double-stack feed column in a standard AR magwell.

For example, the Tri-Service Working Group (TSWG) that was testing 68SPC and 65G vs. 556, etc., insisted that Alexander Arms submit Wolf 6.5 Grendel 123gr soft-point lead-nose bullets — the lamest of lame 65G rounds ever created — because they knew it would disqualify the 6.5 Grendel. A secretary there actually admitted this to Bill Alexander. "Don't you want us to submit a more suitable round?" "Nah, not necessary, we just need to show we considered all options, but we already know what we're going to pick."

I never cared what civvies shoot, and still don't. It's a free country. . . .

Today, trying to decide between the two cartridges, I don't understand why someone wouldn't choose the 6.5 Grendel, but the bottom line is, the more black rifles in the hands of patriots, the better.

Job Number One here is staying in our lane and maximizing the performance of the 6.5 Grendel, and let the others do what they gonna do.

Did I mention we have Wolf 6.5 Grendel steel-case for 23¢ per round?

[LRRPF52]

This isn't meant to be a touchy subject nor picking on other people's flavors. We can have this discussion as those interested in firearms without those on one side feeling picked on.

As LRRPF52 has shown several times on this forum, 6.5 Grendel >>> 6.8 SPC in every way. From long range precision shooting, to hunting loads, to SBR, to suppressed...etc. I don't know of one thing that the 6.8 offers that the 6.5 also matches and if not exceeds in performance. I don't know in what case one would pick a 6.8 SPC over a 6.5G, if for no other purpose than to be different. If looking strictly at performance, I don't see any case where the 6.8 SPC performs any better.

Because 6.8 SPC actually has case taper for better feeding for automatic combat weapons, unlike the weak 6.5 Grendel with no real taper on the sidewalls.


Not enough case taper 6.5 Grendel (L), Plenty of case taper 5.56 (M), Plenty of case taper 7.62x51 NATO ®-It helps if you don't think about it and just repeat what you've been told by someone else.



Because 6.5 Grendel doesn't have case taper, it can't run full auto.

[video=youtube;QzEHPbd3t3M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzEHPbd3t3M[/video]

The Grendel fanbois will tell you that there are 10,000 usable bullets for Grendel...most are target bullets and most are too heavy to get decent velocity so they expand properly especially at the yardage where it is claimed to perform better than the 6.8. If you reload the 6.8 can be loaded hotter than the grendel and gain 100-150fps.

I guess I can't count right because every time I add up the hunting bullets for 6.5 Grendel, they far exceed the count of the target bullets. Maybe one day I'll be able to to do basic math....

If you are using a 16" barrel or less,
About 90% of hunting shots are inside 200 yards...and here the 6.8 has more performance.
10% of hunting shots - From 200-300 they are about tied, but if hand loaded the 6.8 can still out-perform at those distances.
1% of hunting shots - Over 300-400, the Grendel pulls ahead unless the 6.8 is hand loaded, in which case they are about tied.
0% of ethical hunting shots on game - Over 400, if you want to hunt, you really should get a different round as neither have great energy and expansion.

Meaning, if you are using a 16" barrel or less...
With factory ammo - The 6.8 is more capable 90% of the time, tied about 9% of the time, and the Grendel is better for 1% of your ethical shots.
With hand loads - The 6.8 is more capable 99% of the time and tied about 1% of your ethical shots.

Prepare for best performance for 99-100% of my ethical shots vs. 0-1% since I didn't want to carry a 20-24" barrel? That decision was easy for me.
I went 6.8, since I carry either a 12.5" pistol or a 16" rifle.


16" 6.5 Grendel, 123gr SST, 2440fps Hornady Mach 2.0 Doppler-based G1 BC of .493 for the first 300yds is used. .462 would be used for 1000yds, and it is much better to use G7 once you get past 600yds anyway. None of that matters because we're talking close range hunting performance anyway, so we use the Mach 2 Hornady doppler data. The stated .510 G1 BC doesn't really change it significantly within 200yds because ToF is so short.

0 2440fps 1626 ft-lbs

25 2397 1569

50 2354 1513

75 2312 1459

100 2270 1407

125 2228 1356

150 2187 1307

175 2147 1259

200 2107 1212

16" 6.8 SPC II Hornady 120gr SST, .400 G1 untested BC, 2460fps mv

0 2460fps 1612ft-lbs

25 2406fps 1543ft-lbs

50 2354 1476

75 2302 1412

100 2250 1349

125 2200 1289

150 2149 1231

175 2100 1175

200 2051 1121

Looks like the 6.8 120gr SST is going 9fps faster at 25yds! (Ignore the energy though, that doesn't matter, and ignore 50yds on out.) See, I told you the 6.8 is where the horsepower is at. If you want 6.5 Grendel, it sucks for punching paper at distance but is ok, you might as well get a 6.5 Creedmoor if you really want to shoot targets, because the 6.5 Grendel is mediocre at best for that, and we already stated a million times how it isn't good for hunting, with its target bullets and heavy barrels, so naturally, the 6.8 SPC II is the most ideal hunting cartridge you can chamber the AR15 for. Just keep repeating that and it will sink in.

That's that lying LRRPffft character cherry-picking data (from Hornady, 6.8forums, and Predator Masters forums) for 6.8 SAAMI, not SPC II! He's a liar! You can hand load the 6.8 SPC II much faster!

120gr Hornady SST- Generic Deer / Hog load
H322 26.5gr 2480fps
2.260" OAL
Rem Brass
Win LG Primers
16" barrel
Groups about 3/4" at 100yds

120gr SST Hornady- Deer / Hog load
2.260" OAL
24gr H4198 2470fps
Rem Brass
Win LG Primers
16" Barrel
Groups 3/4" at 100yds

Wilson Combat Stainless 16" 6.8 SPC II barrel
This is my hunting rifle
Optic- Leupold 2-7x33mm duplex crosshair

120gr Hornady SST's - Deer / Hog Load
loaded to 2.295" OAL
H4198 24gr = 2470fps - 2500fps
Win Large Primers
Rem Brass
Groups 1/2" at 100yds

I pushed 120 SST load dev. up to 28.2 gr. A2200 for 2737 avg. fps from my 20", but it was too hot, with erratic accuracy. 28.0 gr. is max. in my rifle, producing 2687 avg. fps and sub moa accuracy.

Load for my *** 16" Scout SPC II
SSA Brass trimmed to 1.676
CCI 41 primer
27.4 grains of AA2200
120 SST
OAL 2.290
Group Size .691" 3 shot@100yds
Avg Velocity 2481 FPS

6.8 SPC II Chamber, Hand Load, 120gr SST, .400 G1 untested BC, 2500fps
0 2500fps 1665

50 2393 1525

100 2288 1395

150 2187 1274

200 2087 1161


But don't even try to load the 6.5 Grendel faster with CFE223 or LVR, because you will get the same speeds. I hit 2550fps from one of my 16" Grendels without exceeding 50,000psi chamber pressure with the 123gr Hornady AMAX using CFE. If I was really wanting to throw caution to the wind, I would throw up the max charge I shot, but I won't because only a fool would chase those speeds. I didn't see any cratering or flattened primers until 2640fps, so if I only used those metrics as an indication of excessive pressure, I would run straight to the internet, "No pressure signs!" But because we tested the loads with calibrated instrumentation with correctly-placed gauges and many months of testing before drawing conclusions on pressure data, we know where to cut it off at.

Constructor: Who has the fastest, accurate 120gr SST load? Who has it or who can find it? I think there is a 2700fps (20" barrel)load out there. That is something to advertise the performance of the 6.8.

In that thread, they got over 2800fps with a hot load from a 24" 6.8 SPC II BHW polygonal rifled barrel!

If you want performance from the 6.5 Grendel, you need a 20-24" barrel, otherwise it just doesn't do it, and won't expand with the hunting bullets out there meant for .260 Remington.

[COLOR="#0000FF"]Well, I guess I'm headed off to the Equipment Exchange to sell all my Grendels, brass, barrels, weak bolts, mags, etc.

I'm going to step up to the hot rod performance of the 6.8 SPC II! As you can see, it will just give me more horsepower! Look at all that frontal area of the bullet too. It's much larger than the weak and anemic 6.5 Grendel.[/COLOR]

[wilecoyote]

LRRPF52, you're such a cherry picking liar.... hahahahahaha!!!!!!!

You have to know I'm kidding. I've been around on another site for a long time and seen the conversations. I forget the other guy that used to get so butt hurt regarding the 6.8, but the posts were funny reads.

Back in reality, you have good info, experience and I appreciate your sharing.

[stanc]

I fought the 6.8 SPC tooth and nail back when it was being proposed as the Next Great Military Cartridge because its "performance" was based upon false promises (2800 fps for a 115gr SMK from a 16" bbl) and juiced testing (explosive performance in gel testing using tweaked varmint bullets)...

For example, the Tri-Service Working Group (TSWG) that was testing 68SPC and 65G vs. 556, etc., insisted that Alexander Arms submit Wolf 6.5 Grendel 123gr soft-point lead-nose bullets...

I never cared what civvies shoot, and still don't.

Ditto. I disregarded the testing of hollow point and soft point loads. Like you, my interest was military utility, so I compared full metal jacket.
Even at realistic velocities, 6.8 SPC 115gr FMJ gave superior terminal performance, producing much earlier yaw than 6.5 Grendel 120gr FMJ.

Today, trying to decide between the two cartridges, I don't understand why someone wouldn't choose the 6.5 Grendel...

I can think of a few reasons:

Optimized 30-rd P-Mags

Disintegrating Links

Machine Guns
[video=youtube;z2Pq4_XdA-k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2Pq4_XdA-k[/video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2Pq4_XdA-k

[LRRPF52]

The military isn't interested in either of them for standard issue, especially looking at 5.56 NATO M855A1 performance.

The sniping community in several of the services within SOCOM and USMC have shown interest in 6.5 Grendel because:

Higher hit probability than M118LR from shorter barrels with longer barrel life for courses, half the recoil, fits in the SPR or M4 profile, much better solution than SR25/M110/SCAR-H.

More rounds can be carried for the Sniper/DM duty positions, whereas you can go Black on ammo very quickly with 7.62 NATO.

There has been more focus on .260 Rem and 6.5 Creedmoor for SSRs, while they are also looking for a 6.5mm Assault LMG within SOCOM, no mention of anything .277 currently.

For the civilian side, Grendel exceeds 6.8 SPC II performance from the same barrel lengths with the same bullets from the same companies, then really leaves it in the dust when looking at 129gr ABLR.

Doesn't matter if it's SBRs, 16", or 20", you see velocities within a few tens of fps of each other, with substantially higher BCs from 6.5mm, lower working pressure, and the availability of affordable steel case ammo for Grendel.

I get called a liar over and over, so I did one of my searches....again for specific SPC II speeds from 16" barrels, including the most efficient powders recommended by Harrison.

Everything was 2470-2500fps from a 16" SPC II barrel with hand loads under the 120gr SST, which is a fine bullet for hunting with the 6.8-nothing wrong with it at all. Affordable, deadly within parameters, accurate.

I'm not a hater for pointing out that the 123gr SST, with the same construction and expansion envelope, at the same speeds or even slower speeds, exceeds the terminal performance of the 120gr SST in 6.8 SPC II non-standard chambers meant for maximum horsepower.

It's not my fault the BC is almost a full value higher with one than the other.

It's not my fault that one has way better sectional density.

It's not my fault that one is spinning faster when it hits the animal, with faster impact speed, with more retained energy, more penetration, and equal or more expansion.

This makes me a liar though for some reason...really odd.

I'm cherry-picking the data.

It's funny to see someone who I know can read and do basic logical deduction or addition even claim that out of the "10,000 bullets for 6.5 Grendel", most of them are target bullets and the few hunting bullets for 6.5mm require .260 Rem speeds to expand.

The majority of the hunting bullets on the market for 6.5mm were never designed for .260 Rem speeds. They were designed for 6.5x55 Mauser speeds from surplus actions, where chamber pressure had to be kept down in the mid 40ksi region.

Everything 85-130gr expands very well at Grendel velocities, with a few exceptions. The premium Barnes 100gr TTSX is one, but it still has expansion range for common hunting distances within 275yds.

First I'm told that who needs all that long range performance when shooting animals within 200yds, then I'm told that the 100gr TTSX is crap because it only expands out to 260yds from a 16"??? Scratching head....

If you want to do an addition test, go count all of the 6.5mm bullets that are for hunting, and all of them that are for target. I've been doing it for years.

Last I checked, there are significantly more hunting bullets that expand just fine within Grendel muzzle velocities within common hunting distances.

Not good enough. I'm a liar, you see.

I just counted the inventory of Midway's site, for example. 68 of 98 are hunting bullets in 6.5mm.

You see a similar breakdown when you look at the entirety of the available 6.5mm bullets on the market.

In our shameless quest for profits in the firehouse reloading handbook market, when we put together Volume II, we came up with an even longer list of bullets.

Most of them are hunting bullets. All of the loads in Volume II are for hunting bullets.

All of them will expand within common hunting distances.

The 100gr and 120gr NBTs do even from shorter barrels.

The TSX and TTSX do.

The SSTs do.

The Pro Hunters do-even Sierra specifically says the 120gr Pro Hunter is meant for slower muzzle velocities or longer range from a faster cartridge, and will fragment at .260 Rem speeds at close range.

Same for Hot Cors, Partitions, and about every hunting bullet you can find for 6.5mm.

Nope, I'm lying. Target bullets are more prevalent, because 6.5 Grendel is meant for target, not hunting. Hunting is 6.8 SPC's sole domain of horsepower dominance.

The basic math and open facts simply don't support any of these blatant falsehoods. Anyone can look it up and see, don't trust me.

[grayfox]

I'm just a simple money-paying customer; I started out in the 6.8 world and switched over to 6.5's for a host of reasons. But if someone wants to shoot 6.8's I'm perfectly good with that, let them have their choices, the more the merrier. I happen like 6.5 choices better for me and for my shooting.

All the guys and discussions on this forum happen to be one of those reasons I switched, but another is I find a better-supplied, wider market for what I need, which for me translates directly into better prospects for enjoying my shootin' for a longer timeframe.

Plus I get to plunk bullets out farther at paper and critters than I could have with a fatter bullet! just sayin'.

[PVBoom]

But, the fun never ends.

Its a full out brushfire over on ar15.com.

Just make some popcorn first and get ready to laugh.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/Intere...21-719512/

[Double Naught Spy]

Why are gun makers still putting effort into 6.8 SPC when it seems like it is a dead man walking? 6.5 Grendel is better in every aspect and is only growing in popularity. 6.8 SPC is a dead cartridge and I don't see why gun makers are still putting effort into it since it is a dead end instead of just jumping on the 6.5 Grendel train.

Well, let's see. More and more folks are making 6.8 every day and you can buy 6.8 ammo at Walmart (at least here) and there are a BUNCH of different factory offerings for 6.8 ammo.

Folks here get so excited when they hear that somebody is offering a new factory load for 6.5 Grendel that they can't hardly type straight. A new round comes out in 6.8 spc and it is but a drop in the bucket that makes small ripples and folks barely notice.

6.8 is hardly dead or dying.

[Kilco]

Well, let's see. More and more folks are making 6.8 every day and you can buy 6.8 ammo at Walmart (at least here) and there are a BUNCH of different factory offerings for 6.8 ammo.

Folks here get so excited when they hear that somebody is offering a new factory load for 6.5 Grendel that they can't hardly type straight. A new round comes out in 6.8 spc and it is but a drop in the bucket that makes small ripples and folks barely notice.

6.8 is hardly dead or dying.

Truth dart.

+1 DNS

[ahillock]

+1 LRRPF52. Thanks for digging up that ballistics info and posting the other stuff. Good data. The numbers don't lie. 6.5G outperforms 6.8SPC in everything I have come across. SBR. Long barrels. Short distance. Long distance. Just a better round.

[LR1955]

OK guys:


This thread asked why guys buy the 6.8 when the Grendel is so good.

Here is why.

Because they want to.

LR55

[bj139]

If you shoot at 200 yards they are not much different.
If you shoot at 1000 yards they are very different.

[Lastrites]

Most of butt hurt of the 6.8 goes back to the beginning where Remington screwed their pooch with errors in their saami submission with that the 6.8II guys have never gotten over it as their chambers and mine as I have a 6.8II also from back in the day is essentially a wildcat for handloaders only at this point as hotter factory loads have disappeared and their promised cheap practice load never appeared. The 6.8II would have been better served if it would have had a name change and had its own saami approval but then it would have had a harder time riding the coattails of the original 6.8 offering as they would have had to start from ground zero and provide the substantial outlay of cash and support for submission. But I digress as they should have named their improved chamber something along the lines of 270 Short.

My Bison shoots well but has broken 2 extractors and anything but the expensive PRI mags may induce occasional feeding errors. Both 6.5 and 6.8 have a lot in common from devoted advocates to similar performance at certain distance but the biggest difference is the 6.8 guys seem really defensive where I fail to see the same with the Grendel crowd. Oh and Harrison is a real tool, likely has done more harm than good with his abrasive approach and god like mentality for the future of the 6.8II.

[LR1955]

Guys:

I think that is enough of this one. If you want to compare the two cartridges, there are twenty or thirty threads that do so.

This one is heading down the path of all the other threads comparing the two cartridges. After the page of real facts, there comes volumes of what is almost a religious argument.

LR55