6.5 Grendel II ~vs~ regular grendel.....?

[cory]

LR1955 I get what you're going at here. However this isn't the place. What you think is happening here, is not what's going on.

The old stoner liberty barrel were in fact dangerous. As I've stated before they presented a catastrophic (Loss of life or permanently disabling injury) hazard to the shooter.

Nobody is or has bashed the .264lbc chamber. Nobody is bashing anyone here. A is A, the facts are the facts. As far as the Grendel II chamber, the subject of the OP's post, goes see my original response below. It's nothing but facts. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The "Grendel II" chamber was nothing more than a cover your ass exercise by the company you should have seen mentioned in the "jiberish". That company put out a lot of economy barrels with short throats, did not meet the SAAMI spec, that were potentially catastrophically hazardous to the shooter. Rather than admitting their mistake, recalling the barrels and replacing them, they took the stance that they were within spec and the problem was the design of the Grendel Chamber. However, they were going to take the "higher" ground and offer to ream out your chamber to a "better" chamber. There's a lot of bad blood between AA and Satern that explains some of this.

The "Grendel II" is actually one of the many chambers Bill A. experimented with until he settled on the Grendel chamber with the compound throat for best accuracy through a wide range of bullets.

The compound throat is a design solution that is unique to the Grendel. I maybe mistaking about it being unique, but at most it's rare. It has shown to be extremely effectiver. However, reamer makers sometimes hate it because it makes their jobs more difficult.

Oh and where are you waiting "years" to buy a Grendel barrel?