10-20-2011, 06:29 PM
There has been a lot of industry resistance to supporting the Grendel, since so many companies knee-jerked onto the 6.8 SPC bandwagon. There has been a not so subtle effort to attack the Grendel, cut out products from manufacturers who were offering both 5/8x24 and 9/16x24 thread patterns in favor of the 5/8x24, and a constant barrage of disinformation on how the Grendel can only match 6.8 trajectories out of a 24" barrel, versus the 6.8's 16" barrel. I even started to believe that crap until I broke down and ran the ballistics.
What I learned was the exact opposite...the Grendel with a 16" barrel pushing 120gr Barnes TSX at 2500 fps matches 6.8 SPC 110 Barnes TSX launched at 2650 fps...both out of 16" barrels. The difference: The Grendel retains more energy SHOCKER, and has less wind drift than the 6.8 SPC with those loads.
We're even looking at guys who have been adamant and outspoken opponents of the Grendel announcing that they will now be offering Grendels, because they're tired of turning customers away. There are hordes of new shooters who are maturing into hunting with the AR, and they look at the different caliber options that have actual industry support (not some developmental wildcat), and are naturally leaning in .264" projectiles with their superior Sectional Density and BC's. They could care less how many guys walked around the floor of SHOT 7 years ago telling everyone about Special Forces' new, uber-secret cartridge.
As this industry trend continues, demand and support for the Grendel will continue to grow, even though most shooters will not realize any practical difference in 6.8 SPC ballistics vs. 6.5 Grendel ballistics within 300yds! I could even make a point for how the 75gr AMAX is a better choice than both of them out of your regular AR15, but perception is reality, and since "everyone knows a .223 is only good for varmints", people will naturally look for some other caliber solution in their trusty AR15 platform.
That demand will bring more magazine offerings to market. The width of the magazine doesn't need to be the same over the entire height...hint hint. We will have a polymer mag for the Grendel within the near future. It's just a matter of enough support getting behind it.
What I learned was the exact opposite...the Grendel with a 16" barrel pushing 120gr Barnes TSX at 2500 fps matches 6.8 SPC 110 Barnes TSX launched at 2650 fps...both out of 16" barrels. The difference: The Grendel retains more energy SHOCKER, and has less wind drift than the 6.8 SPC with those loads.
We're even looking at guys who have been adamant and outspoken opponents of the Grendel announcing that they will now be offering Grendels, because they're tired of turning customers away. There are hordes of new shooters who are maturing into hunting with the AR, and they look at the different caliber options that have actual industry support (not some developmental wildcat), and are naturally leaning in .264" projectiles with their superior Sectional Density and BC's. They could care less how many guys walked around the floor of SHOT 7 years ago telling everyone about Special Forces' new, uber-secret cartridge.
As this industry trend continues, demand and support for the Grendel will continue to grow, even though most shooters will not realize any practical difference in 6.8 SPC ballistics vs. 6.5 Grendel ballistics within 300yds! I could even make a point for how the 75gr AMAX is a better choice than both of them out of your regular AR15, but perception is reality, and since "everyone knows a .223 is only good for varmints", people will naturally look for some other caliber solution in their trusty AR15 platform.
That demand will bring more magazine offerings to market. The width of the magazine doesn't need to be the same over the entire height...hint hint. We will have a polymer mag for the Grendel within the near future. It's just a matter of enough support getting behind it.