04-17-2019, 02:51 PM
As you can see from the previous comments, they vary and there are a lot of my way is the only way opinions on this forum, regardless of the subject. I'll throw my opinion out there but take it as just that because everyone else has made very valid points for their personal preference.
I like the feel and balance of a 16-18" barrel. Anything longer adds velocity but it also adds weight and hog hunting for me means a lot of walking so I prefer a little less weight. I also get into thick brush where I am literally feet away from very aggressive hogs and the longer barrel is more difficult to move quickly on a charging boar due to catching on vines and limbs. I also hunt from blinds sometimes and the longer barrels are more difficult to move around without bumping something. There's many reasons not to go overboard with barrel length IMO.
Going to the opposite end of the spectrum, there are many reasons not to go to the extreme on the short side. First, I don't use hearing protection when I hunt because I can be dangerously close and need every advantage I can get to helping my awareness of what's around me. The short barrels are incredibly loud and I never know that only a few inches of barrel could increase the blast and concussion until I shot one of the AR pistols. It only took one shot from one to let me know that I didn't like them. As others pointed out, you lose velocity and that is THE most important part of individual bullet performance. There's high BC bullets that help there, but that in itself is limiting options. Hunting from a blind, especially a box stand, the shorter barrels are closer under the roof and that magnifies the sound too. Obviously, adding a can to this would change things and if you go suppressed, it's a viable option for you. It literally takes away every issue that I have with the exception of velocity.
I think 16-18" is a better option for hunters like myself for the weight reduction, noise reduction, and added velocity without becoming heavy and cumbersome. If a can was added to this, it would obviously change that.
I find a lot of opinions on here interesting, and there's a lot of lurkers that don't comment much but really have good information if you can get them to share. I don't think like a lot of people here do and that's ok. Most want maximum velocity which means slow powder, I don't. I don't want added muzzle blast and flash to get a few fps more or single digit SD. It's not necessary for less than 300 shots. You won't find many people that would even consider fast powders as an option.
I probably have an unpopular opinion on bullet energy too and I mention this because someone has compared it to a 44 mag energy. This measurement imo is thrown around way to broadly and 1200lbs of energy out of a 223 doesn't perform like 1200lbs out of a 7.62x39. There's absolutely no comparison in performance on game tissue. To further demonstrate, compare a 22 hornet with a 45 Colt. The Hornet shoots flatter and faster, but the weaker 45 Colt will kill game much bigger than it's energy number suggests. IMO, it's a valid measurement but it's often used in the wrong context and causes misleading information. Game laws and recommendations are based on the number frequently but it doesn't really make sense across different calibers.
I started off using a 5.56 AR and was really disappointed with the performance. I moved to a 7.62x39 and completely fell in love with the AR and I prefer to use it when deer and hog hunting over every gun that I own. For everything under 200 yards, nothing I have kills them any better. I bought the Grendel to stretch that performance out to 300 yards without adding weight or recoil because I still need the fast follow up shots and quick handling. In my limited experience with the Grendel, it's more difficult in finding cheap accurate barrels, cheap accurate ammo, and solid "one size fits all" loads. But I have no doubt that it'll do exactly what I want it to do once everything comes together. I have already bought my second one and am currently shopping around for the parts for number 3. Welcome to the addiction.
I like the feel and balance of a 16-18" barrel. Anything longer adds velocity but it also adds weight and hog hunting for me means a lot of walking so I prefer a little less weight. I also get into thick brush where I am literally feet away from very aggressive hogs and the longer barrel is more difficult to move quickly on a charging boar due to catching on vines and limbs. I also hunt from blinds sometimes and the longer barrels are more difficult to move around without bumping something. There's many reasons not to go overboard with barrel length IMO.
Going to the opposite end of the spectrum, there are many reasons not to go to the extreme on the short side. First, I don't use hearing protection when I hunt because I can be dangerously close and need every advantage I can get to helping my awareness of what's around me. The short barrels are incredibly loud and I never know that only a few inches of barrel could increase the blast and concussion until I shot one of the AR pistols. It only took one shot from one to let me know that I didn't like them. As others pointed out, you lose velocity and that is THE most important part of individual bullet performance. There's high BC bullets that help there, but that in itself is limiting options. Hunting from a blind, especially a box stand, the shorter barrels are closer under the roof and that magnifies the sound too. Obviously, adding a can to this would change things and if you go suppressed, it's a viable option for you. It literally takes away every issue that I have with the exception of velocity.
I think 16-18" is a better option for hunters like myself for the weight reduction, noise reduction, and added velocity without becoming heavy and cumbersome. If a can was added to this, it would obviously change that.
I find a lot of opinions on here interesting, and there's a lot of lurkers that don't comment much but really have good information if you can get them to share. I don't think like a lot of people here do and that's ok. Most want maximum velocity which means slow powder, I don't. I don't want added muzzle blast and flash to get a few fps more or single digit SD. It's not necessary for less than 300 shots. You won't find many people that would even consider fast powders as an option.
I probably have an unpopular opinion on bullet energy too and I mention this because someone has compared it to a 44 mag energy. This measurement imo is thrown around way to broadly and 1200lbs of energy out of a 223 doesn't perform like 1200lbs out of a 7.62x39. There's absolutely no comparison in performance on game tissue. To further demonstrate, compare a 22 hornet with a 45 Colt. The Hornet shoots flatter and faster, but the weaker 45 Colt will kill game much bigger than it's energy number suggests. IMO, it's a valid measurement but it's often used in the wrong context and causes misleading information. Game laws and recommendations are based on the number frequently but it doesn't really make sense across different calibers.
I started off using a 5.56 AR and was really disappointed with the performance. I moved to a 7.62x39 and completely fell in love with the AR and I prefer to use it when deer and hog hunting over every gun that I own. For everything under 200 yards, nothing I have kills them any better. I bought the Grendel to stretch that performance out to 300 yards without adding weight or recoil because I still need the fast follow up shots and quick handling. In my limited experience with the Grendel, it's more difficult in finding cheap accurate barrels, cheap accurate ammo, and solid "one size fits all" loads. But I have no doubt that it'll do exactly what I want it to do once everything comes together. I have already bought my second one and am currently shopping around for the parts for number 3. Welcome to the addiction.