02-12-2012, 08:16 PM
Hi Montana,
I think you would have to understand the history of the 6.5 Grendel to really appreciate the vastly different views and the angling that went on to answer your question. Bill A. chose a .300 neck and a compound throat lead angle that he felt was optimum for his major objectives. Others chose to tighten things up to a 2.95 neck and tried to market this as superior, they also tried to denigrate the compound throat angle. I see these as mostly issues as driven by jealousy rather than true technical superiority.
I have both .295 and .300 neck chambers and compound throat angle and 1 and .5 degree lead angles. They all work and they all have benefits and drawbacks. Bill attempted a proprietary approach similar to what Weatherby did but in the end, gave that approach up and went to an open standard. Bill has done more for the Grendel than any other person, but his approaches were not always appreciated by all and downright viciously attacked by some. Then you have Johnny come lately types that try to cash in but have no clue what they are doing. You've seen some of that too.
The Grendel is now a SAAMI standard chamber which is a good thing and if you are going to label your product a 6.5 Grendel then it should be a 6.5 Grendel, not something else.
I think that now with the standardization, what you are seeing is the death throws of the my dimension is better types. They will fade away.
What you are seeing as new and improved have been with us from the beginning. They are new and improved only to those who haven't been through it all.
I hope that helps you understand a little more.
Bob
I think you would have to understand the history of the 6.5 Grendel to really appreciate the vastly different views and the angling that went on to answer your question. Bill A. chose a .300 neck and a compound throat lead angle that he felt was optimum for his major objectives. Others chose to tighten things up to a 2.95 neck and tried to market this as superior, they also tried to denigrate the compound throat angle. I see these as mostly issues as driven by jealousy rather than true technical superiority.
I have both .295 and .300 neck chambers and compound throat angle and 1 and .5 degree lead angles. They all work and they all have benefits and drawbacks. Bill attempted a proprietary approach similar to what Weatherby did but in the end, gave that approach up and went to an open standard. Bill has done more for the Grendel than any other person, but his approaches were not always appreciated by all and downright viciously attacked by some. Then you have Johnny come lately types that try to cash in but have no clue what they are doing. You've seen some of that too.
The Grendel is now a SAAMI standard chamber which is a good thing and if you are going to label your product a 6.5 Grendel then it should be a 6.5 Grendel, not something else.
I think that now with the standardization, what you are seeing is the death throws of the my dimension is better types. They will fade away.
What you are seeing as new and improved have been with us from the beginning. They are new and improved only to those who haven't been through it all.
I hope that helps you understand a little more.
Bob