07-25-2011, 02:59 AM
LRRPF52 Wrote:Gents, I think an important thing to remember is that the folks behind 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel are on the same team in the big picture...Well said. You're quite right, of course.
Quote:...while there are two different platforms on the market to offer a different set of ballistic capabilities from within the AR receiver/magazine platform.Very true. Even the underpowered loads from Remington deliver flatter trajectory than that of 7.62x39, and SPC II ammo provides a significant overmatch.
When the 6.8 SPC was being developed, there was a constant reference to equipping M4's with something with more similarity to the 7.62x39 without losing 300-500m trajectory of the 5.56, and without the 7.62x39's magazine size/shape handicaps. I think the 6.8 SPC achieved exactly that.
Quote:The Grendel wasn't conceived under the idea of combining certain cartridge performances, but maximizing performance across the board from within the constraints of an AR15 platform. I think it has done exactly that, especially when you look at how close it is to .308 in terms of trajectory and wind deflection.Concur.
Quote:I think if the guys from 5th SFG and AMU had been collaborating with Arne and Bill, maybe the 6.8 SPC might not have ever been conceived...And maybe the 6.5 Grendel would also have been aborted. The cartridge resulting from such a collaboration might well have been a cross between 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel.
I've sometimes wondered what would result if the SPC's smaller case diameter and higher chamber pressure were to be combined with the Grendel's high-BC bullet @ moderate velocity concept.