6.5 Grendel Variants, Good or Bad?

[cory]

Do you know it hasn't been tested? This print of the Grendel II is dated 2008. Is it possible this reamer has been used for a while and finally came to be public is all.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4904[/ATTACH]

I do agree with everyone's opinion that it is a variant of the Grendel but as far as not being tested is an assumption.

Because there are three reasons not to divulge test results: they're proprietary, there are none, or the results were less than favorable to your position. There's no reason for proprietary data here, so take your pick.

It's possible for me to dunk a basketball, but unless someone does some serious photoshopping you'll never see it happen. A lot of things are possible, but I prefer to deal in substantiated history.

To break it down Barney style, I'm only interested in dealing in facts and data, not what you seem to remember, scratching what you conveniently forget.

You are correct on my statement being an assumption. However, in absence of test data it's the safe/conservative assumption. That's shall I say normal in engineering, take the conservative, verifiable path.