03-26-2014, 05:18 AM
HANKA Wrote:Fair enough, but the problem arose when they were NOT. Right? Dave Kiff was recently bragging that many barrels marked 6.5 Grendel are not SAAMI 6.5 Grendel. Then, when they don't work, who gets the blame? All the vendors involved run for the hills and point fingers at each other and finally at the 6.5 Grendel itself as conceived by Alexander Arms.
We've had a few guys recently say they're disillusioned about the 6.5 Grendel because of the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt that's been sown. That doesn't help the rest of us who are looking forward to more participation, by users and vendors alike, in the 6.5 Grendel program.
As you say, I'd like the various variant entities to take responsibility for their creations. Everybody knows what the .223 Wylde is; it is a solid solution to a valid problem and you know what you're getting when you order one. If you want a 6.5 Grendel variant, call it the 6.5 Satern or the 6.5 Kiff, and own it. I'll give Les Baer credit for calling his the .264LBC, even if he did it for reasons beyond mere truth in labeling.
If one's variant chamber succeeds, one wants all the credit. And the money. If one's variant chamber flops, one points a finger at Alexander Arms. It's like Obama still blaming Bush for the past six years. . . .
John
It would seem that the problem then lies not with variant chambers, but with the advertising and business practices of the various companies offering them. I'll not comment on the merits of their respective names.
Also, in my opinion, a wildcat would necessitate some change to the cartridge (i.e. necking up/down, moving or blowing out the shoulder, etc.). And there are, in fact, numbered chamber designs (6.8 spc and 6.8 spc II.)