6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC?

[bwaites]

Sounds good!

[Rambozo]

I have been looking at the numbers and the AAC shoots a 125 grain 7.62 projectile at 2250 FPS producing 1405 foot ponds out of a 16 inch barrel while the Grendel shoots a 123 grain at 2650 FPS producing 1917 foot pounds from a 24 inch barrel.

To me that seems that if I am using the Grendel in a 16 inch barrel that I am going to be getting about the same performance from either round. Dose that seem to be the case to any one else?

No. Performance only appears equal superficially. Both bullets of similar weight will not have the same BC due to the difference in diameter. All else being equal, the smaller diameter bullet will have the higher BC. The higher the BC, the better the bullet will carry it's velocity. That means that the 6.5 will do better at further distances.

[jwilson1985]

and the 300aac was ment to run sbr and suppressed...there is no point to have a barrel on a 300aac longer then 16"s

[BjornF16]

I'm not an expert, but I would think sectional density should be considered as well for penetration:

5.56 SD (68 grn) = .194
300 SD (125 grn) = .188
6.5 SD (95 grn) = .195
6.5 SD (120 grn) = .246

What would be the optimum PDW bullet (inside 100 yds)?

[Rambozo]

I'm not an expert, but I would think sectional density should be considered as well for penetration:

I would imagine so.

[JASmith]

...What would be the optimum PDW bullet (inside 100 yds)?

Any of these calibers should do very well inside 100 yards.

The choice of caliber and bullet might be decided by what you might like for plinking or other informal shooting.

Informal shooting is one of the best ways to become very familiar with your firearm operation and quirks unless you have the fiscal resources and time to go through formal training and the follow-up intensive practice.

[stanc]

What would be the optimum PDW bullet (inside 100 yds)?

For a military PDW? I'd say it'd be one that has lightest weight and lowest recoil (for maximum shootability/hit probability when used by personnel who get little range time). Plus, it should be in a standard caliber. IMO, that means:

- 5.56x45 w/45-55gr bullet, if you consider a SBR to be a PDW.

- 9x19 w/90-100gr bullet, for a holsterable PDW.

[BjornF16]

Not military PDW...personal PDW.

[stanc]

For private use, there are too many variables to say there is one optimum PDW bullet.

The optimum bullet, caliber, and weapon would depend on an individual's personal situation.

[stanc]

[video=youtube;u5nvFoQDJUI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5nvFoQDJUI[/video]

Anybody got a Grendel LMG, yet?

[bwaites]

Wow, a necked up .223 runs from the same links as a .223, who'da thunk it!

[stanc]

Wow, a necked up .223 runs from the same links as a .223, who'da thunk it!

Well, that's sorta the point, in the context of the thread title.

Regarding conversion of belt-fed machine guns, .300 Blackout has a decided advantage over 6.5 Grendel.

[Variable]

So should I convert this to .300 Blackout?


Oh wait, they can't even fill everybody else's 5.56 orders... Nevermind!

While it'd be cool, I'd much rather have mine done over in Grendel any day!!!

[stanc]

While it'd be cool, I'd much rather have mine done over in Grendel any day!!!

Oh, if only it could be done...

I'll see if I can find my magic wand. It must be here somewhere.

[bwaites]

Well, that's sorta the point, in the context of the thread title.

Regarding conversion of belt-fed machine guns, .300 Blackout has a decided advantage over 6.5 Grendel.

Yep, another belt fed with all the great ballistics of the 7.62x39! That's a winner, for sure! Accurate out to 150 yards or so, (well, maybe 300). LOL!

Absolutely NO advantage over 5.56 belt feds with even less effective range and ammo that costs more than twice as much, thats a breakthrough?

Two completely different animals, one a cartridge with extended range and accuracy, the other a short range cartridge that shines as a subsonic.

[LRRPF52]

I stopped by DSA's booth at SHOT again yesterday and reminded them that Grendel steel case is around the corner, which will make it the most attractive caliber to do in a belt fed conversion due to cost.

.300 AAC in a SAW or Shrike?????

[stanc]

Yep, another belt fed with all the great ballistics of the 7.62x39! That's a winner, for sure! Accurate out to 150 yards or so, (well, maybe 300). LOL!

Absolutely NO advantage over 5.56 belt feds with even less effective range and ammo that costs more than twice as much, thats a breakthrough?

Wow. What an incredible distortion of my words. I never said that .300 BLK is by any measure superior to 5.56 for belt-feds, let alone that it's a breakthrough.

Two completely different animals, one a cartridge with extended range and accuracy, the other a short range cartridge that shines as a subsonic.

Absolutely. But, if you had to go to war tomorrow morning, which would you rather have: The .300 BLK M249 that actually exists, or the 6.5 Grendel M249 that is no more than a dream?

[bwaites]

Wow. What an incredible distortion of my words. I never said that .300 BLK is by any measure superior to 5.56 for belt-feds, let alone that it's a breakthrough.

Absolutely. But, if you had to go to war tomorrow morning, which would you rather have: The .300 BLK M249 that actually exists, or the 6.5 Grendel M249 that is no more than a dream?

I'd point out that in the context of the thread, the original poster was comparing the Grendel and the .300 BLK in a 16" barrel AR and their associated velocities and energy at the muzzle and downrange, it had nothing to do with a belt fed.

As for distortion, I didn't distort anything, I simply stated the facts when it came to the .300 BLK. Its a VERY niche cartridge, and the fact that you can get it to run in a rifle designed for its parent case is no real surprise or breakthrough, is it?

Given the choice between the .300 BLK that exists and the 5.56 that exists, I'd take the 5.56 everytime. I'm NOT confident that the .300 BLK M249 will even run consistently. I found it interesting that the belt in that video was so short, wonder why that was?

BUT....the .300 BLK as a belt fed for carry is a non starter regardless, and overweight, obese non starter at that. As hinted at in the video, it was done as a one-off for some kind of "I'll show you!" kind of thing.

[stanc]

I stopped by DSA's booth at SHOT again yesterday and reminded them that Grendel steel case is around the corner, which will make it the most attractive caliber to do in a belt fed conversion due to cost.

Good pitch! Let's hope they run with it.

.300 AAC in a SAW or Shrike?????

They say it's loads of fun to shoot subsonic suppressed.

[stanc]

Given the choice between the .300 BLK that exists and the 5.56 that exists, I'd take the 5.56 everytime.

Well, sure. But that doesn't answer my question.

I'm NOT confident that the .300 BLK M249 will even run consistently. I found it interesting that the belt in that video was so short, wonder why that was?

No idea. How 'bout a couple hundred rounds?

[video=youtube;JGFfzaM0lOk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGFfzaM0lOk[/video]

P.S. Gotta love those Texans. No way you could get away with that here in Kalifornia.