Originally posted by Bwild97
View Post
Free 6.5 Grendel Reload Data
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
There are only a few that know (remember) the truth of the matter.
True! Bill Alexander did experiment with lots of chambers during the development of the 6.5 Grendel before settling on one to submit to SAAMI. But I have never seen him say the "Grendel II" was one of them. I may have missed it through all the excuses and rumors though.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by barrelcactus View PostThats what Arne Brennan (codeveloper)reported on another board he said the orginal Grendel was what we call the Grendel II print.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by barrelcactus View PostHow do you like those primers are they a thinker cup like the BR4 and the CCI450?Let's go Brandon!
Comment
-
-
-
Originally posted by barrelcactus View PostThe GII has .120 length heres Arne Brennans email arne@northamericansportsman.com
Then they evolved to the compound throat.
Comment
-
-
Arne says they could not get groups with the Lapua Scenars. They then tried the shorter throat compound throat and it did shoot the scenars well with the powder they were using.. They did not have these modern powders though like 8208xbr and ar comp. The new data after folks have been shooting for seceral years with all kinds of bullets including lapua scenars suggests what they were seeing was a sensitivity to jump when ball powders when used with certain bullets. All this data with various bullets and a prefernce toward extruded powders by shooters seem to indicate to me that they learned the wrong lesson from a limited data set. They thought they were seeing a problem with the throat not liking lapua scenars but it was slapua scenars combined with ball powders.Last edited by Guest; 05-11-2017, 10:01 PM.
Comment
-
-
I don't think I'm dog piling and I didn't say a word about the data. Your earlier comments implied (at least by my interpretation) that the Grendel II was the "original" Grendel chamber and was therefore as good or better than the SAAMI chamber. I think it would be awesome if someone were to buy a group of blanks and have the same smith chamber 3 with SAAMI, 3 with Grendel II, and maybe 3 with 264 LBC-AR and then present the average of the results. Until that's done, the closest thing we have is Alexander's original testing of the various designs which apparently showed the SAAMI chamber to have the best accuracy with the widest range of bullets tested.
There's no denying that the Grendel II is on the market today because of the group buy fiasco a few years ago. And it's apparently more cost effective to mass produce barrels with the Grendel II chamber than with the SAAMI chamber. With that said, maybe the Grendel II has been a good thing for the Grendel cartridge. There are probably many, many more rifles shooting the Grendel cartridge today since Brownell's and Midway started selling the Liberty barrels. I was amazed to see that only about 10% of the loads in your group were fired from SAAMI chambers.
You and Arne may be right about the initial testing, I have no way of knowing. I don't have any problem at all with the Grendel II chamber, if that's what people want to buy. My problem is that the Grendel II, Grendel I, Type I bolt, Type II bolt, Type II barrel, etc. results in people not knowing what it is they are buying. SAAMI is a specification that can be relied upon.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Drillboss View PostI don't think I'm dog piling and I didn't say a word about the data. Your earlier comments implied (at least by my interpretation) that the Grendel II was the "original" Grendel chamber and was therefore as good or better than the SAAMI chamber. I think it would be awesome if someone were to buy a group of blanks and have the same smith chamber 3 with SAAMI, 3 with Grendel II, and maybe 3 with 264 LBC-AR and then present the average of the results. Until that's done, the closest thing we have is Alexander's original testing of the various designs which apparently showed the SAAMI chamber to have the best accuracy with the widest range of bullets tested.
There's no denying that the Grendel II is on the market today because of the group buy fiasco a few years ago. And it's apparently more cost effective to mass produce barrels with the Grendel II chamber than with the SAAMI chamber. With that said, maybe the Grendel II has been a good thing for the Grendel cartridge. There are probably many, many more rifles shooting the Grendel cartridge today since Brownell's and Midway started selling the Liberty barrels. I was amazed to see that only about 10% of the loads in your group were fired from SAAMI chambers.
You and Arne may be right about the initial testing, I have no way of knowing. I don't have any problem at all with the Grendel II chamber, if that's what people want to buy. My problem is that the Grendel II, Grendel I, Type I bolt, Type II bolt, Type II barrel, etc. results in people not knowing what it is they are buying. SAAMI is a specification that can be relied upon.Last edited by Guest; 05-13-2017, 05:14 AM.
Comment
-
Comment