THIS Is the Dedicated 65G Bullet I Want

[sneaky one]

ROS is doing the gel testing- he has it down to a science of melting, that I can't replicate- here. maybe he could place an old leather jacket over the gel tubes frontal?

BTW , the end goal on the Gmx's == two pills. One in a lighter wt., we tested a few- gel will tell the story--- An 80 grn. Gmx,was the initial idea that we - The 3 of us spoke of in Jan. I will admit to being reluctant to that wt. class. Yet, after shooting a few @ over 3000 fps, into H 2 O ,.. I was really impressed . Again- wait a week , or 3. We are not ready here.

The other well seen choice , is the 105 Gmx that I posted up last vinter. I put that thru the jugs at same time as the 80. Very nice, as to expansion- end game on deer taking performance ideas.

Think southern deer, as to the larger Northern deer., makes sense to have 2 great choices as to your hunt spot. 80-90,,, then the 105 idea
. Why , 105??
It smokes the Barney unit , by wt., and wayyy less wind drift. Ricsmall took 2 deer last fall , using the 105's I sent to him. In the end, it was over kill on the smaller Georgian deer.

Worked out well for a kill pill, yet too much for that size of eating class deer- RS said to me, never had Meat come out the entrance, & exit bullet hole before- in Any caliber!

The Gmx rocks, in a lighter wt. Hang time...

Gilding metal-GMX construction- is longer for wt., than pure copper alloy.

Gilding- 2 spellings actually= Guilding metal--- Is a mix of 95% copper, & 5 % Zinc.. makes it Way stronger , yet way lighter= longer!

Check my albums! Wait for the bullet ideal syrup , it's on the way!!!!!!!!

[JASmith]

GS Custom recently sent some 86 gr HV bullets. They show a lot of potential as a flat shooting deer bullet. We haven't reported on them yet because we still have to do the testing.

[BluntForceTrauma]

Sounds like good stuff coming!

[Drifter]

Cost should be a consideration if a new bullet is expected to be a big seller for a manufacturer willing to take the leap on a new offering.

Using MidwayUSA pricing, Grendel shooters are accustomed to paying ~$0.30 per bullet for A-max and SST. It appears that LRX and GMX bullets typically run ~$0.65 to ~$0.75 each.

Is a new $0.75 Grendel-specific bullet gonna meet sales performance goals of a manufacturer?

Or would a $0.30 SST or GameKing in the ~107gr weight class be a better investment for a manufacturer?

What are sales estimates after the initial group buy for bullets at various price points?

If a Grendel shooter / hunter would buy ~2 boxes or "premium" bullets annually, or 8 boxes of reasonably-priced bullets, which is the better venture for a manufacturer?

Are ammo manufacturers gonna want this bullet to load, and if so, will they be able to keep the price of their offering reasonable?

Which bullet manufacturers have caught up production to match demand, and would be more receptive to something new at this particular time?

Though I have my own opinions, I don't really know the answers to these questions. But for anyone planning to make a pitch to a manufacturer, put yourself in their shoes. They'll be looking at it from a business standpoint. The ideal bullet in performance might not necessarily be the best business proposition.

[Variable]

Photochopped mockup of a Hornady GMX with big tip. I also envision the tip being swapped out for something akin to M855A1. Heh, heh, heh. . . .

Oh, yes, BTW, I did a quick check in the JBM ballistics calculator of a 0.400 BC 6.5mm 100gr at 2600 fps and it slows to about 1600 fps at roughly 500 yards. Good enough for most of ya'll?

Yep. Pretty good looking to me.LOL I also thought about the M855A1 aspect, but figured I'd let that dog lay sleeping for now.

[stanc]

Yep. Pretty good looking to me.LOL I also thought about the M855A1 aspect, but figured I'd let that dog lay sleeping for now.

That was the first thing which popped into my head when I read the OP. I didn't bother to wake up that dog because such a bullet would fall under the ban on armor-piercing handgun rounds, and therefore be unavailable to the general population.

[rickOshay]

Sneaky what are y'all using to simulate animal hide for the gel test?

We had chosen not to use hide for several reasons:
1. We are only comparing the performance between bullets.
2. We were not trying to determine actual penetration in game, so did not incorporate bone either.
3. A hide substitute would introduce variability due to different thicknesses, composition. gaps between gel surface, etc

But we are open to suggestions.

[stanc]

We had chosen not to use hide for several reasons:
1. We are only comparing the performance between bullets.
2. We were not trying to determine actual penetration in game, so did not incorporate bone either.
3. A hide substitute would introduce variability due to different thicknesses, composition. gaps between gel surface, etc

But we are open to suggestions.

IMO, your reasoning makes sense. Unless there is reason to think the bullet makers would want to see test results using animal hide in front of the gel block, I'd say keep it simple, stick with bare gel.

Since we're in the same area, if I were still in good enough shape, I'd offer to help you with the testing. But, in my present condition, I reckon I would be more of a liability than asset.

[cory]

We had chosen not to use hide for several reasons:
1. We are only comparing the performance between bullets.
2. We were not trying to determine actual penetration in game, so did not incorporate bone either.
3. A hide substitute would introduce variability due to different thicknesses, composition. gaps between gel surface, etc

But we are open to suggestions.

I get where you're coming from there. However, I'd think you'd at least want to do limited testing to see how much of a hide like material made on the bullet opening. If it shows to be negligible, then you can say through limited testing we've shown the variable to have limited affects. However, you could come to find that it make s a drastic difference in what the "ideal" bullet should be.

I'm taking a shot in the dark here. Would it be possible to take some hide from a freshly killed deer this season and preserve in some fluid until the time of a test in the near future?

[LRRPF52]

We noticed that recovered 123gr SST looked exactly like the gel test 123gr SST in that impact velocity window, other than some minor pitting on the lead on the pill recovered from a deer, which even surprised Stokes.

With the 118 years of simple cup and core bullet performance on record, the 6.5mm legacy is well beyond a scientific baseline, especially looking at Moose kills in Scandinavia. We're talking about numbers in the millions, since they average 100,000 moose per year in Sweden alone, and moose are killed in the tens of thousands per year in Finland as well. In 2001, they harvested 66,951 moose out of a 120,000 population. Even if 6.5x55 accounted for a small % of those shoots, we're looking at a significant baseline that truly surpasses most scientific studies in game harvesting, due to the detailed records that have been kept in Scandinavia since the early 1900's.

http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/mat/ekolo/vk/luoma/moosehun.pdf

That said, I think there is merit to the proposition that we actually push for one of the other big name cartridge manufacturers to start cranking out an affordable load with a standard cup and core bullet. That would do a lot for the cartridge and the market, with another premium bullet to follow later on, since we have so many premium options right now.

Something like a Federal with a basic soft point, NBT, Fusion, Partition line-up like they currently have. If you look at their 6.5x55 and .260 Rem loads, they have a nice assortment including 120gr NBT, 120gr Fusion, 123gr SMK for target, as well as several 140gr and 142gr loads.

As far as big manufacturers go for US-made brass ammunition, Hornady is top dog right now, and they sell out anything Grendel as soon as it hits the market. There is room for another big name to get on board, and they would sell a crap load of Grendel as long as they didn't start with a premium load, in my opinion. An economy brass-cased load with a soft point priced around $14-$17 would sell extremely well.

In the meantime, they can develop a high BC lightweight pill for the premium lines, with the Grendel specifically in mind, that would also upgrade the lightweight hunting bullets for the other 6.5mm cases. A .400+ G1 BC ~100gr hybrid ogive, long boat tail bonded bullet would be the most economical approach for a premium bullet I think, since solids take the price up significantly.

The introduction of Wolf steel case will likely see the barrel and bolt maker market respond to customer demand, which will trigger a response in US made brass ammo from Federal I think. That should be our focus.

[cory]

If Federal was to put out an economical load with LC quality brass with a cheap fmj bullet, then IMNSHO it'd be a huge seller. However, that'd take a military contract for them to do and do it at a volume that'd make the ammo economical.

IMHO if winchester put out a Grendel round in their Ranger line at their current price, that'd be a huge seller.

IMHO if hornady put out a steel case, with the 123gr SST, that'd be a huge seller.

However, if someone tries a compromise with marginal brass, marginal bullets, and a marginal load at a marginal price ($0.60 + per round), then I don't think it'd be successful.

One more however, the intent of this proposal is for a solid bullet that is optimized for the Grendel. So these two issues couldn't be further apart.

[MKo]

as noob to 6.5grendel maybe a stupid question. Have you guys tried Swift Scirocco II? I have lot of good experience with that bullet (30cal 150gr) on accuracy and "stopping power" on Moose, white tails, roedeers and varmints like foxes and badgers. All except moose has stopped within 1m after getting hit. Mooses tend to go about 5-50m depending on shot placement. Well one moose I dropped with head shot and it dropped right there. On high speed impact bullet maintains it's weight pretty good.
Another thing is Wolf/Tula ammo. Lot of my friends on other side of big water do not shoot steel cased ammo in their AR's or AK's. Reasoning is that steel case ammo puts lot more pressure on bolt and locking lugs. That's because case does not expand as brass cases do. It's causing faster wear and tear on locking lugs which are most critical part of action when it comes to accuracy and reliability. Or maybe it's my innerself that prevents using anything coming from russia.

[Michael]

Another thing is Wolf/Tula ammo. Lot of my friends on other side of big water do not shoot steel cased ammo in their AR's or AK's. Reasoning is that steel case ammo puts lot more pressure on bolt and locking lugs. That's because case does not expand as brass cases do. It's causing faster wear and tear on locking lugs which are most critical part of action when it comes to accuracy and reliability)

Interesting. This is something I have thought, but had no anecdotal/empirical evidence. Are steel cases, perhaps, produced to lower pressures to avoid this? I would think with the testing done by AA this issue would have considered this and steps taken to avoid undo stress on bolts. Anyone know?

[LRRPF52]

Yes, there is a factory Swift Scirocco II 130gr load from Alexander Arms that has been around since the beginning.

My point about a premium, purpose-built bullet for the Grendel is that I suspect we will get the minimum volume order if another large ammo maker gets on board.

I think Barnes requires a 250,000 minimum order, and that bullet is going to be one of the priciest even in volume. This is why I think a bonded bullet will make the most sense for the market, as they are easier to make, and fall between the price points of an SST and a solid.

[stanc]

...the intent of this proposal is for a solid bullet that is optimized for the Grendel. So these two issues couldn't be further apart.

I agree. If the desire is to increase 6.5 Grendel popularity, one more premium hunting bullet ain't gonna do squat.

IMO, what would help is lower cost, brass cased FMJ target/plinking ammo: