Semi-auto 6.5 Grendel perfect SHTF setup?

[ahillock]

Was just talking about this with a friend the other day what setup would be our favorite hands down if given a choice. 5.56 is nice but has many cons. Same thing with 7.62. The 6.5 Grendel really gives you the benefit of great terminal ballistics but also still working in a lighter weight AR15 platform + being able to carry more ammo per weight than the 7.62. While there would definitely be more 5.56, 7.62x51, 7.62x39...etc. than 6.5 Grendel around, if one had enough ammo stashed away one should be fine. Plus ability of being able to quickly switch the 6.5 Grendel over to a 5.56 setup.

Minimal recoil
Lightweight system
Great terminal ballistics

Seems tha semi-auto 6.5 Grendel would be hard to beat for a one rifle SHTF setup. Thoughts?

[VASCAR2]

I did a test earlier this year comparing the 5.56/223 16" carbine to a 16" 6.5 Grendel. I believe the 6.5 Grendel is a viable option depending on your idea of SHTF. The AR-15 platform is about as prolific as any long gun today and as long as you have a few spare parts (including a 6.5 Grendel bolt) a person could keep shooting a 6.5 Grendel AR-15 a long time.

The real question your talking about is trying to hold out at your home or are you caught away from home and trying to get to a place of safety. The 223/5.56 will always be more available. If your limited to your own supply of ammo is there enough penalty in cost and larger storage space a concern between 6.5 Grendel and 5.56/223?

I have a pretty good stock pile of 5.56/223 and 6.5 Grendel but if I could only have one I still think the 6.5 Grendel can fill the SHTF if your home. The loaded weight of my 5.56/233 carbine and 6.5 Grendel were the same but the 5.56/223 was loaded with 30 rounds and the 6.5 Grendel was loaded with 24. The question then is whether your satisfied with 24 round capacity mag. If your caught away from home with just the 6.5 Grendel and ammo are you at an inherent disadvantage. I usually travel with my 5.56 Tavor plus five loaded 30 round PMags plus one 20 round PMag. If I were carrying my 16" 6.5 Grendel it would be with five loaded 24 round mags plus one 17 round mag. Would my survival be at risk if I only had 137 rounds of 6.5 Grendel compared to 170 rounds of 5.56. There is really no way to know what reality will be in your particular situation, can a person even survive long enough to use 137 rounds of 6.5 Grendel let alone 170 rounds of 5.56/223. You also have to decide how much weight your willing to try and keep with you if your caught away from home.

Here is a link to my test of 6.5 Grendel to 5.56/223.

http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthread.php?12193-6.5-Grendel-vs-5.56

[jonny rotton]

i have been testing scopes, calibers, red dot, and barrel lengths for two years or so trying to find something that would work as the best all around weapon. i wanted to be
able to shoot at least medium ranges but be super fast in side 50 yards. my friends and i would each shoot all the different systems we had at the time at the range.
when i built my first 6.5 grendel i threw that into the mix. recently i have done so with an 11" 6.5 and a 16" 6.5. i was amazed. with a proper sighting system it turned out
to be just as fast and at times faster than the 300 blackouts and 5.56's. my favorite right now is my 16" with an AA fluted barrel and a 1-6x leupold vx6 scope. its the same rifle with a new scope that i took a long range course and rang steel at 1000 yards.
WHERE HAS THIS CARTRIDGE BEEN HIDING FOR SO MANY YEARS???

[stanc]

Seems tha semi-auto 6.5 Grendel would be hard to beat for a one rifle SHTF setup. Thoughts?

IMO, whether one has a Grendel or some other rifle is unlikely to matter.

The caliber of the shooter is more important than the caliber of the gun.

[bwaites]

IMO, whether one has a Grendel or some other rifle is unlikely to matter.

The caliber of the shooter is more important than the caliber of the gun.

So true! I have a list of friends who are close by that I trust, and each of us has somewhat different ideas about the ideal weapon while sharing the same ideas about helping each other.

[ahillock]

IMO, whether one has a Grendel or some other rifle is unlikely to matter.

The caliber of the shooter is more important than the caliber of the gun.

That is a bit of a cheap cop out answer. Anyone who is a shooter should continually hone their skill and keep improving as best they can. If S ever HTF, that shooter would be the best they would be regardless if their lone rifle at home was a .22LR, 5.56, 7.62x39, 7.62x51, 6.5 Grendel...etc.

The shooter is definitely the most important part. But we aren't comparing shooter A to shooter B. We are comparing you, with rifle A vs. you with rifle B.

So the caliber definitely plays an important part whether one wants to go with a .22LR or a .338 Lapua Magnum or a 5.45x39 rifle.

6.5 Grendel offers a lightweight setup, reasonable ammo price for adequate practice, good long range ballistics, ok CQB/CQC use, reasonable entry price, shares cross platform compatibility with 5.56 with proper parts.

If SHTF and I am told I can take the 6.5 Grendel AR-15 or a .22LR AR-15, I'm taking the 6.5 Grendel each and every time. So the caliber is definitely part of the equation. That is why all of us are on this forum. B/C the caliber matters.

[munchie3409]

I have owned plenty of firearms due to SHTF to see which ones would work the best. I'd never consider 6.5G for SHTF over other calibers that are easier to obtain. I am a reloader, before those that would say reload.

Mags are the weak link and they are disposable items.

AR15 in .223/5.56 are easier to get mags and ammo for...and there are so many of them out there. I don't care how much ammo/mags you think you are going to get as reloading components cost more to load for 6.5G over 5.56.

No need to reinvent the wheel when it comes to SHTF. If you need a firearm with more power and range...best to grab a 50BMG. I don't know anyone who preps that has one firearm for everything. Firearms are tools and most folks have more than one tool in the tool box.

[ahillock]

I did a test earlier this year comparing the 5.56/223 16" carbine to a 16" 6.5 Grendel. I believe the 6.5 Grendel is a viable option depending on your idea of SHTF. The AR-15 platform is about as prolific as any long gun today and as long as you have a few spare parts (including a 6.5 Grendel bolt) a person could keep shooting a 6.5 Grendel AR-15 a long time.

The real question your talking about is trying to hold out at your home or are you caught away from home and trying to get to a place of safety. The 223/5.56 will always be more available. If your limited to your own supply of ammo is there enough penalty in cost and larger storage space a concern between 6.5 Grendel and 5.56/223?

I have a pretty good stock pile of 5.56/223 and 6.5 Grendel but if I could only have one I still think the 6.5 Grendel can fill the SHTF if your home. The loaded weight of my 5.56/233 carbine and 6.5 Grendel were the same but the 5.56/223 was loaded with 30 rounds and the 6.5 Grendel was loaded with 24. The question then is whether your satisfied with 24 round capacity mag. If your caught away from home with just the 6.5 Grendel and ammo are you at an inherent disadvantage. I usually travel with my 5.56 Tavor plus five loaded 30 round PMags plus one 20 round PMag. If I were carrying my 16" 6.5 Grendel it would be with five loaded 24 round mags plus one 17 round mag. Would my survival be at risk if I only had 137 rounds of 6.5 Grendel compared to 170 rounds of 5.56. There is really no way to know what reality will be in your particular situation, can a person even survive long enough to use 137 rounds of 6.5 Grendel let alone 170 rounds of 5.56/223. You also have to decide how much weight your willing to try and keep with you if your caught away from home.

Here is a link to my test of 6.5 Grendel to 5.56/223.

http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showt...rendel-vs-5.56

Good post. Each one of us that thinks of SHTF will have a different scenario that we envision and what we might want or not want. Like I mentioned above, my buddy and I came up with a lot of pros to the 6.5 Grendel being a one and done caliber setup for a potential SHTF. It has a lot going for it and is a perfect blend between the 5.56 NATO and 7.62 NATO. The one downside we came with was the lack of widespread use across law enforcement + military. But if one was able to stash enough ammo + reloading supplies, this could be alleviated. + have the ability to run 5.56 ammo if you kept a spare 5.56 upper + magazines.

The 6.5 Grendel has a lot going for it as a suitable round for a multitude of scenarios. If I had to pick only one rifle round (semi-auto or bolt action), I would be hard pressed to find one that has as many positive attributes as the 6.5 Grendel.



6.5 Grendel offers a lightweight setup, reasonable ammo price for adequate practice, good long range ballistics, ok CQB/CQC use, reasonable entry price, shares cross platform compatibility with 5.56 with proper parts.

[ahillock]

No need to reinvent the wheel when it comes to SHTF. If you need a firearm with more power and range...best to grab a 50BMG. I don't know anyone who preps that has one firearm for everything. Firearms are tools and most folks have more than one tool in the tool box.

50BMG might have the power and range, but 50 BMG also has the higher entry cost & higher ammo costs which will limit an average Joe from being able to train and maintain proficiency if budget is a concern. If budget isn't a concern, might as well pay for a former special ops mercenary to be on 24/7 standby to come to your rescue.

The 50BMG also limits you to being mobile if you need to get the hell out of dodge on foot + limits CQB/CQC ability. As VASCAR2 said above, much of this will depend on what kind of SHTF scenario one envisions.

While we as gun owners have multiple firearms and calibers, there comes a point where you can't carry all of your firearms and ammo if you need to be mobile. At a point, less is more.

[Kilco]

For me it depends... I truly love the 6.5G... buuuuut it such a loaded question...

If SHTF and I was defending my HOUSE, I would probably grab my shotgun.. if I were defending my PROPERTY with pre-emptive notice I'd probably grab a bolt gun that can really reach out there with authority.. if I was suprised defending my property against 2 more perps, the 6.5G in a AR15 is probably my best option. If my family and I were on the run, at least in America you would be hard pressed to beat a 5.56. You will more than likely always find more mags/ammo. Just my take though.. no real experience with any of these senerios.

[stanc]

That is a bit of a cheap cop out answer. Anyone who is a shooter should continually hone their skill and keep improving as best they can. If S ever HTF, that shooter would be the best they would be regardless if their lone rifle at home was a .22LR, 5.56, 7.62x39, 7.62x51, 6.5 Grendel...etc.

The shooter is definitely the most important part. But we aren't comparing shooter A to shooter B. We are comparing you, with rifle A vs. you with rifle B.

So the caliber definitely plays an important part whether one wants to go with a .22LR or a .338 Lapua Magnum or a 5.45x39 rifle.

6.5 Grendel offers a lightweight setup, reasonable ammo price for adequate practice, good long range ballistics, ok CQB/CQC use, reasonable entry price, shares cross platform compatibility with 5.56 with proper parts.

If SHTF and I am told I can take the 6.5 Grendel AR-15 or a .22LR AR-15, I'm taking the 6.5 Grendel each and every time. So the caliber is definitely part of the equation.

Now you're shifting the goalposts. In the OP you mentioned only center-fire calibers. Nothing about .22 LR.

And I did not give you "a cheap cop out answer." I gave you my opinion, as per your request in the OP. If you don't wish to hear different opinions, you shouldn't ask for them.

I stand by what I originally said: IMO, whether one has a Grendel or some other rifle is unlikely to matter. There are some SHTF scenarios wherein 6.5 Grendel would be better, but there are also scenarios in which it would be not as good.

Overall, though, I just don't see a significant difference compared to 5.56x45, 7.62x39, 5.45x39, 7.62x51, 6.8 SPC, .300 BLK, or a number of other calibers, for SHTF use.

[ahillock]

Now you're shifting the goalposts. In the OP you mentioned only center-fire calibers. Nothing about .22 LR.

And I did not give you "a cheap cop out answer." I gave you my opinion, as per your request in the OP. If you don't wish to hear different opinions, you shouldn't ask for them.

I stand by what I originally said: IMO, whether one has a Grendel or some other rifle is unlikely to matter. There are some SHTF scenarios wherein 6.5 Grendel would be better, but there are also scenarios in which it would be not as good.

Overall, though, I just don't see a significant difference compared to 5.56x45, 7.62x39, 5.45x39, 7.62x51, 6.8 SPC, .300 BLK, or a number of other calibers, for SHTF use.

I didn't move any goalposts nor limited it to only centerfire calibers. I used the "....etc." indicating any other calibers one wants to consider. You wrote "The caliber of the shooter is more important than the caliber of the gun" and I would disagree with that as the caliber for shooter is very important. We aren't comparing shooter A to shooter B in some imaginary scenario. We are comparing each person to themselves with whatever caliber they want to go with.

Caliber is very important as it dictates what one would be capable of taking care of in a scenario. Having a Barret M107 in a SHTF scenario will lead to a vastly different capability than one who has a 9mm AR. In terms of target capability, weight, ease of travel and a whole hoast of other factors.

This question is about caliber. If you don't want to add to the discussion of a 6.5 Grendel for a SHTF caliber, then please start your own thread about the importance of the shooter in a SHTF being paramount and above all else in importance. This thread is about caliber discussion.

[stanc]

Caliber is very important as it dictates what one would be capable of taking care of in a scenario. Having a Barret M107 in a SHTF scenario will lead to a vastly different capability than one who has a 9mm AR. In terms of target capability, weight, ease of travel and a whole hoast of other factors.

Jeez. First you go to one extreme with .22 LR, now you're going to the other extreme with .50 BMG. What's next, 90mm recoilless rifles?

With the calibers you noted in the OP, I assumed we were talking about carbines, assault rifles, and battle rifles, not target/plinking firearms or anti-materiel weapons.

A Barrett M107 is a special purpose weapon that's in a completely different class than 6.5 Grendel AR-15.

This question is about caliber. If you don't want to add to the discussion of a 6.5 Grendel for a SHTF caliber, then please start your own thread about the importance of the shooter in a SHTF being paramount and above all else in importance. This thread is about caliber discussion.

Which I have addressed, but you have ignored all of those comments, and instead remain fixated on the solitary sentence about the caliber of the shooter.

I repeat: IMO, whether one has a Grendel AR-15 or some other carbine/assault rifle/battle rifle is unlikely to matter. There are some SHTF scenarios wherein 6.5 Grendel would be better, but there are also scenarios in which it would be not as good.

Overall, though, I just don't see a significant difference compared to 5.56x45, 7.62x39, 5.45x39, 7.62x51, 6.8 SPC, .300 BLK, or a number of other calibers, for SHTF use.

[ahillock]

Jeez. First you go to one extreme with .22 LR, now you're going to the other extreme with .50 BMG. What's next, 90mm recoilless rifles? :roll eyes:

Now we are getting somewhere with this discussion. Not going with extremes at all. munchie3409 is the one that brought up the .50 BMG into this discussion and I was specifically referring to that. .22 LR was brought up in the discussion as it is one of the top 5 most common rifle rounds bought in the USA. However, I agree that the .22 LR is inadequate if one has other options. So if we are agreeing to that, then caliber does come into play since .22LR wouldn't be our first choice if other options are available.

With the calibers you noted in the OP, I assumed we were talking about carbines, assault rifles, and battle rifles, not target/plinking firearms or anti-materiel weapons.

A Barrett M107 is a special purpose weapon that's in a completely different class than 6.5 Grendel AR-15.

So again, we are getting somewhere. We can both agree that there are certain calibers that are better to fit the SHTF scenario. Calibers that are multipurpose and that are potential jack of all trades. I agree that the .50 BMG would not be a good SHTF type caliber if one was going for one do it all round.

Which I have addressed, but you have ignored all of those comments, and instead remain fixated on the solitary sentence about the caliber of the shooter.

I repeat: IMO, whether one has a Grendel AR-15 or some other carbine/assault rifle/battle rifle is unlikely to matter. There are some SHTF scenarios wherein 6.5 Grendel would be better, but there are also scenarios in which it would be not as good.

Overall, though, I just don't see a significant difference compared to 5.56x45, 7.62x39, 5.45x39, 7.62x51, 6.8 SPC, .300 BLK, or a number of other calibers, for SHTF use.

Thing is that the caliber definitely does play a part.

7.62x51/.308 has significantly more recoil than the 6.5 Grendel, is a heavier system, doesn't have as good distance ballistics and several other factors against it. In many cases, the 6.5 Grendel is the superior round than the 7.62x51 other than availability. However, if one is able to stash away x,xxx or xx,xxx number of rounds + reloading supplies, would that matter in a SHTF scenario?

.300 BLK is nice if you want to run suppressed sub sonic ammo and only care about <300 yards, but that seems to be quite the specific setup. Especially if you might need to have the range to go out to 800-1000 yards in a scenario. I'd rather have a 6.5 Grendel that will stay supersonic out to 1000 yards to have that option and potential. If only care about CQB/urban environment, then yes a .300 BLK with subsonic ammo and a suppressor would be hard to beat. But this setup severely limits one to that specific outcome.

5.56 is nice due to availability but I wouldn't trust it past 300-400 yards. But this wouldn't even be an issue as you could run both in a SHTF scenario as I mentioned; just have a 5.56 upper + magazines and you could run both. Other than availability of ammo, not sure there is any feature of the 5.56 round that I like better than the 6.5 Grendel. The 6.5 Grendel isn't perfect in everything, but in the AR-15 platform it is as close to a general purpose combat cartridge as one can get with the limitations.

7.62x39, if in an urban combat situation with range being limited to 200 yards or less (maybe up to 300) then yes that would be a worthwhile consideration. But if you need to hit something further out to say 700-900 yards? You are severely limiting yourself. You also don't have as many bullet options for this if reloading is a big concern.

6.8 SPC, this topic has been discussed a lot, but I'm on the side that the 6.5 Grendel is superior to the 6.8 SPC is just about every way. So if considering the 6.8 SPC, the 6.5 Grendel would be the way to go for me.

I agree that all of these calibers are useful in a SHTF scenario. But are they as close to "perfect" as the 6.5 Grendel? I would argue no and state that the 6.5 Grendel has less weaknesses than many of those rounds you listed. Each round has weaknesses. As a discussion goes, the fact that you brought in other calibers and ignored other caliber types, shows that even you have a list of calibers that you would consider for SHTF and some that you would ignore and not consider.

[cory]

For me it depends... I truly love the 6.5G... buuuuut it such a loaded question...

If SHTF and I was defending my HOUSE, I would probably grab my shotgun.. if I were defending my PROPERTY with pre-emptive notice I'd probably grab a bolt gun that can really reach out there with authority.. if I was suprised defending my property against 2 more perps, the 6.5G in a AR15 is probably my best option. If my family and I were on the run, at least in America you would be hard pressed to beat a 5.56. You will more than likely always find more mags/ammo. Just my take though.. no real experience with any of these senerios.

Brother if your scenarios ever come to light, it will happen so fast you will not have time to pick and choice your weapon. You'll grab whatever is closest to you and fight or you'll be dead. If you have choices near you and you hesitate to contemplate which is right for the attack at hand you'll be dead. You need to have already made this decision before an attack ever happens. Once you've made that decision you need to keep that weapon within reach at all times.

The Grendel is an incredibly capable weapon. However, logistics out weighs performance. If you're in a predetermined location where you have a cache of ammo stored it's a great option. Now I would highly suggest that you have a 5.56 upper and loaded mags in a bug out bag. Trying to keep the Grendel feed while you're on the run will be a fool's errand. At this point fight with the 5.56 and hunt with a small stash of Grendel ammo you keep in reserve. Don't wait until you've completely depleted your Grendel ammo before you switch over, either. Otherwise, you'll run out at the worst possible time.

Stay safe brother!