AR Performance?

[woohoo]

I don't shoot paper...does that mean I have to get rid of my Grendels?... Unless those deer in the freezer are really just cardboard targets.

The 6.8 feeds better than the 6.5CSS?...Hmmm, maybe the CSS neck is too tight.

Here's another one saying the 6.5CSS neck is too tight.
Actually I would call that a chambering function not a feeding function as in related to the mags or feed ramps. As far back as 06 I never, not 1 single time had a problem with ammo loaded with Lapua brass chambering in the 6.5CSS. Loaded rounds were apx .290 the necks in Arnes chambers were actually .296. The reamer was designed .295 but as always the reamer cuts a bigger hole than the reamer itself.
Bill, I'm not saying the Grendel/264 is good for nothing. I'm saying I would not choose it for a competition rifle, I wouldn't choose the 6.8 either. The rifles I would choose for competition are all wildcats except for the 556 for 3 gun/multigun. Tough to sell enough wildcats to make a living isn't it.

[BjornF16]

Here's another one saying the 6.5CSS neck is too tight.
Actually I would call that a chambering function not a feeding function as in related to the mags or feed ramps. As far back as 06 I never, not 1 single time had a problem with ammo loaded with Lapua brass chambering in the 6.5CSS. Loaded rounds were apx .290 the necks in Arnes chambers were actually .296. The reamer was designed .295 but as always the reamer cuts a bigger hole than the reamer itself.
Bill, I'm not saying the Grendel/264 is good for nothing. I'm saying I would not choose it for a competition rifle, I wouldn't choose the 6.8 either. The rifles I would choose for competition are all wildcats except for the 556 for 3 gun/multigun. Tough to sell enough wildcats to make a living isn't it.

Actually, I didn't say it was too tight...I merely posed a humorous question given your comment that your 6.5 CSS had problems feeding. I've never had any problems with my Grendels and AA magazines.

There have been some who have competed with Grendel in F class. As I said, I don't punch paper for fun. Took my Grendel to Whittington and shot High Power Silhouette out to 1100+ yards. Seems to do pretty well on steel beyond 300 yards as well as deer.

Personally, I don't have a problem with the various chambers...the more the merrier. I personally choose the spec Grendel chamber for the quality control. I've ordered from AA as well as other spec Grendel barrel manufacturers.

There have been plenty of good hunting pills for Grendel for some time: 130 Scirrocco, 129 SST, 120 TSX, 120 Nosler, 100 TTSX just to name a few. I personally have had great success with the 129 SST. It performs just fine at Grendel velocities. Now, with 123 SST coming out, even better.

There is nothing wrong with the new 6.8 chambering...I just wouldn't waste my money since the Grendel matches (if not exceeds) it inside 300 yds and exceeds it beyond. Magazines have been a weak spot, but ordering from AA has reduced magazine issues. Should get better over time.

Saying the Grendel is only good for punching paper and (maybe) some hunting inside 300 yards is a bit puerile.

I wish you success in your business...

[Dogue]

So basically the what AR Performance is saying is (he who writes as woohoo)

" The grendel sucks at everything, but I am only in it for the money, and the chamber is inaccurate"

Possibly the best sales pitch I have ever seen! you should get that barrel!

Well, it makes sense since Harrison always bad mouthed the 6.5 as being inferior to the 6.8 on Arfcom, but then he started building 264LBC's.

[bwaites]

We should encourage all those who produce Grendel products as they all have a contribution to the caliber. Everyone added, brings options that others may wish to see. Instead there are now two pages of discontent and argument. How does that contribute to the knowledge, or to helping shooting as a whole.

We should examine each product subjectively and individually decide if it suits our needs.

Bill's point is good, and I see no real benefit to this thread at this point.

[bwaites]

Closed