Which chamber for a custom bolt gun?

[Bill Alexander]

All other barrel aspects being equal, the CSS chamber should be equal to or better than the Grendel in terms of accuracy. I think the primary difference between the two is the tighter neck of the CSS. I believe both have compound-angle throats.

As for pre-fit options, the CSS might be the only one. Obviously, a custom job expands the options, but also the cost and time frame.

Please explain your basis for this quote! I am interested in hearing why this should be the case.

Bill Alexander

[Drifter]

Please explain your basis for this quote! I am interested in hearing why this should be the case.

Bill Alexander

Just a general speculation due to supposed tighter neck design.

Perhaps you can share the differences in design and performance of the chambers so that we'll know (rather than speculate) going forward. Please set us (especially me) straight. -Thanks

[warped]

Just a general speculation due to supposed tighter neck design.

Perhaps you can share the differences in design and performance of the chambers so that we'll know (rather than speculate) going forward. Please set us (especially me) straight. -Thanks

Do you mean other than the fact that he spent a ton of money and time on researching the best design and actaully evaluated the other design before ditching it?

[bwaites]

Play nice boys!

Please don't create a fight where there is none! From what Drifter says, he is making a supposition based upon years of bench rest and long range competition with bolt guns, that doesn't necessarily apply to gas guns.

As one of our members signatures reads: "In Theory there is no difference between Theory and Practice, in Practice, there is."

Every decision in firearm design is a compromise of some sort.

Bill Alexander does a wonderful job explaining why he made that decision, lets give him a chance to do so if he desires, without creating a big issue over it.

[Bill Alexander]

I suppose Bill Waites is right (again!).

Sorry rather abrupt on this and I will take the time to explain how the chambers work and why we went the way we did.

Give me a little time to draft something and I will get it posted.

Regarding a bolt action, quite honestly the Grendel chamber is not the place to start if you are chasing the Benchrest bug. It is too much of a compromise and does not get the best from the cartridge if the requirement to run in full auto is removed.

Bill Alexander

[bwaites]

I suppose Bill Waites is right (again!).

Sorry rather abrupt on this and I will take the time to explain how the chambers work and why we went the way we did.

Give me a little time to draft something and I will get it posted.

Regarding a bolt action, quite honestly the Grendel chamber is not the place to start if you are chasing the Benchrest bug. It is too much of a compromise and does not get the best from the cartridge if the requirement to run in full auto is removed.

Bill Alexander

Thanks Bill, its why John pays me the big bucks!!

I look forward to seeing it all in writing. Someday I hope to have enough of it all together to punch out a reasonable history, if only for my own gratification and knowledge!

[warped]

I was not trying to be rude, rather just pointing out that someone carried out the research and paid the bills so we could have what is now the Grendel, without such an expenditure there would not have been a standardized chamber.

I did not intend to be hurtful, my apologies if it was interpreted that way, this forum has been a great benefit to me and also to many others.

I am most appreciative both now and in the beginning when I did not even have something to contribute other than just my most humble experience.

Don't mind me, I am just an old NCO with some good friends who have truly paid the piper.

[bwaites]

Warped,

All of us appreciate your input, I especially appreciate all you've done regarding the Grendel and the information about the brakes you have supplied.

I'm trying to keep everything as friendly as it was the first day all of us found the board back up, and the excitement we all shared when we found it!

A lot of us are hard to offend, but some of the new members might not have such a crusty exterior, and since I can't always distinguish, I'll try to keep it all VERY civil if I can!

Thanks again for all you have done!

[Drifter]

I look forward to hearing (reading) about additional details and history regarding the cartridge straight from Bill himself.

I suggested the other 6.5 primarily because it was the only pre-fit barrel option that I'm aware of for the CZ bolt rifle. But I shouldn't have speculated about accuracy comparisons. I had no intentions of starting any BS, and should have thought more about it before writing my response.

I'm a newcomer to the 6.5 Grendel, and very pleased to see this forum back up, as the info found elsewhere on the 'net is scattered and possibly less reliable.

And in case anyone questions my motives, I'm impressed enough with the performance of my first 6.5 Grendel build using a Satern barrel that I've already ordered another Satern 6.5 G barrel.

[Hooz]

Regarding a bolt action, quite honestly the Grendel chamber is not the place to start if you are chasing the Benchrest bug. It is too much of a compromise and does not get the best from the cartridge if the requirement to run in full auto is removed.

That was the reasoning behind my original question (that still has no real answer, and only one suggestion). Here is what I've found...

Pac-nor offers a "pre-fit" barrel for the 527 chambered in "6.5 GREN MATCH". I used quotes around "pre-fit" because it is a custom barrel, but they have already have the right profile, etc.

CSS has the Lothar Walther "6.5 CSS" barrel, but it is a drop-in for the 527 CARBINE. I'm building a 527 VARMINT (heavier profile) rig.

SAOD Industries offers both the ".264 LBC" and "6.5 SAOD" in a varmint profile, pre-fit 527 barrels (both Lothar Walther).

So far, that makes 4 options (only 3 if I discount the carbine profile barrel), and all four use different chambers. I've found SOME information on the non-Grendel chambers, but a few of them remain a mystery.

So... Back to my original question... Does anyone have any idea which would be better for a precision bolt gun?

[Hooz]

Official Word from SAOD

This is the official word from SAOD on the differences between the 6.5 SAOD and .264 LBC-AR chambers.

Sir,

The .264 LBC and the 6.5 SAOD both have a .295 neck, although the 6.5 SAOD has more taper to it.

The .264 LBC has a .120 free bore which is a good choice for longer heavier bullets to be used, shorter bullets accuracy can suffer or require more hand loading for accuracy.

The 6.5 SAOD has a double angle throat which shoots all bullets very well.

We normally suggest the 6.5 SAOD for a shooter who needs a chamber to fit a wide variety of bullets for reloading.

With regards,

SAOD Sales group

[bwaites]

So SAOD is WHO, exactly? There is no hard address on their website, no phone number.

Barrels are Lothar Walther, so is it a LW subsidiary, or set up by someone else?

They offer a 490 SAOD, but no ammunition, what is a 490 SAOD?

As for a bolt gun, they don't offer one, all their information is directed at the AR market.

I'm always highly suspicious of anyone who sets up a website and doesn't provide the hard address, phone number, etc.

PS, Their double angle throat is simply a .295 neck version of the Grendel chamber, which Bill Alexander has already said is not the optimum for a bolt gun, and was designed to allow full auto/fast semi auto optimization. He tried the .295 throat and there was no accuracy advantage or other significant advantage over the .300.

[rasp65]

Hoot
I think if you want the best chamber you should contact Dave Kiff at http://www.pacifictoolandgauge.com/index.htm and tell him what you need. Any chamber for an AR will be less than ideal for a bolt gun. You will want a longer leade so you can seat the bullets out farther and make more use of the powder space.

[Hooz]

So SAOD is WHO, exactly? There is no hard address on their website, no phone number.

Barrels are Lothar Walther, so is it a LW subsidiary, or set up by someone else?

They offer a 490 SAOD, but no ammunition, what is a 490 SAOD?

As for a bolt gun, they don't offer one, all their information is directed at the AR market.

I'm always highly suspicious of anyone who sets up a website and doesn't provide the hard address, phone number, etc.

PS, Their double angle throat is simply a .295 neck version of the Grendel chamber, which Bill Alexander has already said is not the optimum for a bolt gun, and was designed to allow full auto/fast semi auto optimization. He tried the .295 throat and there was no accuracy advantage or other significant advantage over the .300.

They actually do have pre-fit barrels for the CZ 527 Varmint. They even sell them in a kit with the factory "kevlar" stock. You just have to dig through the site a bit to find them.

I'm not sure who SAOD is specifically. I stumbled across them while looking for a 300 AAC Blackout barrel for another 527 conversion. SAOD is apparently working with AAC (as I was pointed to them BY AAC), and they're offering a 300 Blackout barrel as a pre-fit for the CZ 527 as well.

From what I gather... The 490 SAOD is basically a 50 Beowolf. They just used the bore diameter (.490) instead of the groove diameter (.50) as the designation. Ammo is interchangable.

[bwaites]

Not pertinent.