Comparing 6.5 Grendel to .260 Remington

[wa11y]

Kind of a long shot, but does anyone have any velocity data for similar weight/the same bullet shot out of a 16" barrel for both 6.5 Grendel and .260 Remington?

I'd like a shorty bolt action rifle for bushwhacking, and would like it in some 6.5mm cartridge. I know that out of a longer barrel, the .260 gets better velocities than the 6.5 Grendel, which is to be expected due to the .260's greater case capacity.

But what about out of shorter barrels? Would I still see better velocities out of the .260 with a 16" barrel, compared to a Grendel? Or would I see about the same velocity with more muzzle blast and more wasted powder out of a .260?

I've tried searching, but haven't found anything on the web comparing these two. Not surprisingly, most people stick to longer barrels and heavier bullets for the .260, so I'm having a hard time finding an apples to apples comparison of velocities between the two.

[mongoosesnipe]

out of a shorter barrel the velocities would be closer but 260 still has a higher operating pressure and 20 grains of extra capacity so it will still have a velocity edge over the grendel though it will not be as substantial with the shorter barrel though i would expect at least 100fps extra out of the 260

that said considering you plan to use the gun for "bushwhacking" which i interpret as short range hunting such as mostly under 100 yards but you are choosing a 6.5 for the potential to reach out to 3-400 should the need arise, in which case the grendel would do everything you need as far as medium game goes and on the inside of 100 shots the animal wont know the difference between 2400 and 2500fps

[bwaites]

LRRPF52 has both and I suspect he'll weigh in shortly.

[LRRPF52]

The shortest I have seen for a .260 Remington is 18", which seems like a waste to me. I personally wouldn't build a .260 Rem shorter than 20", and my current .260 Rem is a 22". I get 2810fps velocity with the 130gr VLD or Norma Golden Target, which is a great 1000yd plus load. I can center-punch 500yd targets with it like they are 100yds.

So I just ran my 130gr load through Shooter's Notes velocity estimator, with a new barrel length of 16", and it gave me a velocity of 2630fps, which is quite respectable actually from a 16".

With a 16" .260 Rem pushing the 123gr, it says I should get around 2714fps.

18" .260 Rem/123gr: 2785fps

If you are busting brush, and want a lightweight bolt gun, the Grendel will allow a micro action. The next issue you have is magazine length-restricted COL. BjornF16 has a 20" Savage Grendel that will spit 129gr Hornady Interbonds and SST's out at 2585fps, which is about what the 16" .260 Rem will do.

The Grendel will have less recoil, and consume less power.

[SHORT-N-SASSY]

. . . But what about out of shorter barrels? Would I still see better velocities out of the .260 with a 16" barrel, compared to a Grendel? Or would I see about the same velocity with more muzzle blast and more wasted powder out of a .260? . . .

Short Barrel 6.5mm Rifle http://www.sincityprecision.com/?p=1503

[wa11y]

Thanks for the responses, especially those with data. It sounds like the .260 or 6.5 Creedmoor will still give better velocities, but not really significantly more for the increased amount of powder. I was figuring that if I went that short on the barrel, shortening the case and going with a 6.5 Grendel would probably be a good idea, and it's good to see that backed up.

[Brian]

I have a 20" Grendel and a 22" 260 bolt gun. With 123 Amax's I get 2575 out of the Grendel and 3000 fps out of the 260.

[SHORT-N-SASSY]

I have a 20" Grendel and a 22" 260 bolt gun. With 123 Amax's I get 2575 out of the Grendel and 3000 fps out of the 260.

It's been reported in these Pages that a 6.5 Grendel-chambered CZ527 bolt gun, with a 22-inch barrel, gets 2650-2700 fps with the 139-grain Lapua Scenar projectile. But, getting back to the original point the OP brought to this Thread, "velocity data for the similar weight/the same bullet shot out of a 16" barrel for both the 6.5 Grendel and .260 Remington," and extrapolating the reported velocities of the 22-inch-barreled 6.5 Grendel bolt-gun to what might reasonably be expected from a 16-inch barrel, I think it's fair to state that, at least when compared in the short 16-inch barrel, the much larger cased 6.5mm Creedmoor and .260 Remington cartridges don't represent a significant improvement over the 6.5mm Grendel, when fired in bolt guns/actions of similar strength. Indeed, having run the numbers some months ago, I elected not to rebarrel an AR-10 to the 6.5mm Creedmoor or .260 Remington, given one of my parameters was a 16-inch barrel.

[hm2 clark]

Could you supply a little more information to clarify your question? Are you asking about bolt action vs bolt action? or M4 vs AR10 vs bolt actons? Bolt action Grendel rifles will push a 6.5 bullet a lot harder then a AR action, we just don't talk about it much on this forum. When you're talking about bushwacking,what do you mean? It sounds a lot like what I do; spot and stock through thick cover and hang out in spots where I can see maybe 250 yards or so. If so Point Blank Range with heavier bullets/pointing and shootability of the rifle may be more appropiate questions. In the end, a bigger cartridge case will always yield increased velocity over a smaller case.

[wa11y]

Well, I posted in the "bolt action" sub forum, so I figured it would be obvious that I was asking about bolt actions, not an AR.

I mostly just like short, handy rifles. I know with .308, going shorter than 18 inches really drops velocity and makes huge fireballs. So if I wanted to go as short as I legally could without a tax stamp, and really like the ballistics of the 6.5 cartridges, should I go with a .260/6.5 Creedmoor or a 6.5 Grendel? If taking a .260 down to 16" was going to get me into Grendel velocity territory, but with less muzzle blast and wasted powder, I may as well get it chambered in Grendel, and save some powder and have less muzzle blast.

I don't really NEED any sort of short rifle for any practical reason, I just like how they look and handle. And how they're lighter and easier to carry.

[SHORT-N-SASSY]

. . . I mostly just like short, handy rifles. . . . So if I wanted to go as short as I legally could without a tax stamp, and really like the ballistics of the 6.5 cartridges . . . I may as well get it chambered in Grendel . . .

I don't really NEED any sort of short rifle for any practical reason, I just like how they look and handle. And how they're lighter and easier to carry.

wa11y,

Have you seen the prototype of the upcoming (2014) K&M Arms M17S? It will have a 3.5-pound mechanical trigger, available in left- or right-side ejection versions --- and chambered in 6.5mm Grendel, among other calibers.

[SHORT-N-SASSY]

wa11y,

Have you seen the prototype of the upcoming (2014) K&M Arms M17S? It will have a 3.5-pound mechanical trigger, available in left- or right-side ejection versions --- and chambered in 6.5mm Grendel, among other calibers.

Update:

Ken, from K&M Arms, yesterday confirmed a statement made at the Crossroads Gun Show in Phoenix, last weekend, re the planned replacement of the original M17S AR-15-style Bolt, with a Leader-style 3-lug Bolt, for the all-new M17S. "Yes, it's true. A 3-lug Bolt, with 30-degree locking rotation. Uses the standard AR Extractor and Ejector, along with pins and springs. The design is much stronger than the AR Bolt. And, I do not have a hole going all the way thru my Bolt, for the Cam Pin. So it is even stronger. My Bolt will not break in half, or break a lug."

[wll]

Kind of a long shot, but does anyone have any velocity data for similar weight/the same bullet shot out of a 16" barrel for both 6.5 Grendel and .260 Remington?

I'd like a shorty bolt action rifle for bushwhacking, and would like it in some 6.5mm cartridge. I know that out of a longer barrel, the .260 gets better velocities than the 6.5 Grendel, which is to be expected due to the .260's greater case capacity.

But what about out of shorter barrels? Would I still see better velocities out of the .260 with a 16" barrel, compared to a Grendel? Or would I see about the same velocity with more muzzle blast and more wasted powder out of a .260?

I've tried searching, but haven't found anything on the web comparing these two. Not surprisingly, most people stick to longer barrels and heavier bullets for the .260, so I'm having a hard time finding an apples to apples comparison of velocities between the two.

I just built a long barreled bench gun in 6.5 Grendel that I'm taking to the range for the first time on Friday or Saturday.

I like the cartridge a lot and because of this I will be building a small carry gun. using a Hog Hunter stock, Savage short action and a 20 inch threaded barrel. I looked at the 260 Rem and the Creedmore, and although I would get more velocity .... at what cost ... more barrel wear, louder, more recoil. With a 20 inch barrel the Grendel will still reach out there and be effective on deer size animals to 400 yds ... I don't need any more than that.


wll

[stokesrj]

Hi Walley,
I built a 20" Remington Model 7 in 6.5 Grendel. I gave it to one of my son's who thought he needed more umpff so he had it rechambered to 6.5 Creedmoor. This was a really light weight build, under 5 lbs. In the Grendel it was pleasurable to shoot. In the 6.5 Creedmoor it is still fun, but whacks you a little more because it is such a light rifle. It does produce about 250 fps more velocity at the same operating pressures and shooting the same bullet. For Use at 600 yards and in, I liked it in the 6.5 Grendel better.
Bob

[acelungger]

I would not of believed how the Grendel shot!! And so, I had to do another one!! Now that my body all messed up and can't do anything fun. If I run into someone I know that ask me about my Grendels, I will do my best to explain just how they shoot. AWESOME!
I didn't put the 6.5 in front of Grendel, because I thought that the 6.5 was all there is?
Later
G