6.5 Grendel vs 6.8 SPC Vs 100 Hogs

[Stinky Coyote]

Great post lazyengineer! I was drawn to the Grendel as a hunter and it hasn't disappointed. I did shoot a custom 6.8 spc for a little while, few coyotes and one whitetail doe about 220 yards and worked good. The lack in sd/bc kept it to a class 2 game only (deer/sheep) and inside 250 yards so as you said it had trade offs. But I don't reload so I had to keep waiting for the Grendel to become commercially available, the 6.8 came out earlier so I gave it a whirl. I agree the Grendel is the most efficient and versatile use of 30 grains of powder on the planet. The 6 arc comes close but as you say, to be stronger in a few areas it gives up in other areas. I don't rank the 6.8 spc in the same league as the Grendel or Arc.

[Fess]

Actually l. Bill has stated several times his primary reason for developing the grendel was a better ar15 cartridge for deer hunting. He is even on film stating that fact.

And the barrel extention is the same used for 556 barrels no matter if it's on a grendel barrel or 6.8 spc barrel.

I'm still trying to break my first grendel bolt under normal useage. Have broken a few but was ententaly running hot handloads too do a destruction test.

Early in the Grendel's life, Bill Alexander and others definitely proposed the cartridge for military use. One of the first widely publicized public demonstrations of the Grendel was at a Blackwater shoot, where, using a 140+ grain bullet, penetrations tests against bullet-proof glass and auto bodies were performed. Alexander subsequently demonstrated it working well in a fully-automatic AR and discussed Armor Piercing (AP) projectiles. The co-developer of the 6.5 Grendel was Arne Brennan, who was developing his 6.5 PPC, and, eventually, PPCX (extended shoulder) for target shooting. If you like shooting at 600+ yards, it is easy to find or load Grendel ammo that can do it.

You are correct about the barrel extension. The fact that the Grendel and SPC use the same diameter barrel extension and bolt as the 5.56 is what forced the compromises on chamber pressure. The examples that I mentioned in the footnote used larger diameter barrel extensions and bolts and could tolerate higher pressures.

Bolts are disposable wear items, even on 5.56 AR15's. The bolt life of the 6.5 Grendel is acceptable if pressures do no exceed SAAMI max. Again, compromises. Early in the Grendel's life, some bolts were of lower quality, essentially poorly hogged-out 5.56 units, and that was a problem. Modern bolts tend to be much more reliable. Keeping an extra extractor on hand is not a big deal.

Here is an interesting early article (circa 2006) about the 6.5 Grendel that will give some insight as to its early days. The John Hanka mentioned in the article is our own BluntForce Trauma, so he knows a lot more than I do, of course.

https://www.accurateshooter.com/cartridge-guides/6-5-grendel-cartridge-guide/

[gwtx]

Thanks for the "action video", great. +1 for the Grendel