6.5 Grendel Armor Piercing ammunition data/info...

[stanc]

Stan????? Gee, thanks for letting us know you're alive all this time JERKFACE!!! I emailed you repeatedly with no reply. You ditch the capriXXXX address??? I thought you must have croaked or something.

Ha! Came close enough to doing that! Had diarrhea for two months last summer. Dropped about 40 lbs of bodyweight. Spent the last six months in recovery, during which time I was without e-mail/internet. (That's why you got no reply from me.)

Just got back today. Couldn't get my e-mail to work with the old address, so changed the "two" in it to "45" -- e-mail should work now, if you still have something you want to send. Maybe try a test message first? I lost all the messages and addresses under the old account, or I'd fire off a test message to ya.
=================
Yes, Bill...it's really me. I was wondering if this was really the 65grendel forum! Sure looks different...
=================
Hi, ol_goat! (And everybody else, too.)

[bwaites]

Welcome back. We've tried to make and keep it a friendlier place. Sent you a PM re: the great crash of November.

Glad to hear you are better!

[RangerRick]

Glad you're doing better, and welcome back!

Rick

[JASmith]

Glad to see you back! Sounds like last year was not much fun, and recovery can be slow...

Joe

[Variable]

Ha! Came close enough to doing that! Had diarrhea for two months last summer. Dropped about 40 lbs of bodyweight.

Man that sure sounds crappy!!!

Email test inbound.

[student28]

I'm new to this site but am curious about this round. I own a Grendel in the M4 platform with a 16 inch barrel, made by Sabre Defense Industries with an ACOG. It is extremely accurate out to the range I've had the opportunity to us it thus far; 300 meters. I'm hoping to get longer shots but have not had the opportunity. I use every chance I get to push this round. I believe it to be one of the best I've shot. To prove this to my cousine - who was skeptical about the performance - I took a partridge's head off just beyond 50 meters - freehand as it was walking accross a road on the back side of my fathers property. I did get in trouble for that one. I didn't know he had been feeding them and considered them his pets... oops. But anyway.. I am wondering if these tungsten core rounds would be made available to the public. I think a two piece core would defeat the purpose of the thing and not the best option. If penetration is the purpose, keep it solid. If penetration is the purpose, these rounds should not be used in a CQB situation and collateral damage should not be an issue.

[student28]

I see. I figured this would probably be the issue - sell to law enforcement and military only - requiring those who want to purchase such rounds to go through other channels. I also don't get why this should even be a question - military interest. The 6.5 Grendel is far superior vs. the 6.8 vs. the 5.56. I have studied each of these rounds intensely when the Grendel was first being developed. It seems as though politics are determining the fate of this outcome, as it did with Colt vs. Ruger back in the day - the m16 is a piece of sh**! I had one blow up in the face of one of my boots (juniors) and we experienced many weapons issues in the Middle East - missfeeds, etc; especially with the magazines. Being we were engaged in intese combat, this really put a sour taste in my mouth - sorry to all you m16 fans!

[JASmith]

A lot depends on what one wants a tungsten-core bullet to do. Bill Alexander has a need to make the Grendel as useful as possible for military and law-enforcement applications. How much that can be used on the civil side will depend in large part on the second amendent debate.

Barnes sells the MRX bullet with a mostly tungsten core. The bullet is by no means viewed as an armor-piercing item, but we need to be aware of what exists.

[student28]

Nice, thank you for that..

[LR1955]

I see. I figured this would probably be the issue - sell to law enforcement and military only - requiring those who want to purchase such rounds to go through other channels. I also don't get why this should even be a question - military interest. The 6.5 Grendel is far superior vs. the 6.8 vs. the 5.56. I have studied each of these rounds intensely when the Grendel was first being developed. It seems as though politics are determining the fate of this outcome, as it did with Colt vs. Ruger back in the day - the m16 is a piece of sh**! I had one blow up in the face of one of my boots (juniors) and we experienced many weapons issues in the Middle East - missfeeds, etc; especially with the magazines. Being we were engaged in intese combat, this really put a sour taste in my mouth - sorry to all you m16 fans!

ST28:

I don't get it. The M-16 is a POS yet the Grendel is a 6.5mm M-16. Is the Grendel M-16 the same POS as the 5.56 M-16? If not, why? Grendel chambered M-16's push the pressure limits far more than the 5.56 models. I don't think there is anyone on this forum who has shot their Grendel for more than 1K rounds who hasn't sheared at least one bolt lug.

Talk about misfeeds due to gas problems, magazine problems, buffer problems -- there are probably ten pages of forum on how to get the CP magazines to function with the Grendel as well as pages of guys asking why their Grendel won't feed, extract, or eject. Way more problems than my experiences with the various issued M-16 series of rifles / carbines.

BTW what are you talking about concerning Colt vs Ruger?

LR1955

[bwaites]

I see. I figured this would probably be the issue - sell to law enforcement and military only - requiring those who want to purchase such rounds to go through other channels. I also don't get why this should even be a question - military interest. The 6.5 Grendel is far superior vs. the 6.8 vs. the 5.56. I have studied each of these rounds intensely when the Grendel was first being developed. It seems as though politics are determining the fate of this outcome, as it did with Colt vs. Ruger back in the day - the m16 is a piece of sh**! I had one blow up in the face of one of my boots (juniors) and we experienced many weapons issues in the Middle East - missfeeds, etc; especially with the magazines. Being we were engaged in intese combat, this really put a sour taste in my mouth - sorry to all you m16 fans!

student28, I'm a little confused, too. The AR15 platform is pretty doggone dependable, and even with magazines that have had their problems, the rifle does pretty well.

The only difference between an M16 and the AR15 that most Grendels are run in is the selector switch. An AR15 IS an M16 without select fire.

They work, and they have worked, mostly, for the last 50 years. Most servicemen I have talked with like their AR's, some say they would like a more efficient cartridge, with better knockdown, but they like their AR. They like them so much that many buy their own as soon as they can, either while still in the military, or soon after they get out!

[student28]

Clarification

I understand what you mean abt the likeness, they are the same in most ways. And a lot of people do run out and purchase this system right away. But you will find that most purchases are due to nestalgia, not necessarily function. And they are versitile and hold a large capacity mag, they are accurate, and they look mean. They do have many great qualities. Dependability however is contingent. Anyone who has really been in the sh** knows what a piece it really is. But perhaps this is largely due to the magazine, mag well, and bolt extractor device. I had too many close calls - along with many around me - due to malfunctions of this nature. Mags don't seat properly and sometimes fall out during firing. Rounds swelling in the chamber, needing to be pryed out and rods pushed through to ensure there are no further obstructions. The whole system getting full of debris because of the two piece design. Weapons maintenance was always a major priority and was never ignored. It was a constant battle in itself. But if you are using it in other situations, I guess it is a good system. If you're getting really down and really dirty... For those who have used it in real combat - remember, my profile states initial invasion - moving from objective to objective, from open-terrain desert ops to cqb in mout, we all, at least in my unit, would have chosen a different system. And of course knock down power was a major issue. I am not back in that situation and so love my m4. But from a combat vets perspective, in that situation again, I would choose my single shot 20 guage! I guess it is also due to the more solid and noticable quality difference between my standard issue and my current system by sabre.

[LR1955]

I understand what you mean abt the likeness, they are the same in most ways. And a lot of people do run out and purchase this system right away. But you will find that most purchases are due to nestalgia, not necessarily function. And they are versitile and hold a large capacity mag, they are accurate, and they look mean. They do have many great qualities. Dependability however is contingent. Anyone who has really been in the sh** knows what a piece it really is. But perhaps this is largely due to the magazine, mag well, and bolt extractor device. I had too many close calls - along with many around me - due to malfunctions of this nature. Mags don't seat properly and sometimes fall out during firing. Rounds swelling in the chamber, needing to be pryed out and rods pushed through to ensure there are no further obstructions. The whole system getting full of debris because of the two piece design. Weapons maintenance was always a major priority and was never ignored. It was a constant battle in itself. But if you are using it in other situations, I guess it is a good system. If you're getting really down and really dirty... For those who have used it in real combat - remember, my profile states initial invasion - moving from objective to objective, from open-terrain desert ops to cqb in mout, we all, at least in my unit, would have chosen a different system. And of course knock down power was a major issue. I am not back in that situation and so love my m4. But from a combat vets perspective, in that situation again, I would choose my single shot 20 guage! I guess it is also due to the more solid and noticable quality difference between my standard issue and my current system by sabre.

S28:

Sounds to me like the Marines didn't run a depot level inspection on the weapons you guys had before you deployed. The Army does and it generally results in every single weapon being rebuilt with many being replaced with brand new weapons.

LR1955

[student28]

Yes

They certainly did. However, in my unit, the cycle of operations were working overtime. By the time the Army replaced us so we could move on to the next objective, they were quite used.

[LR1955]

They certainly did. However, in my unit, the cycle of operations were working overtime. By the time the Army replaced us so we could move on to the next objective, they were quite used.

ST28:

Yes, I recall that the Marines were doing doctrinal tasks that really weren't Marine doctrine and thus the Marine logistical system had huge problems supporting the Marine units.

It doesn't surprise me your stuff broke down. Your logistical system was never intended to support the type of long duration operations you guys were doing. That should have gone to the Army whose doctrine and log system is designed around long duration sustainment.

That said, it probably wasn't design flaws with the various weapons you guys were using but rather the equipment couldn't be repaired when it broke or wore out. And your log system obviously couldn't supply you guys with magazines once yours got trashed.

LR55