6.5 Grendel Variants, Good or Bad?

[BluntForceTrauma]

As the 6.5 Grendel continues to grow in popularity, winning hearts and minds (much to the consternation of the feral hog population), more and more vendors want a piece of the pie, and they want their products to stand out from the crowd by making little tweaks here and there, deviating just a bit from the SAAMI standard.

It started with the .264LBC, and now some are advertising a Grendel II.

Variant chamberings are nothing new. It is a ballistic fact that you'll get best accuracy by tuning your chamber to match your bullet. Benchrest guys have been doing this since the invention of the wheel.

But there are standards for factory ammunition. Is there not a SAAMI specification for .223 Remington? Is there not a SAAMI specification for .308 Winchester? I'm not an expert, so I don't know. And yet there are a myriad of .223 and .308 chambering variations. Now, I DO know there is a SAAMI specification for 6.5 Grendel, ensuring that all rifles so labeled work safely with all factory ammunition so labeled. All others that chamber factory 6.5 Grendel ammunition are variants of one sort or another, created for one reason or another, usually profit motivated.

As aficionados of the 6.5 Grendel cartridge, as owners and shooters, it's not our job to carry water for one vendor versus another. We want more and more vendors jumping on board, we want marketplace competition to give us more variety and better quality at lower prices, hallelujah and amen.

Now, the question, and the debate: Do 6.5 Grendel variants promote or detract from the long-term future of the cartridge?

John

P.S. Whichever of the Horde makes the most reasoned arguments, whether for or against, and avoids name-calling or skull-bashing, wins a golden flagon of mead.

[Slappy]

There is only one true 6.5 Grendel in my opinion and anything that deviates from the true should be made public knowledge before purchase. BANG BANG!!

[maverick5582]

If it was not for the 6.5 Grendel I would have never built my first AR-15. I never liked the 5.56 round. I always thought it was too small for my needs. I was fortunate that when I decided to build the Grendel that there was a N.R.A. course available at Montgomery Community College in Troy, NC. The first question I asked before I took the course was what reamer would be used to chamber the barrel. I was told it would be a Manson reamer built from a AA print. That was indeed fortunate. I chambered the barrel with a roughing reamer first, then the finishing reamer. I have had no problems with factory ammo or my hand loads.
Bill Alexander did the work and we who have stayed the course with his blueprints appear to have had the least trouble with the Grendel. For me I have been the recipient of his efforts and I am thankful for that. I may have bitched about the long wait for parts like others, but all in all it has been a pleasant experience. Thank you Mr. Bill.

I think that variants for the Grendel AR-15 is a bad idea. I also think that manufacturers who make changes in from the original AA blueprint should indicate up front what they are doing to avoid the problems that have taken place so far. Now, for the bolt action 6.5 Grendel I think there is room there for improvement.

Maverick

[Michael]

I have no experience with the 264LBC or the Grendel II but I cannot shoot to the full capabilities of my AA Grendel on most days. It is a quality piece of gear with accuracy rarely matched in an AR platform.

Based on the number of issues forum members have had with the factory ammo not chambering in the barrels billed as ‘Grendel II’, it seems as ‘variants’ on the original create more problems and damage the reputation of a great cartridge.

There is a SAMI spec for the Grendel, so all barrels that have the Grendel moniker should adhere to the accepted specs.

[BluntForceTrauma]

I also think that manufacturers who make changes in from the original AA blueprint should indicate up front what they are doing to avoid the problems that have taken place so far.

It's a crap shoot. "Good" improvements are . . . good. Bill Alexander tested many, many variations of a chamber for the 6.5 Grendel, given its unique position as a moderate velocity cartridge with a fixed OAL and a very wide variety of 6.5 bullets. It ultimately required a unique solution. Obviously, it's within the realm of theoretical possibility that a "better" chamber that fires all factory 6.5 Grendel ammunition can be found, and that would be a Good Thing, but practically speaking the odds are low. The SAAMIed chamber has been performing very well for more than ten years and over thousands and thousands of rifles.

Now, there are also "bad" improvements. Variant chamberings that are inaccurate or that increase pressures and break bolts make the whole program look bad, and neither impress new buyers nor the Winchesters of the world.

For example, early on we begged, we pleaded with people not to use standard 7.62x39 bolts with the 6.5 Grendel, such as what Model 1 Sales was offering. We warned they were not strong enough. People went ahead and used standard 7.62x39 bolts with the 6.5 Grendel. And broke bolts. Next thing it's all over the internet: "Oh, yeah, doncha know everybody knows dat dere Grendel breaks bolts, fer shur." Fans of competing cartridges were, of course, happy to spread this around, like manure on a bean field.

So variations have a small potential upside and a lot of demonstrable downside.

John

[PigOPs]

I'm back and forth on this... I think there are some good barrels being made in variant chamberings. In this case the moniker: "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" comes to mind. Whatever their reasons, some have made it work and work well.

My concern has been this idea lately that the Grendel cartridge isn't quite hot enough so lets make longer throats so we can have longer bullets so we can have more powder capacity, ad naseum... MY OPINION MY OPINION MY OPINION is that this comes from a misunderstanding of what makes the Grendel so great: BCs The Grendel has delivered everything that drew me to it... maintained velocity over an extended range with fantastic wind fighting capability. For me this means I can take the 300 yard shot and know what my bullet is going to do when it hits a given animal. Muzzle velocity isn't the only number to look at when forming opinions on ballistics.

We shall see eventually how all this shakes out... My hope is that barrel makers will clearly label/market their chambering as what it is and as people get into the Grendel game they will be able to make an informed decision about what they are looking for.

P.S.-- When I was getting into the grendel many on this forum had me scared to death to get anything but "grendel" (which I did BUT it happened to be an EXTREMELY short throated Liberty barrel that has since been reamed correctly). One of the recent things that has made me feel better about all of this is bwaites thread about his new BHW barreled build... from all accounts BHW makes a quality barrel that, while it may not shoot every bullet in any weight, shoots some things really well.

[jmhallrn]

So long as it is properly marked as a variant, is well executed, and functions with any SAAMI spec ammo, I fail to see how a variant chamber is a problem. Some will be better than others, but the ones that don't work well will die off eventually. This reminds me of the 1911 arguments over external extractors, beavertails, ramped barrels, etc. Just because it's not the original design doesn't automatically make it inferior. I think each chamber should stand or fall based on its merits, not a dogmatic loyalty to the "real grendel."

[LRRPF52]

In my own experiences with custom rifles, I have always specified what type of bullet I would be shooting. When I worked out these details with one custom shop on a .308 gas gun, they asked what bullet I would be shooting. I said the 155gr Scenar. The throat was cut for that bullet, and it shoots them into 1/2 MOA like it's fun. Try loading 168gr SMK or 167gr Scenar factory ammunition....pulled bullets, brass ripped to hell, primers cratering.

For production guns, they need to shoot factory ammunition.

One of the key successes of the Grendel is accuracy, and we know the Grendel chamber works well across a wide range of bullets. For someone to claim their variant chamber out-shoots it is basically saying that they think they have more testing with the Grendel than the company that brought it to market. That erodes credibility quickly, especially when you find out the kind of testing AA does, and did early on with the development of the 6.5 Grendel.

If it isn't broken, why try to "fix" it?

[BluntForceTrauma]

So long as it is properly marked as a variant, is well executed, and functions with any SAAMI spec ammo, I fail to see how a variant chamber is a problem.

Fair enough, but the problem arose when they were NOT. Right? Dave Kiff was recently bragging that many barrels marked 6.5 Grendel are not SAAMI 6.5 Grendel. Then, when they don't work, who gets the blame? All the vendors involved run for the hills and point fingers at each other and finally at the 6.5 Grendel itself as conceived by Alexander Arms.

We've had a few guys recently say they're disillusioned about the 6.5 Grendel because of the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt that's been sown. That doesn't help the rest of us who are looking forward to more participation, by users and vendors alike, in the 6.5 Grendel program.

As you say, I'd like the various variant entities to take responsibility for their creations. Everybody knows what the .223 Wylde is; it is a solid solution to a valid problem and you know what you're getting when you order one. If you want a 6.5 Grendel variant, call it the 6.5 Satern or the 6.5 Kiff, and own it. I'll give Les Baer credit for calling his the .264LBC, even if he did it for reasons beyond mere truth in labeling.

If one's variant chamber succeeds, one wants all the credit. And the money. If one's variant chamber flops, one points a finger at Alexander Arms. It's like Obama still blaming Bush for the past six years. . . .

John

[PigOPs]

^^^ +1

[cory]

If we're talking purpose built rigs, as stated above, I'm all for it. I believe Pac Nor has a super match Grendel or something with a tighter neck. That makes a lot of sense for a bolt gun. That being said they and LBC let you know up front that you're getting a variant of the SAAMI Spec first and foremost. If someone comes out with a variant that excels in a specific area AND does the testing to prove it's safe, I'm all for it.

However, when someone introduces an untested variant to cover their failure in manufacturing to an acceptable quality, this for me is completely unacceptable.

[JASmith]

...
Now, the question, and the debate: Do 6.5 Grendel variants promote or detract from the long-term future of the cartridge?...

In my view, variations from a standard are a normal and necessary part of making progress. The resulting experience through formal and informal testing followed by field use helps winnow the wannabes from the winners. In the big picture it does not matter whether the standard wins. Yes indeed some egos and pocketbooks may be bruised along the way, but that is the essence of competition in the technical world.

The problem arises when ego, greed, or outright retribution of imagined (or real) slights leads one or more parties to slander and false statements about their design and the capabilities of the standard. This part of the discussion should not be tolerated beyond a single warning.

On the other hand, honestly portraying the differences between one chamber, cartridge, bullet, or rifle helps all of us better understand what we have. That honest portrayal, however, needs to indicate where an option does not do as well as the standard, where it performs as well, and where it outperforms the standard. The result is that folks can indeed get what meets their need or fancy with a fair bit of confidence.

[Buster]

untested variant

In my view, variations from a standard are a normal and necessary part of making progress.

Isn't this a 'Wildcat"...?

[JASmith]

Isn't this a 'Wildcat"...?

Yup!

There are a lot of wildcats that have the standard cartridge as part of the name. For example "30-06 Ackley Improved." One can shoot standard 30-06 cartridges in that chamber because they are headspaced the same, but the chamber is a wildcat.

As a repeat, folks need to avoid claims that these variants are the same as the standard. They are not even though one can use standard ammunition in them.

[CoolBarrelBill]

In this situation I think the variations are a bad thing. I posted a thread asking about a BHW barrel with a type 1 chamber. I was told to use a 7.62X39 bolt. A SAMMI spec Grendel chamber uses a different bolt. A poster in this thread said do not use 7.62X39 bolts this can get very confusing for people and some will look else where.