I shoot a 6.5 Swede mate of mine also wanted one but instead brought a 6.5 grandel any thoughts
Printable View
I shoot a 6.5 Swede mate of mine also wanted one but instead brought a 6.5 grandel any thoughts
Is the grandel the same as grendel only a couple of generations older?
Should have got a 6.5 Grandma instead, the Grandal is a flawed concept.........
Power wise the Swede has the advantage, but within its limits the Grendel should work fine.
123gr at around 2400-2500 depending on barrel length. A bit behind the Swede but still very usable within its range limit.
Using the 123g factory loads effective range on deer?
Much further than a 223 :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sr5dan
250m is what I would use mine to.
Past that and its my Pooseventy country.
Attachment 98347
Much further than a 223 :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sr5dan
A customer was telling me today about shooting three Reds at 280+meters with a Grendel bolt action I built him a while ago with 125 SSTs, he really rates them, even taking it chasing Wapiti during the ballot
To be fair he is an exceptional shot, one of the best around in the competitions he competes in :)
It's only a monster compared to the .223.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg
Compared to the 6.5x55 or even 260REM its not in the same class.
The place for the Grendel is if you must have a short action or want a light recoiling round for a light rifle.
If you use a long (20") barrel, you may as well devote half an inch of action to a 308 class case and you'll get a lot more knockdown power.
From a short barrel, you have terminal velocities down around 1800 fps at 200m so you need to be fussy what bullets you use.
So, it's a special purpose round like the .243, .22/250, 300BLK or at the other end the 300 WinMag and 7mmSTW.
Depends what he plans to hunt with it and whether he has got a big rifle as well.
Dogmatix has shown exactly what its place is.
About 7-8 years ago or thereabouts almost overnight this cartridge become really popular with my cuzzies in the central US. All of a sudden they were Grendelling this and Grendelling that and to be honest I didn’t have a clue what they were on about, had to look it up.
Remained pretty ignorant about it (couldn’t really see the point) until I visited last and had a go for myself. They have them in suppressed ARs and use them almost exclusively for head shooting feral hogs at night. Pop pop pop pop pop pop... Its very light recoiling and extremely accurate in a sorted AR rig. I don’t recall what bullets they were using. Far more knock down that a .223 and nowhere near as much drama as an AR-10. For a lightweight night time rig it was an excellent choice and I really really liked it.
I believe the one cuz now uses a 6.5 Grendel in a bolt rifle for close in whitetail deer stalking very successfully. Sub 100m kind of woods shooting, little-ish deer.
Just a few days ago in Taranaki we were using a tricked up AR15 for fallow and goats and I said I would prefer a Grendel over the .223 any day of the week. Cheap ammo would be a problem I would assume.
Flyblown, any advantage over a 7.62x39 for those uses?Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyblown
What rifle for the grandel/Grendel?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sr5dan
Unless you want a ar15 type set up, the 6.5 swede is the winner.
Yes of course there is, the Grendel is All American star spangled specialness, and the 7.62x39 is a rubbish dirty commie round used by Democrats and homysexials.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cordite
I guarantee you that is what my cuz would say. Straight face and all.
Interesting family. Won't talk of my cousins.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyblown
I suppose that's why then we also have the 6.5 Creedmoor instead of that crap equivalent 6.5 Japanese. Can't ever admit some bucked teeth, short sighted, height challenged Asians got it... just right.
I’m covered. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Beaker
Attachment 98357
I'm covered more better tho, 6.5TCU, 6.5SAUM and .375WSMQuote:
Originally Posted by dogmatix
On what planet?Quote:
Originally Posted by berg243
Its a bit of loose statement to say 'about the same as the 243' as it depends entirely on which pills each cartridge is loaded with and how hot they are. But they aren't worlds apart.Quote:
Originally Posted by 257weatherby
I msg'd my hick cuz last night and asked him what projectiles he's using in the AR and how he's getting on with it. He uses cheap Barnaul steel cased 100gr FMJ pills for plinking, but for hunting hogs he uses 123gr Hornady ELD-M. Out of his 20" AR the 123gr ELD-M is making 2450fps.
A 123gr, 2450fps 6.5 Grendel is only about 6-7% down on a 85gr, 3200fps .243 Win at 200m, give or take a couple of % here or there.
Compared to my relatively mild 2800fps 100gr ProHunter load in my .243, the 123gr Grendel is only a couple % down on energy. For all intents and purposes they are the same.
The 100gr 6.5 FMJ pills are almost identical to my .243 ProHunter load.
So overall, 'about the same as a 243 for energy' is fair enough.
Foot pounds of energy kills nothing. The combination of bullet speed, bc, and bullet construction/type are what gets the result, good or bad. I am running the 95 Berger ( and 95 TMK) at 3000fps and it is dynamite. Do the calculation for 123SST at 2450 vs 95 VLD at 3000 at 300yds. Not really apples with apples. I have a longer barrel that gets 3150 with the same pills, compare that....... If you run the .243 slow and with poor bc bullets, then saying they are similar is valid.
At point blank on a pig, the slow SST is going to be better, but once you are out a bit, no.
And I prefer the .243 also, mainly due to knowing it very well and the Grendel very little, plus too old to change.Quote:
Originally Posted by 257weatherby
Hmmm, I hear what you're saying, but next time I try and kill something, I'm not so sure it will fall over from me trying to kill it with some bc...Quote:
Originally Posted by 257weatherby
Pretty sure it will fall over after a good dose of ft-lb though.
But this is all highly subjective. In .243 terms the 95gr VLD and TMK are right on the extreme end of the spectrum, they won't even shoot out of a standard 1:10" barrel if I'm not mistaken.
So if a half decent apples vs apples comparison is made - say 123gr SST in the Grendel vs 95gr SST in the .243, as @berg243 says, there's a gnat's cock of a difference, in killing terms at the ranges my cuzzies use them at for hogs (50-200m), bugger all.
I think one of the better points made about the Grendel is what @Bagheera made on page 1 The place for the Grendel is if you must have a short action or want a light recoiling round for a light rifle.
If you use a long (20") barrel, you may as well devote half an inch of action to a 308 class case and you'll get a lot more knockdown power.
Comparing the Grendel to other '08 cased calibers is purely academic, thats my take on it ;). I built my Grendel on a Sako L461 to be a light low recoil fun gun for collecting venison for the pot and clean up a few goats. With the 123gr SST I find it almost too much of a gun under 150m on the goats (makes a horrible mess) and prefer my 6x45 and 75gr HP.
Except for those guys with cannons, everything is about range,shot-placement and bullet construction.If I was only allowed a .22, I would hunt anything with it (NZ). Interestingly, statistics show that most people (non-military) killed by firearms, are killed by .22s.. and I'll bet some were really big buggers.. PS,if I only had afore-mentioned .22, and a lion was coming for me..I'd definately give that a go too..PPS..what's a .270?..is it the same as a pooh-70 ?
So a poor bc vs a good bc with more weight, both running slow, is an apples with apples comparison? 95 SST has an abysmal bc, run it slow and what do you get? oh right, a fair comparison with a 123 SST out of a Grendel. In case you had forgotten, bc is relevant to retained velocity and the fixation on foot pounds of energy doesn't seem to bother the .223 mob killing deer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyblown
@Mathias, life would be so boring without pointless academic arguments!
Anyway, @Sr5dan, as long as your mate understands the limitations of the cartridge and uses it accordingly, I can’t see why he or anyone else should be particularly concerned about his choice. It will kill things just fine as long as he doesn’t try to do it from too far away.
Big differences between these two.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sr5dan
Easy tiger! Have a bit of light-hearted banter why not, doesn’t do anyone any harm once in a while.Quote:
Originally Posted by 257weatherby
Yes yes yes and yes I know all that... of course I do. But the reality remains that for most cartridges within conventional hunting ranges sub 250m BC is largely a minor consideration. Some would say largely irrelevant. It’s only when we stretch things out a little, that BC and retained velocity starts to count as a significant factor in the killing equation.
I’ve killed more goats, deer and antelope with a poor BC 6mm soft point than most blokes will shoot with all their rifles in 5 lifetimes... big boast! But true. Fuck knows, a few thousand by now. And I will continue to do so without even thinking about BC, ft-lbs or fps, all I am concerned about is MOA. I know it does the job, no need to work myself up about any metrics that might not be as quite as good as something else. Its me that I need to concentrate on, not the BC.
The only rifle I own that I regularly use a high BC bullet for is the 6.5 Creedmoor, which is the only one I shoot at animals with past 500-600m. I started to use a high BC bullet in my 308 and then just the other day I said hang on a minute, why am I shelling out my hard earned on flash bullets for a rifle I’m only going to use in the woods? So I stopped that folly there and then.
So in the context of this debate - the Grendel compared to other stuff, and will the Grendel do the job, I think BC is largely irrelevant like it is in the 7.62x39 or 30-30 context. Its a conventional short range cartridge. You don’t need high BC for that.
When you're hand loading, you can always swap out for lighter or heavier bullets, push them faster or slower, and in doing so make the ballistics and terminal performance more or less like any other cartridge you want to compare it to... And someone will always then argue that's no longer an apples to apples comparison... So IMO, ignore hand loads and extreme end of the spectrums - look at the average factory hunting load for the cartridge to gauge ballpark performance (which for Grendel is a ~123gr, decent BC pill @ ~2450fps and for .243 is a ~95gr, reasonable BC pill @ ~3000fps) and understand that all cartridges are somewhat flexible in terms of what they can be made to do.
The Grendel was designed to turn an AR15 platform into a long range rig. Which it does. The round roughly mimics the trajectory of a .308 and has a good 30% more energy than a standard .223 AR. I've used mine for long range shoots with heavy pills where it has been almost boring at 800m (and will hit 1000m with a bit of help), and I use it for hunting where a light pill travelling fast is pretty damn devastating on small game (with barely any more felt recoil than a .223), much like a .243 would be.
Just don't expect it to ever come close to matching a 6.5x55, 260, x47L or a Creedmoor though. It just doesn't have the powder capacity to push high BC bullets fast enough.
Pommy, I know bugger all about the genesis of the Grendel, when you say it was developed for long range AR-15 purposes, was that for military or sporting applications do you think? The Wikipedia on it is a bit limited. When I say sporting, I’m thinking more target type sports rather than hunting. As someone who shoots proper long range targets with it, what is your view on its max effective range on our deer species?
This tells you a bit about the origins and intended purpose: 6.5 Grendel - alexanderarms.com.
I'd say 250-300m for deer. A 7.62x39 is generally considered to be a 150m-200m deer gun. The Grendel moves a much higher BC bullet at a touch higher speed, extending the effective range. For smaller game such as wallabies & goats, I'd say it's good for as far as you feel you're able to get good shot placement.
Don't let practical common sense get in the way of a perfectly good argument dammit!Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyblown
I love arguing. Unfortunately sometimes I'm wrong!Quote:
Originally Posted by 257weatherby
Hmm. Some of the stuff in that article is exaggerating the round's capability.Quote:
Originally Posted by PommyMcPomFace
"For extreme accuracy, formidable terminal ballistics and long range applications, the 6.5 Grendel from Alexander Arms is unbeatable."
Cobblers.
Anyway, looking at the ballistics, I'd go with a 2000fps minimum for a 125gr pill, so that's around 250m so yeah, seems like the experienced Grendel shooters are on the money.
See what you mean about the 7.62x39... I've learnt today that the Grendel is clearly in the next class up from the Soviet.
I've asked the other cuz what bolt action he's got a Grendel in. I suspect it will be a Ruger. Want to know what he's done with it so far this deer season.
The other thing to consider with the Grendel case is it is inherently accurate.
The 22, 6.5 & 30 Grendels I have built are stupid accurate, whether bolt guns or AR uppers.
https://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co....-barrel-37192/
Its a fantastic little case, but it is just that a little case, you can't expect miracles from it :)
Greg,Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg
What actions have you used to build the 6.5G bolt guns on?
A Stolle Panda, single shot benchrest rifle, a Rem 700, mag feeding was frustrating but sorted, mucking around with a 6PPC Tikka at the moment also a Zastava ex 7.62 x 39Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathias
The Grendel seems to have been developed sa a candidate military round for use in the AR, to "take back the infantry half kilometer" in response to a specific need somewhere. However in trials it lost out to the 6.8SPC which hasn't turned out good enough to establish a niche between 5.56 and 7.62. For heavy hitting at close range, ther is a 50 Beowulf which also hasn't established yet. (as I read it off the interweb) So, the patent holders demoed its capability as a mid range target round, in competition with the 6mmPPC and you see beautiful bench like creations on the net, shooting special scenar 123gr bullets.
Anyway, the 500m aspiration meant using the highest feasible bullet weight which I believe is around 123gr. The BC of my 120gr 6.5 ballistic tips is almost as good as my 140gr 7mm BT. But the lower velocity places a limit, specially on expansion for hunting which requires good terminal performance. For the infantry, paper and gong shooting it doesn't matter if it arrives at 1500 fps and doesn't expand but for goats and such small deer it does. That's why people are tempted into 100gr bullets I presume, but then you lose the wind capability and you're back to why not get a 6mmPPC with a fast twist (not easy to come by).
Comparing just the wind drift at 5m/s
7mm08 140gr BC G1 0.485 MV 2820fps (22" barrel)
6.5Gren 120gr BC G1 0.458 MV 2200fps (16" bbl light load for unfired brass)
Range ... 6.5 Gr .... 7mm08
100m .... 3.4cm ..... 2.6cm
200m .... 14cm ..... 10cm
300m .... 34cm ..... 24cm
400m .... 63cm ..... 45cm
500m .... 102cm .... 73cm
I got my Grendel for hunting smaller deer like sika but only up to 300m because when I looked back over 5 years with the 7mm08 I had only ever shot a couple beyond that but I wanted a lighter shorter rifle. The loopy trajectory and increased wind drift should be just fine up to 200m and manageable with care out to 300. But to do that, I need to push the envelope of the Grendel's capability: heaviest bullets, most powder, maximum technology and range practice to get accuracy for shot placement. You can stretch the specs of a 308 with 10% or 20% heavier bullets, longer barrel, nuclear powder charge, but with the Grendel you're already there just to get started. I'm thinking it will be a good cartridge, within the limited expectations I've set for it.
If i could find a LH Zastava 39 bolt think id a have a 6.5 G thank god i cant so my bank wont get cranky at me
Seem a cool wee round the 6.5G
Great read..... I just ordered a Howa Mini 6.5 Grendel and whats interesting is the people with actual experience rate this little round highly for good reason. For an intermediate cartridge, in a light weight rifle straight out of the box compared to it's peers; 223 / 7.62 x 39 it was a no brainer.
