Home Forums Hunting & Shooting AR and Tactical Rifles 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC for best all round AR caliber.

It's not internet lore for those who have returned from the sandbox who have personally seen it.
But you are correct that it is apparently no longer being used by SF.
Exactly why my comment was past tense...

What comparable acceptance and use of the Grendel can you offer by any foreign government or US government department?

You might want to check your own internet information accuracy...

Per Wikipedia re: military use of the 6.8 SPC:

"Military/law enforcement adoption

By late 2004 the 6.8x43mm SPC was said to be performing well in the field against enemy combatants in Special Operations.[6] However as of the end of 2012 the cartridge was not used by conventional US military personnel."

[6] ^ a b John Pike. "5.56-mm Cartridges". Globalsecurity.org. Retrieved 2011-09-15.

Notice the wording "was said". Said by whom and what report? Its just more smoke and mirrors.

Me thinks SanCalPigHunter doth protest too much, kinda like Robert Silvers always showing up when the 300 AAC Blackout is discussed.

Not sayin' he's wrong, but...................

I am not sure what bearing Mil/LE has on anything. Both make some really bad choices on a regular basis.

From another site but good info.

24" 6.5 Grendel, 6600ft ASL(I shoot at 6600ft ASL regularly.), 67F, 100yd zero, 2.5" Scope Height


Code:
Range Velocity Energy Trajectory TOF Drift
(yards) (fps) (ft-lb) (MILS) (sec) (MILS)
0 2630 1889 0.00 0.0000 0.00
100 2494 1699 -0.0 0.1171 -0.2
200 2362 1524 -0.4 0.2407 -0.3
300 2235 1364 -1.2 0.3712 -0.5
400 2111 1217 -2.0 0.5093 -0.7
500 1992 1083 -2.9 0.6556 -0.8
600 1876 961 -4.0 0.8108 -1.0
700 1766 851 -5.1 0.9756 -1.2
800 1660 752 -6.3 1.1509 -1.5

16" 6.5 Grendel, 6600ft ASL, 67F, 100yd zero, 2.5" Scope Height


Code:
Range Velocity Energy Trajectory TOF Drift
(yards) (fps) (ft-lb) (MILS) (sec) (MILS)
0 2450 1639 0.00 0.0000 0.00
100 2320 1470 0.0 0.1258 -0.2
200 2193 1314 -0.6 0.2588 -0.3
300 2071 1171 -1.4 0.3995 -0.5
400 1953 1041 -2.4 0.5487 -0.7
500 1839 924 -3.5 0.7070 -0.9
600 1730 817 -4.7 0.8752 -1.2
700 1626 722 -6.0 1.0541 -1.4
800 1527 637 -7.5 1.2445 -1.6

What bullet and grain is that data on?

Not sure will ask.

i can't find any loaded softpoint 223 ammo, its amazing you guys can find all that loaded 6.8 and 6.5 a true miracle.

I noticed at 500 yards the 3.5" drop and 924 ft lbs of energy for the Grendel is enough to kill a deer. Most gun writers say 900 Ft lbs is needed for a good deer kill which the 30-30 has at about 200 yards. That is a long range shot in my book. I read this elsewhere and that is one reason I was leaning towards the Grendel. The Swedish Mauser in 6.5 is a moose killer in Sweden. I know the Grendel is not as powerful, but for deer, hogs and pronghorn with its flat shooting, it has enough power.

Here's the closet ballistic comparison i could find. Notice that when both rifles fire from a 16in barrel and use a 120gr ballistic tip bullet the lower range advantage of the 6.8SPC completely disappears. The Grendel takes over right away and keeps the lead to 1000 yards. Also notice the Hornady HITS scores. 500+ is considered adequate for medium game. 499 and under is varmint shooting. The Grendel has better HITS scores which means better killing power right from the muzzle. With these bullet combos 6.8SPC is a 300 yard deer gun and the Grendel is a 450 yard deer gun.

You mean the deer I killed with my 45 ACP are now alive because they weren't killed with at least 900 FPE. Rating lethality using FPE to rate lethality is silly and meaningless

I said from what I read that most gun WRITERS say you need 900 ft lbs of energy to adequately kill a deer, whatever that means. I have a friend who killed a 9 pointer with a 44 mag carbine at 192 yards. He aimed about a foot high. Even so, the Grendel has more downrange energy retained.

Look a this side by line up. The 123gr SST in the Grendel VS the 120gr SST in the 6.8SPC.

Velocity is far more important for a rifle cartridge on game, IMO. And not speed for its own sake, but rather the MINIMUM speed that'll make YOUR chosen bullet perform as designed. A lot of manufacturers, IE Nosler, reccomend 1800fps.

Taking that into consideration, you'll see that even the Grendel is hardly a LR game cartridge, though is has an extra 100yd reach over the 6.8.

Whats fun about the Hornady HITS number is that it takes the caliber, grain, energy, and velocity into account and gives you one number that measures the killing power. As you see at no time does the 6.8SPC ever have a higher HITS number than the Grendel. Its a myth that the 6.8SPC is better close in and the Grendel better at far off shots. The Grendel is actually better right from the muzzle out. According to the HITS score the Grendel is in the deer killing range out to 550 yards or so using a 16in barrel. Most of us hunt with 18 to 20 inches so we are probably good out past 600 yards. So I'd say that's more range than i'll ever need to drop a deer.

That is why I'm leaning towards the Grendal. I also above was not talking about speed or velocity. I was talking about Foot Pounds of energy at various distances. That translates into penetration and knock down power. Yes it is 0.3 mm smaller than the 6.8, but that is not enough difference to matter. It is penetration energy. Gun writers said for a crossing shot on a deer to penetrate to the vitals at an angle. They said you needed 900 ft lbs of retained energy. 6.5 will penetrate better. Next would be bullet selection for proper expansion.

When talking about the rounds' effective range on game or anything else, including wind drift in your charts would make them more instructive.

I recently got rid of my Grendel and I miss it already. It would be fun to play with some of these new bullets and powders now available. If I was going to hunt with an AR the new 129 Accubond LR (advertised expansion down to 1300 fps), when available, might be the perfect all around bullet for it.

Mr. Dixie Dude

I studied in some detail the grendel vs 6.8 options about two years ago. On paper the 6.5 is better. For practical logistics it seems the 6.8 is better.
Long distance capabilities goes to the 6.5

I stumbled upon some industry confusion concerning chambers for the 6.8 that disturbed me.

As I get older complications are not something I am interested in.

I don't see much advantage of the 6.8 cartridge over the 7.62x39 honestly. I think rock river has a new carbine in the AR platform that takes AK mags.

The cost of bulk ammo always brings me back to reality as I am frugal and have just a tiny hint of Scot in me.