Home Forums Hunting & Shooting AR and Tactical Rifles The 6.5 Grendel is a shlt cartridge past 200 yds.

The only guy here that I know of with a PHD in math seems to think it will kill just fine, so, just saying.......

This thread is a great reminder of the character...

It is really more of a bullet & velocity issue. Some of the quickest killing bullets on thin-skinned game like deer are those that open up violently upon impact. Cheap cup & core bullets driven fast.

The 90gr bullet can achieve plenty velocity out of the Grendel to be and excellent 200 yd deer killer, but it doesn't have the high BC that the sniper wannabes desire.

You realize that's more true of yourself than anyone else in this thread, right? What makes you think you have an opinion of any value on this?

Did you attend a bad public school? Struggling with reading comprehension? Butt-hurt because you're too stupid to defend the Grendel against the onslaught of truth?

Notice how his reply included nothing regarding any hunting experience he has?

Antelope Sniper: Have you or someone you know used the Grendel? My experience (limited) with it has been good. Maybe I'm more attentive to bullet placement than I once was. A young lady in our family is going to buy her own rifle even though she is welcome use one of mine. The .270 recoiled more than she liked so she has been using my Weatherby Vanguard 2 in .223. She told me she had done some research and was thinking of getting a 6.5 Creed. I told her the Creed is a fine caliber but she might do just as well deer hunting with a Grendel and get even less recoil. She seems to be more than average averse to recoil. We don't hunt out west in barren country but the occasional 300+ yard shot does present itself.

but... long skinny high bc KEEPS the velocity up longer.....

That said with your opinions, I"ve countered with mine. I have NO problem killing with slow non violent bullets. NONE. Even out to longer distances than most feel good with.

Again you work with paper numbers more than deer numbers.

Lets take me out with a Grendel and at your 300 yard it won't kill squat distance and how many deer you want me to kill? It won't be hard.

By your own words the grendel bullet opens to .40 .
I have shot many head of game with a 45-70 . For your edification that bullet is.460 out of my molds. Weight anywhere from 290 g. To 500g.
Cast hard, and moving anywhere from 1100 to 1800 fps at the muzzle.
.460 hole going in and .460 hole coming out.
Take a half inch hose and see what kind of stream it produces.
If your frangible perfect bullet blows up on entry you lose.
The 6.5 bullet has a history of being a fine penetrator. I killed many deer in my youth with a 6.5 carcano with some ranging to 350 yards.
Don't have a Grendel but wouldn't hesitate using one at the same distance if I could still see that far😁

In closing I just have to say...... DLA is a poor Hunter past 200 yards

Hastings,

I have not used the Grendel beyond shooting another guys rigs at the range a couple of times. One that I shot was really set up for cross purposes, what a 16" barrel and an Eotech sight . So, I've never got to stretch the legs on one properly set up with good hand loads. Regardless, I've killed game far enough to know NAB still expand down around 1800 fps, and that's the regular AB's, not the LRAB's. Sure, you don't get the explosive devastation of a 3300 fps impact, but you also have a whole lot less blood shot meat. The LRAB's are advertised to expand into the 1200's, and i suspect even at those velocities, they would do just fine providing the shooter had the skill to keep them in the boiler room.

The primary medium rifle in our family, over 4 generations, is the .270 Winchester. I shoot 59gr H-4831 over a 140gr NBT/NAB, lit with a CCI-200, and back it off two grains for the wife and kids. That's in Winchester brass, if you use something heavier like Remington, you'll want to back that off a grain.

In this state the minimum for big game hunting is a 6mm bullet, and 85grains for Elk. I started my kids on AR's early, so to keep the same ergonomics etc, I wanted an AR hunting solution. For that I've build a pair of 6x45's, one with a 22" barrel the other with a 16. the 22" shoot great with the 90gr NBT, 10 shot groups just over an inch, but I have yet to scope the 16". They are both BHW barrels, so I imagine it will shoot just fine.

Hey RETARD what have you killed with the Grendel and at what distances? Do you even own a Grendel?

If DLA would post a picture of a deer he has killed, or a rifle that he owns, or a pistol he owns I might believe he is not a troll. His posts seem to be based on his interpretation of what he reads on the web. I have killed deer with 5.56, 6.8 SPC, 257 Roberts, plus bigger and have noticed after shooting almost 100 deer or so that the bullet and where it hits make the most difference. My grandson shot a spike yesterday at 120 yards with 6.8/95g TTSX. The deer was hit too far back but it traveled 10 ft and lay down. I have a hard time believing that a 120 TTSX out of a grendal at 350 yards would not punch through a deers shoulders. Again like most I believe DLA is sock puppet or troll just here to stir things up.

With a 22" barrel it will keep a 100gr NBT at 2000 FPS out to 400 yards.

I still don't get the 2000 FPS thing even. I"d hunt with a 22LR if it was legal. Deer are just not that hard to kill. Obviously not at 300 yards but you get the point.

Assuming DLA can even HIT a deer at 300 I'm gonna say he has really really really poor recovery skills if it doesn't fall on the spot.

And too many folks rely on deer dropping at the shot... if I were them, I'd learn to track as best I could. Sooner or later even with the 50 loudenboomerDLA express magnum you are going to have a deer run. They all run if you miss. If you hit they run less....

Jeff,

The 2000 fps things comes from an article posted in the pistol thread discussing why rifles do so much more damage than pistols. The articles discusses how tissue cannot resist the hydrostatic shock created by impact velocities greater than about 2k fps. Below 2k fps the "temporary" wound cavity remains temporary, where above 2k, since it can't resist the tearing the temporary wound cavity stays permanent. That's the source of DLA's fixation on the 2k fps.


Of course, in the real world, that's just one variable. As mentioned here before, there are bullets specifically made for subsonic hunting that expand very well, and leave big holes, regardless of velocity. The other side of the "above 2k" effect is called bloodshot meat. This effect is greatly reduced below 2k. It's why some old timer who like to "eat up to the bullet hole" like killing with rifles like the 30-30, the 30-40 craig, or even the old 45-70. One old boy in our shooting club like killing things with cast lead bullets out of his 38-55, including a large bull buffalo. Some of those black powder cartridge shooters are pretty amazing. Their standard course of fire goes out to 500 yards. Just don't tell DLA, he doesn't think you can shoot that far with black powder.

If a deer drops in it's tracks, it's because you hit it in the CNS, other wise, it's going to run....at least a ways.

Yeah, that's dumbing down some basic rule of thumb to the point of stupidity. The other dumb stuff about calculating expanded bullet diameter etc just adds to the foolishness.

Out of all the stupid and juvenile stuff dla has posted, there is one valid point that he's made unintentionally - that bullets have to be selected to match the intended velocity range. Most of us know this of course, and fortunately there are a number of very good choices for the Grendel's velocity range, even in short barrels. For example, the very common 123gr ELD bullet works down to about 1800 fps (some claim a little lower), which gives me ~300 yards but that's from a 12.5" barrel at sea level. Longer barrels and higher altitudes obviously increase that range. Or we've got the excellent 129gr ABLR that is marketed to expand down to 1300 fps, which is more than 750 yards, again from a 12.5" barrel at sea level. I'm not going to be shooting game at that distance, but the capabilities of the right bullet for the cartridge are there.

That's the source, but it's wrong, as is easily demonstrated with expanding low velocity bullets in hunting. Just as one example, I've had subsonic (1,000 fps) hollow points tear golf-ball sized holes through heart and lungs, with the core still punching through the far shoulder. Obviously the bullet didn't expand to the size of a golf ball, or it wouldn't have penetrated very far, but the damage was there and plainly visible when we butchered the animals. I think rost495 has seen similar effects IIRC.

I've also killed deer with both Grendel and 300 Blackout with impact velocities well under 2,000 fps, with resulting damage that was indistinguishable from a 30/30 or similar. Bullet choice matters, the oft quoted 2,000 fps mark - not so much.

Too many people look at entry and exit holes in the skin (which is very flexible) and try to draw conclusions about the internal damage; that doesn't work. Also, some of these studies about bullets needing 2000+ fps are based on very old data that does not reflect what modern bullets do on impact.

For a number of years the load I shot pretty much exclusively out of the .308 I used, was a 175 grain SMK. It duplicated 118LR which I was quite familiar with. When it came to making wind calls in the field, this paid off time and again.

If you go online the internet will tell you that SMKs are terrible hunting bullets and blah blah. That said, in dozens of animals hit, never did one need a second round, and they never went far, if anywhere more than about the usual 4 or 5 stagger steps, followed by the tumble.

Finn Aagaard, though he has been gone 19 years now, never said it better. Shot placement is 90% of killing power. When you are precise in your placement, everything else usually falls right in line.

I still shoot them a lot in my big .308, when I shoot it.

Example:

A bunch of cows were bunched up in a group at a distance where stalking closer across the wide open was not going to happen, and it was obvious they were going to run when they took off. I was not going to shoot when that happened. One cow stuck her neck and head out away from the group and received a 175 grain SMK as a result.




The point is for "some", certain cartridges and projectiles probably are garbage for them.


For guys like Montana Marine, Rost 495, BSA and a whole list of guys on here who are solid shooters, and shoot most of the year round, it is not really that hard.

For guys who just read a chart, make assumptions with absolutely zero field experience on the particular subject matter to back up their BS, you get the postings of DLA.

And then of course, we get to reaffirm what we already knew, each time he posts, as he removes any doubt whatsoever.

Missed this one earlier. I have both cartridges as well.

If you're looking for penetration, the 6.5 Grendel is the better choice of the two. Higher velocity in the 243 does NOT equal better penetration; most of the time it means less penetration and more fragmentation. It does shoot flatter than the Grendel though.