Thread: 6.5 grandel

Originally Posted by Sr5dan

I shoot a 6.5 Swede mate of mine also wanted one but instead brought a 6.5 grandel any thoughts

What rifle for the grandel/Grendel?

Unless you want a ar15 type set up, the 6.5 swede is the winner.

Originally Posted by Beaker

What rifle for the grandel/Grendel?

Unless you want a ar15 type set up, the 6.5 swede is the winner.

I’m covered.

Originally Posted by dogmatix

I’m covered.

Attachment 98357

I'm covered more better tho, 6.5TCU, 6.5SAUM and .375WSM

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.

Originally Posted by 257weatherby

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.

Originally Posted by 257weatherby

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.

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...

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.

Originally Posted by Flyblown

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...

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.

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.

Originally Posted by 257weatherby

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.

Easy tiger! Have a bit of light-hearted banter why not, doesn’t do anyone any harm once in a while.

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.

Originally Posted by Flyblown

Easy tiger! Have a bit of light-hearted banter why not, doesn’t do anyone any harm once in a while.

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.

Don't let practical common sense get in the way of a perfectly good argument dammit!

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 ?

@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.

Originally Posted by Sr5dan

I shoot a 6.5 Swede mate of mine also wanted one but instead brought a 6.5 grandel any thoughts

Big differences between these two.

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?