Roberts was telling the truth. Military ammo must maintain safe pressures in extreme temperatures. Some years ago, one of the SPC developers -- I don't recall if it was Murray or Holland -- said that 6.8 SPC chamber pressure should not exceed 54,000 psi, in order to have acceptable weapon durability. That's significantly lower pressure than what I understand some handloaders are loading to.

I'm trying to find where I spoke with him on this.

It was information given to him on velocity and barrel length, nothing he was witness to himself. He explained that to me.

You have seen the video of the military cartridge being fired through a chronograph from an 8" and a 16" barrel by the guy that helped develop it, as well as designed and developed the 95grTTSX for Barnes from the ground up. Dr. Lucci knows what he's doing, and quite a few ammo companies have him help develop ammo for them for the 6.8.

Again, the ammo he fired was the mil contract ammo. You saw the velocity figures with your own eyes. Doc's data is erroneous, not on purpose, but it is incorrect.

You also saw Yama's data with the mil contract overruns, the same exact ammo. It is loaded the same, it's overruns of ammo that was for testing, not 2nds, not blems,  not misloaded, but the real deal.

Two things you've seen with your own eyes, yet you refuse to believe them over a document printed by human hands that do make errors from time to time.

I really don't understand this logic. It makes absolutely no sense at all.

LWRC does velocity testing on every lot of ammo they send to their customer overseas. 2850 from a 16" barrel.

It depends on what projectile you use. There are a few that the 6.8 shoots flatter, but with a tad more wind drift, and I mean like a few inches of drift at 1000 yards. Like I said earlier, though it can be done easily, it is not cheap to do, since most bullets for the 6.8 were not design with a high enough BC at a weight appropriate for the caliber. If you want to go long range, it is cheaper to go with the 6.5G. The G will generally give you an advantage in wind drift.

The point is, the G has developed over the years into a better shirt range, short barrel gun than it was, and the ^.8 has developed over the years into a better long range gun than it was. Both have been improved by new powders, new made for caliber projectiles, and just a lot of testing and trying new things.

Their differences are not so different anymore.

The thing that makes the 6.8 the winner right now is industry support.

We can also buy brass cased S&B ammo with Hornady premium bullets for $13.50-$13.99 a box right now. We can find lots of it on the shelves. More companies are coming out with more new ammo for it all the time.

They somehow believe every human with a doctorate is as infallible as God Almighty, except when it's Dr Chris Lucci. who was intimately involved in the design and testing of the stuff in the first place, because, Grendel better, mmm, mmmm. Does not fit their narrative.

Doc made an error, simple. Nothing more.

Federal and LWRCi tests this ammo as you say. It is at safe pressures, you G guys need to get off of that dead horse. We get these velocities with spec II chambers and correct land / groove ratio barrels at the same pressures that the lower SAAMI stuff runs in a SAAMI chamber.

I have posted the pressure testing results and comparisons a dozen times on this site already.

Ammo that was ripping apart in SAAMI chambers and running near proof load pressures ( tests were showing 70kpsi+ ) in SAAMI original chambers and barrels , were not even showing swipes in the Spec II and 1/11, 1/12 twist guns, and were running less than 55Kpsi. Yes, real , honest to the good Lord pressure testing equipment used in the industry was used.

Spec II ammo ran 60Kpsi plus in the SAAMI guns, while it was @50Kpsi in the Spec II ones. SAAMI ammo that was 55Kpsi in the SAAMI barrels was down as low as 42Kpsi in ARP barrels, and 45K in other Spec II ones.


Huge difference.

Perhaps it would make more sense if you consider that Gary Roberts is known for being adamant that what he posts is accurate. In the absence of a correction from DocGKR himself, I think it should be understandable that Grendelizer is unwilling to take someone else's word that it was an error.

I think it's not understandable. Dr. Lucci is well known for being adamant that what he posts is accurate. And shit dude, really, he is one of the fucking designers of the round and has way more knowledge of it than Doc Roberts.
I like Doc Roberts, but his info is erroneous. You have video evidence showing this.

It doesn't make sense at all. That logic is either insanity, willful delusion to not accept reality for what it is, or pushing bullshit and misinformation due to an agenda. I don't believe you guys are insane, so it is either one or the other of the last two.

If it's the third option, you should be banned from the tech forums for misleading members for the purpose of self promotion.

??? I don't recall any Grendel fan saying the Federal ammo is loaded to unsafe pressures.

I haven't seen that data. The last such info I read was the report done a few years ago by Chris Lucci, and as I recall, the differences in pressures between SPC and SPCII chambers were nowhere near that great.

What you're overlooking is that many Grendel fans are familiar with the writings of Gary Roberts, since he posted quite often on the old 65grendel forum. I doubt if more than a few of the Grendel guys are even aware that Chris Lucci exists, let alone what his reputation is.

Your comment is irrational and inaccurate, since I have not engaged in self promotion. I have nothing to gain or lose, regardless of the success or failure of 6.5 Grendel.

Thank you.

I COULD NOT AGREE MORE..... Thanks for echoing my sentiment.... I'd bet on the later, Atleast as far as one individual goes.

+1

So what you sying then is the this statement is in fact true and correct.


So we have established the 6.8SPCII can do anything the Grendel can do.
I will give the edge to the Grendel bucking the wind past 600 yards.
As well the edge to the 6.8 having a higher velocity in barrels 12.5 inch and under.
Advantage 6.8 in SBR, not sayind a 6.5G wont do it, the 6.8 just does it better.
Also the 6.8 holding higher velocities across the board on projectiles up to and including 140 grains.
Definite 6.8 for availability, parts, complete weapons and uppers, factory ammo.
Definite 6.8 for industry support.

Because this puts the 6.8 as the better choice over the 6.5G unless all you want your AR15 to do is shoot 1000yards at targets and nothing more.
If all you want it for is targets at 1000 yards then build a 6.5G
Anything else build a 6.8SPCII

I have found or seen no where that there are 2 pressure loading for the Federal XM68GD, there is not Mod# anything.
I have boxes of the XM68GD, I have fired many many boxes of it.
It all performs the same.
How did "he" counter our claims? Are you speaking with him?
I dont have an opinion of why there is a diccrepancy, ask hiim.

I can see that it does not fit his game plan to discount the advances in the performance of the 6.8.
Which he trys to do at every chance he gets.
The thing is there are 100's of thousands of rounds of XM68GD in circulation with not one reported instance of any damage to a weapon or person reported.

As well what is this comment about?
He had countered that he thinks the military loading was moderate for both durability and environmental concerns
There are no durability questions with the XM68GD, that is another misleading fallacy.
G-Man throwing the "environmental" comment in there is bizzare.
Yuppers if we load that god forsaken XM68GD any hotter it's going to ruin the enviroment, yes sir re Bob mother earth will be pissed.
WTH

Fact is there is one loading of the XM68GD, it runs 2850 to 2875 depending on altitude and temp of course.

Stanc, that was his whole point that the 6.8 cannot run at those pressures reliably, which is a fallacy that exists in his mind only.

I think he meant the high heat and temp extremes along with running full auto when he says environmental concerns.

It matters not, however, as the loading is what it is, and is not at a high enough pressure at that velocity to induce malfunctions or cause dangerous pressure spikes.

Why would anyone shoot either at a target at 1000 yds?...or game past 350?

Presumably for the challenge?

Ahh.. duh
Should have had another cup of coffee :)

No the XM68GD has been tested extensively in those conditions.
I mean come on its a round developed for the Arabs.

Fallacy. The 6.5 Grendel was just as good in SBRs at the beginning, as it is now.

Concur.

No question 6.8 industry support and ammo availability are substantially greater.

If that's your standard for "winning," then 6.8 is clearly the better choice.

However, most Grendel shooters seem to be able to build and shoot their rifles, despite the more limited availability of parts and ammo.

I think he means there are better tools for the job.
Which is true for both of them.

The point for me in the 6.8 being the better choice is it will stand the test of time now.
It's going to be around for a long while.
Which has been voiced as a concern for someone looking at both calibers.
The 6.8 withstood a shit move by Remington, it stood on its own and came back in the market without the big $$ support initially. Now big $$ is behind it.

Its proved itself to be what the designers intended it to be, the best all around caliber in the AR15 platform.
Actually if we look at what the cartridge can do performance wise and terminally it's what Eugene Stoner should have built to begin with.

As well anyone shooting wildcats can build and shoot their rifles.
Which is what the 6.5G is, a wildcat.
Not a mainstream caliber you find on store shelves all over.
Like it or not the 6.8 is becoming a mainstream caliber.

Then it would depend on which bullet was used and at what velocity.  A 6.8 130 Berger BC of .496 would hang with a 6.5 123 Amax BC of .500 if both were handloaded to 2650 out of 20" barrels. A 6.5 123 Lapua would clearly beat the 130 Berger if both were loaded to the same velocity.  

sush or the puffer will show up

If that is of significant concern to someone, then I agree that 6.8 is the more prudent choice. However, I would also say that it matters less what the overall availability of parts and ammo is, and more on availability of the specific parts and supplies any particular individual desires.

For example, I only shoot FMJ ammo, so I couldn't care less how many different hunting loads are on the market. Plus, as I noted previously, the availability of low cost, steel cased ammo has far greater appeal to me than the ability to sell once-fired brass.

As long as one can get what one wants, what does it matter if the caliber is second in popularity, versus fourth or fifth?

That was not the designers' goal. Murray and Holland intended to create a special purpose cartridge specifically to improve terminal performance of the Mk12 SPR, not to develop the best all around AR15 caliber.

Actually, no it isn't. What the AR15 should have been chambered for is something along the lines of the 6.5x40 and Six5, except possibly in .25 caliber. Or maybe something like a 5.45x39 necked up to 6mm. Even the 6mm SAW round would've been a better choice than 6.8 SPC.

6.5 Grendel ammo availability is certainly quite limited, but it's simply inaccurate to call it a wildcat. It's a SAAMI round, produced as factory ammo by major manufacturers.

I like it. But, I'd also like to see 6.5 Grendel become just as popular.

I have been reading this thread with amusement and have stayed out of this exchange. But the BS meter went off the scale with this quote:

"Which is what the 6.5G is, a wildcat."

1.) Is there a SAAMI spec for the 6.5 Grendel? Yes!

2.) Is there "head stamped" cases for the 6.5 Grendel? Yes!

3.) Is there commercially loaded ammo for the 6.5 Grendel? Yes!

4.) Are there multiple vendors that sell 6.5 Grendel complete rifles and/or upper? Yes!

These are NOT the criteria that one would expect to find with a "Wildcat" cartridge. This statement makes all of your arguments that you have given through out this thread suspect.  

If I remember correctly, the LWRC Six8 requires a lower that is only built by  LWRC; (Fails criteria #4) the LWRC Six8 requires special mags that only work with the LWRC Six8. They have also changed the name slightly to " 6.8x43mm Rem SPC".  

The SAAMI spec for the 6.8 SPC is also a bit confusing. Granted is seems that it has been worked out but a person buying a 6.8 SPC must verify that they are getting the "newer" chamber spec.

Lastly, almost ALL if the high performance loads that you refer to are loaded to 2.3", longer than the 2.26" SAAMI spec.

I would think that this makes the LWRC Six8 more of a "wildcat" than the 6.5 Grendel.

Bottom line:

The 6.8 get it's better performance when if it is reloaded. Same with the 6.5 Grendel

The difference between the two (6.5 Grendel, and 6.8 SPC) is pretty much moot.  Case volume is the number one factor in determining velocity potential of a cartridge and both the 6.5 Grendel, and 6.8 SPC have a case volume of ~35-36 g of water.

So it basically boils down to "Do you like blondes, redheads, or brunettes... Chevy, Ford, or Jeep?"

6.8 is superior to 6.5

You all need to grow up.
Study the calibers you are interested in and find the one that fills your niche.
6.8 is my choice. If I was shooting 300 to 500 yards I would get a long barreled 6.5. But I shoot out to 200 yards with a 10.5" barrel 6.8.
There is no PERFECT ROUND that will do everything.

Did anyone shoot the Federal XM68GD over a chrono at the proper distance of 15ft?

I only saw pics of a 5.56 carbine at the range with a chrono at correct distance from Yama.  Yama has the Federal XM68GD, so I guess he could do it if willing.  The video with the LWRC 6.8 showed the chronograph itself recoiling to the muzzle blast every time the PDW was fired.

Also, Stan's picture from the initial development of the 30 Remington wildcats when looking for terminal performance exposes what I mentioned earlier, in that they used SMK's for 6mm, 6.5mm, 7mm, & 7.62mm, but a V-MAX for the .277" variant.  When these tests were shown to third party ballistics engineers, they were very unimpressed with the blatant failure to use the same type of projectiles across the board.  This also had major implications for possible adoption by military forces, since OTM was JAG approved in certain units, but nobody was going to allow a varmint round specifically designed for explosive expansion.

One of these pills is not like the other...



It's yet another example in how the entire 6.8 marketing campaign was filled with unprofessionalism, misrepresentations, and lies.  Remember, this is how the cartridge was first advertised to me in 2002-2003, with a series of lies and unsupportable statements by its early advocates, all of whom were in the military at the time.  That always bothered me, even though I was excited about a .277" AR15. What I learned was that I had to go and research all the claims myself, since none of the information being told to me could be trusted.

There isn't anything of substance a 6.8 can do in terms of hunting that the Grendel can't do, especially from short barrels. The Grendel has proven to do things in the hunting world that I have yet to see from the 6.8, namely twofers.  It should be doable, but we just haven't seen it yet that I am aware of.  It has happened several times now with Grendel's on both hogs and deer, the deer at over 300yds. Then there is the trail of blood from numerous large game the Grendel has slain, and not just anomalies here and there, but plenty of elk, mule deer, bison, caribou, and moose. That's no surprise for those of us who have hunted with the 6.5x55 Mauser, which has been responsible for hundreds of thousands of dead moose in Scandinavia dating back for over a century.

The idea that the Grendel should only be allocated as a mediocre, long barreled target gun is silly, even when looking at factory ammunition speeds from short barrels.
The idea that .277" projectiles have more wounding potential than .264" projectiles is also silly, whereas retained energy of the 6.5 Grendel gives better solutions for expansion and penetration.  Within 175yds, there isn't a practical difference, but impact velocity and energy will be higher from the Grendel from thereon out, ceterus paribus.
If you want to be able to hunt and shoot distance, with comparable trajectory and better wind drift than most .308 loads, the Grendel makes more sense.
If saving money and getting more bang for your buck is important, Grendel makes more sense when looking at ammo.
If you want to narrow down your ammunition/bullet type to do both hunting and target at an affordable price, the 6.5 Grendel makes more sense.
If you don't want to worry about which type of magazine will work with your ammo, and would like to keep mag prices down ($13.21-$19.00 per mag), the Grendel makes more sense.

If being able to buy ammo at Wal-mart is a significant priority for you, then maybe 6.8 would make sense.  I just looked at Wal Mart's site and all of the stores in my region are out of stock for 6.8 SPC.  I personally don't do much business with Wal Mart, and most of my ammo is ordered online.  My last order for 6.5 Grendel was $17.99/box for 123gr SST Hornady, which is both a great hunting and target load with a .510 BC, using the Interlock bullet design that is proven on many types of game from the Grendel.

The only practical thing I see right now in favor of the 6.8 SPC is online availability of various types of ammunition, but most of them are more expensive than what I have been paying for factory Hornady, and the Lapua-brassed ammo I have leaves me with Lapua brass, so it's well worth the price, even for those that don't reload. Resale value of 1x Lapua brass is excellent.

There are pros and cons for each, but the merits clearly place more of those benefits on the 6.5mm side for me.  The guys with 6.8's seem to be raving mad happy with their choice. We're all spoiled if you really look at it, having all these options that simply didn't exist back when I got into AR15's in the 1980's.

Be Nice if people could respect the OP's question which was

So I guess what I'm really asking is for those who have a 6.8 why did they choose it? Thanks

again  OP states on page 7

I was really not wanting to get into the depbate of the two. I really wanted to know what it was that made 6.8 owners choose it.

there is a reason grendel threads are short , it's no one gives a rats ass about it just like the OP

That question was being respected, until a 6.8 fan needlessly tossed in the sarcastic remark:

& yeah yeah "G"brand now has Wolf ammo.

The pic of my crono set up was just to how how I set it up.
Thats the exact same way I have set it up when I did run the XM68GD, a few times in fact.
Thats the only pic I have of the crono set up, however I always do it the same.
It run 2875 average for me just as I said, 5500ft elevatoin at the range.
I just got back from the range and ran 40 different work ups across 4 different projectiles.
5 different powders, I like messing with it.

The pic Stan showed does have a Vmax on. But here again your hanging your argument on the pic and ignoring the fact that they state they used a wide varitey of projectiles.

Wally world, yea 6.8 shows up there.
But you cant make a case with Wally world as an exapmle as its a well known fact the employees are seloling the stuff to guys that go to gun shows before it ever hits the shelf.
The local guy here is horrible at it, the manager does not care.

The idea that .277" projectiles have more wounding potential than .264" projectiles is also silly, whereas retained energy of the 6.5 Grendel gives better solutions for expansion and penetration. Within 175yds, there isn't a practical difference, but impact velocity and energy will be higher from the Grendel from thereon out, ceterus paribus. Make that 350 yards now
If you want to be able to hunt and shoot distance, with comparable trajectory and better wind drift than most .308 loads, the Grendel makes more sense. Only past 600 yards over the 6.8 on targets, hunting I call BS
If saving money and getting more bang for your buck is important, Grendel makes more sense when looking at ammo. Only steel cased, nothing else, fallacy
If you want to narrow down your ammunition/bullet type to do both hunting and target at an affordable price, the 6.5 Grendel makes more sense. This is also BS, there is way more 6.8 hunting ammo both available and cheaper, the only G Dog ammo thats cheaper is the steel
If you don't want to worry about which type of magazine will work with your ammo, and would like to keep mag prices down ($13.21-$19.00 per mag), the Grendel makes more sense. Also totally misleading BS, just because there are spendy PRI mags, your saying CPD, ASC are junk? They are comparably priced fallacy spinner


This garbage is typical of the tales Grendel guys have been spinning here for years.

Woahhhhh, dont put down thier beloved G diddy.
They will fabricate tall tales, spin yarns, create false statements.
They will curse you and put your screen nick on voodoo dolls.
They will go to their grave or the mental ward screaming in their best demonic voice "it should have been the Grendel, it should have been the Grendel"

But its not, the best of the 2 is the 6.8

no he made a comment about steelcore steel case ammo and then the clowns started in.
eta: opps ment steel case

Your reading comprehension seems to be rather lacking. Here's the full comment:

Note there is nothing whatsoever about "steelcore" ammo. That entire paragraph was not only gratuitous, it was completely irrelevant to the OP's question.

Ammo found online with ammo search engines, I'll count the grendel hits how about one of you grendel fanboys count the 6.8 hits  

Ammo Bot grendel  3
Ammo Bot 6.8spc  ?

Slickguns  grendel 0
Slickguns 6.8spc ?

Gun Deals grendel 15
Gun Deals 6.8spc  ?

WikiArms grendel  0
WikiArms 6.8spc  ?

Ammo Now grendel  2
Ammo Now  6.8spc  ?

Ammo Seek grendel  1
Ammo Seek 6.8spc   ?

This is why my buddies daughter dumped the idea of a grendel build and went 6.8spc, she will reload everything she shoots but likes the option of easy to find factory ammo

I'm not hanging my argument on a picture.  If you read, you'll see that when submitted for terminal ballistics analysis, the 6.8 used varmint pills for the expansion performance demos, and that really turned off a lot of people who were previously interested.  There is a mountain of events that most 6.8 owners don't know about regarding the abysmal manner in which it was advertised, and a lot of the conclusions go unchallenged by people who are unaware of the details.

Whether comparing factory to factory, or hand loads to hand loads, the Grendel is going to out-perform the 6.8 with the same types of projectiles in similar weight ranges, from the same barrel lengths.  I used to believe the lies that 6.8 smoked Grendel from SBR or 16" barrels, but then did the research myself and saw that it was totally false. Don't make me break out the ballistics tables again, only to be told I'm doctoring the data, when I have even gone to the extent to compare 6.8 hand loads to 123gr Grendel factory loads, or 14.5" Grendel's to 18" 6.8's.

Not sure where you're getting 600yds from, but there isn't a ballistics table that will show that favorable to 6.8 past 250yds, maybe 275yds.

Just did the ammobot search for pricing on 120gr SST, and it's the same as Grendel, although I have been able to get 123gr SST much cheaper. I have a target load and hunting load in that combo, that exits the same speed as a 120gr 6.8 factory load.  There isn't one 6.8 factory load that doubles as a hunting bullet and target bullet in that BC or price range. Not BS

Grendel has also had cheap 123gr PPU Soft Point and 120gr MPT for years, with brass cases.  Steel cased Grendel is just a much lower price point at under $8 a box.

You misinterpreted the magazine issues the 6.8 has.  There were statements on SSA's website that specifically said not to use their 140gr Berger load in Barrett 6.8 rifles, and that you would need a particular magazine for that load.  The site has been re-vamped since being bought by Nosler, and I no longer see that load available or the statements, but they were there.  They also had 3 different types of factory loads rated by hotness:  Extreme (discontinued for pressure problems), Tactical (hotter loads meant to push velocity), and standard.

Then the creation of a new receiver set for 6.8 by LWRC and a new magazine, that isn't common with anything else, introduces more variation and less standardization into the market.  I also shouldn't have to buy mags that cost over $40 if I want to hand load certain projectiles for the caliber.  I personally like one magazine standard so that there is commonality of parts across the industry.  You won't find me saying the other mags are junk, as that's a straw man proposition that doesn't pass scrutiny.

You effectively have a wildcat if you need special mags and hand loads to get the performance you are advertising as common, only for customers to find out later that they need PRI mags and hand loading with a special chamber and twist.  I can order 8 Grendel mags right now for ~ $105, while that same money would only get me 2 PRI mags.  Then I'm told in the same breath that 6.8 parts are cheaper than Grendel.  There is a lot of confusion in the 6.8 market, starting with the chamber, moving to the mags, what pressures and load data are good, etc.  It has been strange to watch it all unfold, and there clearly isn't anyone with ownership of the design driving it and holding people accountable to one standard. To the contrary. every new development seems to pull the 6.8 even farther from a standard.  That does not bode well when you factor in scalable economy from a big picture industry standpoint.

With Grendel, there is one standard for the mags, and I don't need extra length in the mag body to load long projectiles.  My shortest internal length ASC or CProducts Grendel mag has 2.305" of space, but I wouldn't load that long anyway.  2.275" is plenty for me.

Call BS all you want. The facts just don't support any of your counter arguments.

THIS

6.8 ASC are under $10 , personally I'd rather have 3 PRI's for $113.75 then 13 ASC's , I can run 2.314  in the ASC's but the PRI are a much nicer mag



but how many different chamber reamers ? seems like after the Midway /grendel deal there several

Replies in Red G man
More twisted crap as usual.
Good thing is people see thru your feces my friend

Yes Angus, he does not want to talk about that.

If it isnt negative about the 6.8 he's not interested in it.

This whole PRI mag thing shows it.
He will try to dig up and twist anything.

I think after the Midway fiasco people came up with 5 plus reamers as someone knows as they were in the threads

I see I am being drug into this again so...

Since I am the one that made above statement let me, once again, reiterate the intended purpose & underlying sentiment;

I chose a 6.8, which is what the OP asked in correlation to that over a 6.5G, in the interceding coment was added that even though Wolf ammo, which is indeed steel cased, to hence there is no argument available that would negate the statement to which stanc has no rebuttal, that even though cheaper priced (ie, read cheaper quality) is available, before or since my purchase, it WOULD NOT CHANG MY PREFERENCE OR CHOICE Thereof. Period. End of discussion as far as choice goes. I was not bashing the caliber or cartdridge, only that ONE OFFERING  would not Chang the choice. An entirely relevant statement to the question posed in the OP'S original question.

In sumation, as to the entirely RELEVANT, in my intended usage & applications the 6.5G holds absolutely no value over my 6.8 what so ever. So let it go & go shoot what you want & leave me alone in regards to my personal preference.

As a side note: I said I do not buy Wolf or Russian made ammo. Not that I haven't or have had usage there of. So I base my knowledge not on inexperienced quandary but that of developed wisdom.  I can not help that Butt-hurt was incurred by the misunderstood statement & a plethora of inconsequential anecdotes followed.

As I said before I am done defending the statement, which I stand behind, so let it go & move on to more productive engagements.

Guess the fanboys couldn't count that high

Probably not.

Arpartsfinder.com
No Grendel under ammo seek.
22LR, .223, 5.56, 7.62x39, 6.8 and .300 AAC
No Grendel.
Why? Nobody cares?

Redding the maker of highend reloading equippment lists the Grendel under obsolete and/or wildcats.
Guess they are clueless, someone should tell them how important it is.
Funny how they tout its long range capabilities but the go to in long range reloading barely supports the cartridge.

The 6.8 is approved for use by the FBI, DEA multiple enforcement agencies, is the Grendel?

I wouldnt run that junk in anything either foxy.
9mm, 5.56 no matter

This should get moved to GD or the pit. It isn't really a tech discussion anymore, it's 6.5 vs 6.8 purse swinging.

Agreed.

Except there has been misconstrued information that is being rebutted.

This thread needs more pictures,

How well do the hunting bullets for the 6.8 and Grendel stack up to each other, both in expansion and retained weight.

For hunting, I think the ballistics are good for both rounds,  maybe one has more sound available projectiles!!
??