There is alot of information of what the 6.8 can do at 68forums by a guy that goes by Xman.
Ballistics are good for both, out to 400 yards.
Neither carries enough energy or speed past that for a humane kill.

Both have many projectiles that can be used for hunting.
With the 6.5G and 6.8 many of those are designed to move at speeds faster than either produces.
Or have minimum reliable expansion speeds that limit the effective range with either.

I cannot speak fro the 6.5G but for the 6.8 there are projectiles that are being produced specifically for it for hunting.
As well I can see this turning into a total new pissing match.

There are capable hunting bullets from 85 to 130 grains for the 6.8. I suspect the same holds true for the 6.5G.
I do not know if any manufacturer is bringing out new hunting bullets for the 6.5G, not just in .264 caliber, but designed for the Grendel.
I do know that they are for 6.8, specifically for its velocity and energy.
By Hornady, Speer and Barnes.

got some 100gr GMX's that I hope to dump in bambi this winter, but will be out of the 270ar @ somewhere between 3100 and 3200 fps, will pass 100 of them to my buddies daughter so she can run them in her 6.8 when she finishes it up hopefully next week

I know it's not ballistics gel testing, but all the bullets are fired into consistent test media for each round of testing. Basically it's a water jug, newsprint, then if the bullet makes it a plywood box.

This is the link to 68forums Xman's bullet testing thread that Yama_Raja mentioned.

6.8 SPC Bullet Performance

6.5 Fanboys post your bullet testing.

The closest to an apples-vs-apples comparison that I know of is the following gel test which shows 6.5 Grendel 120gr TSX and 6.8 SPC 110gr TSX.

Bare gel test @ 0:10-1:25 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BROdbEm5wqA

A couple of things to keep in mind:
- Distance from muzzle to gel block was only 10 feet, much closer than typical hunting shots.
- The 110gr 6.8 TSX was optimized for the SPC, whereas the 120gr 6.5 TSX was designed for cartridges with higher muzzle velocity than that of the Grendel.

Check out 1:19 mark in video for graph of Kinetic Energy Transfer to the ballistics gel. 6.8 SPC only lost to the 50 Beawulf

Actually the 110gr .277 TSX is designed for .270 Win velocities but the 6.8 SPC can use it as long as the bullet speed is above the expansion velocity (1800-1900 fps I think). It's still a good choice though in the 6.8 SPC.

The 95gr TTSX was specifically designed for the 6.8 SPC and has a lower expansion velocity (1600 fps?? I think) than the 85gr or 110gr TSX.

Here's a picture illustrating the differences in the Barnes bullets in the 6.8 SPC.

To bad they shot low going thru the car door with  the 6.8.

As well the gel at 10ft really does not do much for hunting distances as you stated.

However it does back up what I have been saying about wound channel and how the 6.8 performs.
If you look at the 6.8 bullet exiting the gel and the 6.5G exiting the gel you can see that the 6.8 bullet expanded and the petals peeled back all the way as they are designed to do.
The 6.5 bullet did not expand fully as I also expected to see.

This is the difference when a bullet is designed for a specfic round, it performs as it should over a longer range, until the bullet looses the speed and energy to the point the expansion slows or stops.
As well if the bullet does not expand it will travel farther thru but do less damage to the game animal.
As the distance gets farther out and the bullet slows down this is excaberated.
Thus the 120 TSX in the 6.5 will stop expanding sooner at distacne than the 110 TSX in the 6.8
This is the point I have been trying to make about hunting with bullets designed for a higher speed than the weapon produces.

In the 6.8 the difference between the 110 TSX and 95 TTSX gives the 6.8 almost 100 yards additional where the bullet will expand as intended.
The best flavors of hunting bullets currently for the 6.8 and some designed for the 6.8 are.
120 SST Hornady, massive damage and wound channel, can cost you meat
The 110 TSX Barnes
The 95 TTSX Barnes
110 Sierra Pro Hunter
100 Nosler Accubond
110 Nosler Accubond
115 Federal Fusion
90 Sierra Gold Dot (XM68GD)
I may have missed some

Notice I left out the 110 Hornady VMax
This is because it was designed as a varmint bullet for the .270, the copper jacket is a bit too thick to be a varmint bullet in the 6.8


There are more bullets that perform well in the 6.8
Such as the 90 and 100 Sierra Hollow Points, they were designed as varmint bullets for the .270 but do work well in the 6.8

I actually have a high degree of respect for Xman's work, and have been following it since he posted it.

Very rarely do you see that many projectiles shot over different impact velocities, showing the actual expansion correlation to impact on ballistic media.

We did the same types of testing, using Perma Gel for Volume II of the reloading handbooks.

You see many similar effects with the TSX and TTSX, but different characteristics with the cup and core bullets.

The 123gr SST expanded to
.620" at 2663fps 18" penetration
.590" at 2642fps 21" penetration
.460" at 2084fps 23"
.389" at 1884fps 30"
.301" at 1799fps 26"
.264" at 1621fps 26"

It's been killing everything it's been pointed at so far, including hogs, deer, and caribou.  We didn't see any fragmentation of any of the projectiles, but we did have some core separation with the 100gr Nosler Ballistic Tip and 100gr Partition in the lower speed impact ranges.

What we saw is that you don't really need expensive monolithic solids or even premium bullets like the Partition and NBT to get good expansion and penetration, and this has been demonstrated on game over and over again.  The 129gr SST had already demonstrated murderous performance on game, but it has an older boat tail design, which limits its BC a little.  Hornady took the success of the 123gr A-MAX (which has been used to kill a lot of game itself, behaving much like a NBT, but with .510 BC), and applied the SST jacket and core metallurgy.

Which reloading manuals LRRP ?

I'm in need of an update. All I have is photocopies of a bunch of pages from an old , old Lyman, a Lee from the 90s, and a Hornady that's at least 12 years old. The copies I have is mostly data for particular cartridges, some books not having all powders and all that, and a few pointers for when I started loading in 2000.

Yes Xman does a good job. An example of what people are putting into the 6.8.

That said we have been discussing performance out of a 16 inch barrel.
What barrel are you getting 2663 out of? A 24 inch?
Hornady #9 lists max charge of only CFE223 at 2500 fps.
All other powders are 2450 fps.
This out of an 18 inch barrel.
A 6.5G 16 inch runs at under 2400 fps only loaded to max charge with CFE223.  
While out of a 16in 6.8 the 120SST runs 2550 fps.
With more than one specific powder as well.
Hornady ballistic calculator
6.5 123 SST @ 2350 fps muzzle
500 yards 1685 fps, 775 ft lb energy 62.2 inch drop

6.8 120 SST @ 2550 fps muzzle
500 yards 1681 fps, 753 ft lb energy 57 inch drop

The 120SST in the 6.8 expands to a lower speed than the 6.5G 123 SST.
Oddly you say there is not much fragmentation with the 123SST as the 120SST is known to fragment highly, and the SST series is not know for retaining weight like a bonded or monolithic bullet.  
I would like to see proof of this statement.

This shows what I have been saying.
The bullets in the 6.8 from a 16 inch barrel perform terminally better than the 6.5G with similar bullets out to minimum expansion distance.
This is because the bullets fired from the 6.5G start at a slower speed thus giving it less hunting range as well as less expanded diameter.
It takes the 6.5G out to over 400 yards before it starts to even out at 500 yards as Hornadys own ballistic calculator shows.
The statement someone made earlier that the 6.8 is only better to 175 yards is false, this proves it.

This also shows why the 6.8 works better from even shorter barrels which maintain a higher muzzle velocity then a 6.5G with same weight bullets.
Not saying the 6.5G won’t perform the 6.8SPCII just does it better.
This is why they use the 6.8 so much for hog hunting in Texas from 12 to 14 inch barrels.

A side note about accuracy with the 6.8.
Yesterday at the range I was playing with 115 Nosler Custom Comps for the first time.
With 29 grains of RL1200R at 2.285 OAL, CCI 450 Primer, Federal brass, moving 2700fps over the crono (yes 10ft out) 5 count 5 in the same hole @ 100 yards.
Yes I have the target at home.
I have to give kudos here to the Geissele SD-C trigger I just installed.
Flat incredible over the lightly self honed military triggers I have been using.  

I stand corrected. I think I may have concluded it was designed for 6.8 SPC because the first time I saw it in loaded ammo was when SSA introduced a 6.8 loading with the 110gr TSX.

Superb photo of bullet expansion vs range/impact velocity.

This shows the difference between bonded, monolithic and cup & cap at 100 and 200 yards.



The 120 SST completely separates from its jacket, retaining only 27 or 29 percent of its weight. (cant remember which but to close to look back at).
The bonded and monolithic retain over 90 percent and in the case of the 96 TTSX 100 percent.

300 yards, which is the distance most game is shot within.
The 95 TTSX will expand out to over 500 yards but by then the energy is low enough I would not consider it a clean method of harvesting game.
This is why I say its good to 375 yards.



As you can see even at 300 yards the 120 SST still comes apart.

This is why I find it difficult to believe the 123 SST hold together as was stated.

The 120 SST is a killer to be sure, it just is reported to do more damage than necessary sometimes unless your blowing up hogs.

Re the notation at the bottom of the last photo: "missed H2O jug"

What was the test medium for these bullet expansion tests?

IIRC, water jug then wet phone books.

Latter tests, in an effort to identify tumble, a thin plastic sheet was placed between the jug & books.

I'd like to make several comments on some of these posts but i'll try to refrain....  Especialy the "makes more sense" post on page 14.  I guess no comparative research was performed before engaging the PTO and spreading that load of (insert animal here) scat, good call.  But hey, this is the interwebnet.  Thanks to Yama and the other 6.8ers for taking on the 6.h8aters and clearing the air.

As far as the OP, I'll give you my path and why 6.8, keeping in mind I originally wanted a 6.5G.  Two years ago, I went whiteail hunting for the first time.  Yes, I started late, long story.  Without much time to prepare, I was tossed in a stand without any promise of seeing a thing.  I used my 20" .223 AR with Federal Fusions.  Not the best choice in caliber but I did my research, knew my rifle and it's limitations.  After all, a paring knife would be very effective at harvesting a deer had I been able to wrangle the wild beast.  Anyway, I took an amazing deer.  Since then I have hunted with a few differeent calibers and rifles.  I liked the weight of the Tikka T3 light, it's very hilly here.  I liked the feel, adjustablity, and pointablity of our other AR, a Colt 6920.  So I researched calibers in the lighter side of the MSR family.

I can only post 2000 characters at a time.... Fine

I enjoy target shooting also, so longer range, not loooooong (1000yds), sounded appealing.  The 300BLK was out.  The 7.62X39 was out.  I don't have dough to waste, I have kids and a life, the 50 Beodog was out.  6.5G, perfect.  Great for what I wanted.  After looking at parts availablity (I'm not a backordering kind of guy), options, ammo (I don't reload yet), and prices, I was less excited.  6.8 had similar #'s within my hunting and target ranges and some amazing companies to choose from with lots of options.  Barrels are readily available from people you can call and talk to in person, or email and get a response within a few, if not a couple of hours or....or post on a no BS forum and they will respond possibly even sooner.  As far as 6.8 specific parts?  WTF difference does it make when you are building a rifle.   Just different parts, same price.  Add the 6.8 stuff to the cart and check-out.  How about a new one, doesn't matter either.  Specific parts doesn't matter unless you are building one with parts you have laying around.

The deciding factor for me was the SELECTION and PRICE of IN STOCK ammunition.  Hunting rounds are the same price or cheaper (with a little research) than the wifes 243 with MORE in stock choices online.  Stores not so much but I was surprised to see Cabelas had about the same number of choices for 243 and 6.8 on my last visit.  I don't have a nice behind but I will bend over and pick up my brass if I forgot the catcher.   I can turn $.70/rd into $.35 or $.40/rd with minimal effort.  Time is money.  That is hard to beat with a stick, I don't care who you are or what stick you have.  I do have quality fair priced plinking rounds (cheap as far as a hunting caliber is concerned) and three different excellent hunting rounds in the safe.  I didn't have to backorder any of them.   Two at $.95/rd and one at $1.25/rd (TSX) and thats shipping included.  Not counting the brass offset.  Pretty good considering 308 hunting rounds can easily cost that much.      

OP, I hope your still listening to this thread......blink twice if you are.  Do you some research on what options suit you best, prices for it, and the asnwer will present itself.  I'm not telling you to buy 6.8, I"m just telling you how I came to it.  If the G is calling your name, make sure it's looking you in the eye when it's doing it.  There are forums for all things in this world.  I lurked the 6.5G and 6.8 enough to know what worked for me.

FYI I've stayed out of it too until your post.  

Yes, the 123gr SST and other projectiles were shot across the speed spectrum from a longer barrel to see what would come apart at close distances, if they would at all.  They were shot down through the speeds to find out where expansion stops, if the hunter is using expansion as a cut-off for their effective range when hunting, and to also see what kind of expansion happens between maximum impact speed, and minimum.

Hornady #9 used an 18" barrel, while Hornady #8 used a 14.5" barrel for 6.5 Grendel data.  They also bundled the 120gr GMX Mono Solid (with significantly longer bearing surface and harder material) into the data with 120gr A-MAX and 123gr A-MAX.  The max load with CFE for those pills, the GMX being the limiting pill, is 31.2gr.  If you then look at the data for the 129gr IB, SST, and Interlock SP, the max load of CFE is 31.7gr.

A lot of us looked at that data, scratching heads, and asked why the longer bearing surface 129gr pills would get a larger charge weight when compared to the 123gr, and I asked Hornady's ballisticians and engineers about this. The answer is the GMX.  So while the 129gr cup and core pills top out at 31.7gr, you can load the 123gr A-MAX and SST to that + some.  With 31.7gr of CFE behind the 123gr in my 16" barrel, I get 2532fps.  

I shot that powder/bullet combo using a pressure ladder approach, where I looked at available load data, knew the factory load performance, and watched the chronograph most importantly, so I could see where a departure in the trend line occurred.  The departure happened at 2648fps, but if I had only been looking at primers, I could have easily written that load off as good to go, when it had in fact exhibited an excursion in the pressure correlation to the charge weights.  I backed off 100fps and set that as a personal limit, but I'm more than happy with 2500fps at 31.2gr of CFE from a little 16" AR15.  I posted a very detailed analysis of that work with CFE here:

Testing CFE223 in 6.5 Grendel

Remember that Hornady's online data for the ammo lists a 16" figure, as well as 24", but the 16" is really a 14.5" barrel with a pinned muzzle-the same one used for #8 and shown in the videos when they introduced factory A-MAX ammo in ~2009.  It averages 2450fps from 16" barrels, and 2500fps from 18".  When I chrono'd it over a 20", it was 2602fps, while Hornady's site lists 2580fps for a 24".  I max out the cable length of my chronograph, so that it is at least 15ft from the muzzle, following the directions from the manufacturer.  I also take a tape measure with me as part of my range bag, to make sure I get good readings.

As to the terminal performance comparisons, notice that different mediums were used between Xman's and that done for the 6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbook Volume II, where calibrated Perma Gel was used.  As a sanity check for us, we looked at recovered (from game) 123gr SST and compared it to our Perma Gel tests, and they were spot-on as to retained weight, expansion, and overall condition of the projectile.  This was a rare occasion where the 123gr SST was just under the skin IIRC, where it had gone through the deer's thoracic cavity entirely, but was found when dressed out.  The shooter was an 8yr-old, attesting to the low-recoil advantages of these types of cartridges and the AR15.

I still haven't seen any scientific baseline evidence to show superior 6.8 hunting performance if you look at expanded projectiles in media. Anecdotal field performance points to the Grendel being more capable, based on the number and types of game that have been killed with it, along with the number of twofers.  Within common ranges of 200yds or less, there won't be a practical difference when using the same bullets, fired from the same barrel lengths.  All the energy is within very close margins, and expansion is indistinguishable from the animal's perspective.

LRRPF52

So your saying the Grendel can perform with 2 or 3 projectiles if you can hand load and find CFE223.
Otherwise it has lower numbers such as those I posted.
As well the Grendel from a 16in barrel cannot hit the speeds with a 123 SST that the 6.8 does with a 120 SST.

What the threshold of opening speed from the GMX? I will bet its much higher than is optimum for the Grendels slower speed
.
Your comment about the 8 year old I dont understand because all of these calibers have low recoil in the AR15, anything 30 cal or under, whats your point here?

When I see a disclaimer from Hornady that it was a 14.5 I will believe you, otherwise more unsupported drivel.

If you take them time to look at Xman's posts you will see he compares to recovered bullets, moot point. Every medium is just for a standard baseline.
As well the video's posted earlier say "basic gel" not ballistic gel.

So your saying if shooting deer with a Grendel go for neck shots with the 123 SST, because there is not enough penetration for a heart lung shot?

Your also admitting a Grendel needs a 18 inch barrel to hit the velocities a 16 inch and in some cases a 14.5 in a 6.8 hit.

SO:
The 6.5G needs a longer barrel to hit the same speeds.
To hit max speeds with the 6.5G one has to find one specific powder.
If you want the 6.5G to perform to this level you must hand load.
There are a limited number of the 65 or some odd 6.5 projectiles that actually work effectively in the 6.5G, actually fewer then the 6.8 has.


And your 2fers you refer yet again, guys get them hunting pig with the 6.8 and post to the forums frequently, nothing special. In feral hogs, devil beasts, one of the hardest animals to kill mind you.
In fact from the ballistic tests you refer to the 6.5G reverses at deeper penetration in medium.

.

All of the bullets we tested exhibited expansion thresholds down to ~1800fps, except for the 100gr TTSX.

Nosler Partitions 100gr and 125gr
Ballistic Tips 100gr and 120gr
SST's 123gr and 129gr
A-MAX 123gr
North Fork 120gr

There isn't a practical difference between 2450fps and 2500fps with the factory Grendel ammo from a 16" versus hand loads.  What's important for a hand loader is having room to find accuracy nodes in a wider spread of velocity and barrel time.

There has been a lot of testing with the GMX in several weight classes, which is experimental.  Pretty devastating to tissue.

The comment about the 8yr old wasn't caliber specific, since both Grendel and 6.8 provide lower recoil solutions to kids, people with injuries, smaller frames, etc.

If you're interested in 123gr SST performance on game, it has been used to DRT caribou at 275yds, and roll over kicken chicken caribou at 400yds, both from an 18" AR15 carbine in Alaska, using the factory load.  It expands just as well as the 6.8 SST.  Hornady wouldn't purposely handicap the projectile.

The velocities don't really change the expansion thresh range much since the BC's are so high when comparing 14.5" to 16".  With factory ammo averaging 2500fps from 18" guns, it shouldn't be hard for people to see that it clocks 2450fps from 16" guns, and 2350fps from 14.5" guns.

Any bullet trap medium is not a standard.  A standard has some very specific parameters, like calculated and calibrated gel at certain temps.

Nobody has brought up neck shots.  Most Grendel real world hunting involves complete pass throughs.  Exceptions I have seen are frontal shots, or rear shots, with a lot of damage and DRT, which is consistent with most hi power rifles that shoot substantial bullet weights at moderate to high speeds. Nothing surprising there.

There are other powders that will generate those speeds.  LVR being one. AA 2520 being another.  You're constructing straw man statements from thin air, when there could be a gentlemanly discussion.  The fact is this:  You have been told for years that the 6.8 SPC has a hunting advantage over the Grendel.

I'm showing you real world data that demonstrates this to be false.

Instead of saying, "Hey, it looks like it might have an edge."

You respond with comments using "unsupported drivel", "BS", and personal attacks.  I understand.  You've been lied to over and over until it seemed like reality, then someone checks those claims, does a lot of testing and research covering years, and concludes differently. The research also included years of real world terminal performance on game, at distances up to 400yds on large game.  Nope, that isn't good enough. Jump back on old arguments, double down, use strawmen logical fallacies, really bad arguing techniques, and dig in.

I got it man.  

Xman's Images, top notch.

The 6.8's 95 gr TTSX is SMOKING!!!

I saw 2 50 count boxes of them at Sportsmans Warehouse, $31 each, I picked them up, a little on the pricey side.

110 Accubonds in 6.8 look good too.  I was shocked at the pictures of the 120 SST in the 6.8, from threads I've seen at the 6.8 forum, it's been smoking Pigs, I would of though they held together at a higher weight.

6.8 has a GREAT Monolithic with the 95 TTSX
Sweet Bonded with the 110 AB
Good priced and shooting regular type bullet in the 120 SST.  Maybe this one can double for extended steel plate shooting(for BC and Price).

Yes, I'd like to see  6.5G 123 SST test images.  Also thoughts on downrange differences in the 123 SST and 129 SST(ballistics vs game performance), I have not shot any of the 129 SSTs, or seen them on the LGS shelf.  I love the 123 AMAX, and Nosler 123 CC in the G for non-game shooting.

In the G, what bullets stack up to the 6.8's 95 TTSX and 110 AB?

Bullet performance is high on my list for a caliber choice, Probably higher then exterior Ballistics, Mechanical efficiency(Jamming, smooth running, etc.), and Availability of parts and ammo.

Big thanks for the data shared so far.

There are too many variables to waste time in a "my-handload-is-faster-than-your-handload" pissing match. Better to stick with factory ammo where at least the makers are tempered by product liability concerns.

For example, one can boost velocity by loading to higher pressures in a barrel with very thin lands. The trade-off is that thinner lands wear faster than fatter lands, as well as other parts, but this approach counts on the fact that the average guy never really puts enough rounds through a gun to ever get near its durability limits or to wear out a barrel.

I'll wait and see what Harrison's best load is in his Six5, and then I'd like to see it duplicated in the 6.5 Grendel with pressure testing. He just might be on to something.

Regarding hunting, which I still don't care what guys prefer; the more shooters, the better. Deer and pigs are easy to kill. Use .223. Use 7.62x39. Use shotgun slugs. Use an arrow. Whatever. Shot placement is everything. HTR likes to shoot hogs in the neck, for example; any round will do for head and neck shots.

But I do want to try this reality check with Yama and the others, to see if we're dealing with reasonable people or if they're way deep in the weeds of FanBoy World: Out of 200 deer shot in exactly the same place, 100 with a 6.5 Grendel and 100 with a 6.8 SPC, how many will the 65G kill and how many will the 68SPC kill?

Rebuttal in red.

The 6.8 is a superior hunting round within the limits of both cartridges.
The 6.5G is capable, I never said it wasnt.
Its just not as good the 6.8.

The 6.5G operates at slower speeds.
It actually has a lower number of available projectiles that operate within the parameters of its speed and energy then the 6.8.

6.5G parts are less available.
It has less industry support.
It has less factory ammo choices and availability.
It requires a barrel that is 2 inches longer to generate the same speed and energy as the 6.8 with a like weight bullet.
It is only capable of 400 yards on game just as the 6.8 is.

What is the advantage of the 6.5G over the 6.8?
There isnt any!!!

With deer they would both kill the same, coyotes and antelope as well. That has been the point all along. With the misinformation about the 6.8 falling out of the sky at 175 yards.
The Grendel is no better weapon to 500 yards than the 6.8. It only carries a minor windage advantage past that, where the 6.8 drops less due to its higher velocity. The ballistics charts support this.
Why build or buy a rifle that's harder to get parts and ammo for when they both do the same thing?
That has a lesser selection of factory ammo on store shelves, since you want to stick to factory ammo.
That has less industry support?
That has a weaker design due to the platform? (bolt and barrel hoop, yes 9510 bolts help but with both running the new steel the 6.8 is still stronger.)
Or that has 5 different chamber reamers in circulation where the 6.8 has been standardized by the industry to SPCII even if not by sammi yet.
How in the world does that make any sense at all?
Now if your killing pigs, the hardest bastards in the world to kill, zombie feral hogs. The 6.8 is the better choice. Because you need every advantage you can get.
Your own 6.5G guy posted the ballistic video supporting this.

Edit: And black bear to my prefer a 6.8 as well as pigs.

You're looking at muzzle energy, not on-game energy.  Both factory SST loads clock in the mid 2400fps range.  Even with a 100fps advantage from an 18" ARP barrel, you're in the mid 2500fps range.

Here's a thread on hand-loaded 120gr SST's, as well as factory ammo average from ARP barrels.  120gr SST Factory and Hand Load Performance








So:

20" barrel 120gr SST = 2560fps to "close to 2600fps"

16" barrel = factory load at 2460fps, hand loads average 2450fps

18" ARP barrel = 2587fps with factory SST, 12ft from muzzle

Run the numbers and you'll see why I chose the Grendel.  I have expansion threshold out farther.  My factory load exceeds the 6.8 factory load as the distance increases, even compared to longer barrels.  So much for the "Grendel needs a longer barrel" claim.  Funny how I can reach those same speeds and still be 100fps away from "warm" with hand loads.

I've mass-produced my 2500fps load and shot it extensively, with excellent 500yd-600yd accuracy.  I don't need an expensive bonded bullet or solid to get reliable expansion or full penetration.  It's only 40-50fps faster than the factory load, which isn't huge in downrange performance.

A more accurate statement would be that you need an 18" or 20" 6.8 to achieve what a Grendel does at 275yds, as long as the Grendel doesn't hand load.  That same load then doubles as an affordable target load, and I've shot the factory 123gr Hornady out to 1200yds with POA = POI for the solution I got when I ran the data into my ballistics program.  That isn't happening with any 6.8 factory loads, and you have to step into some expensive bullets as a reloader to get even close to .500 BC's.

Hunting advantage = Grendel
Target advantage = Grendel

I concede, everyone's right, you live in Egypt because your in de-nile.
I'm done debating what you post, your just cluelessly blinded by the shine off your Grendel koolaid jug my friend.

Yes, cool aid is doing it to me.  Not a long-researched quest into which one makes more sense.

You mentioned antelope.  6.5 Grendel has killed antelope out to 752yds with the 123gr A-MAX.

Once again enough of the puffers BS ,, OP didn't ask about the gerndal and came back to say he didn't want this debate

Hmm. A few pages back you said:

Because desire often overrides practical considerations. Remember, several years ago the availability of 6.8 parts and ammo was also pretty slim. By your reasoning, back then it made little sense for shooters to opt for 6.8 rifles. But, despite all the drawbacks, their determination to stick with the caliber caused industry support of 6.8 to gradually increase to where it is today.

Why do you want to deny the same potential success to 6.5 Grendel? It's not as if having more 6.5 shooters is going to cause the supply of 6.8 guns, ammo, and parts to dry up. Isn't there room for both to exist and flourish?

It seems to me that the pertinent question isn't whether 6.8 bolts are stronger than 6.5 bolts, but whether 6.5 bolts are strong enough. If the answer to the latter is yes, that's all that matters.

There was a time when 6.8 also had a multitude of different chambers being marketed. IMO, this is a minor issue, one that should resolve itself if buyers insist on SAAMI-spec Grendel chambers, just as customer demand for SPCII chambers resulted in that becoming de facto standard for 6.8 firearms.

Not true. The only thing that video shows is that the 6.8 TSX load has greater energy transfer than the 6.5 TSX load at a distance of 10 feet. It does not show the energy transfer at typical hunting distances, nor does it provide comparative data for other bullet types.

But, for the sake of discussion, let's assume every 6.8 load delivers more energy on target than every 6.5 load, at all distances. You can't kill critters deader than dead. So, as long as 6.5 has sufficient energy transfer on target, the difference relative to 6.8 is only academic.

Let's cut the bullshit. You want the truth, let's see if you can handle the damn truth.

Let's say everything about the G that LRRP and the G man says is fact so far as velocity / energy / numbers goes ( we'll let LRRP vouch for it ), but nothing he says about the 6.8 is fact, throw out his stats and opinions on the 6.8.

Let's say that everything I, Yama, and the other 68ers are saying about the 6.8 is fact so far as velocity / energy / numbers go ( all this I can vouch for ), but nothing we say about the 6.5 G is fact, throw out our stats and opinions on the 6.5G.

Here's the truth.

There isn't much more than a hill of beans in favor of one cartridge or the other out to 1000 yards or so if the shooter is loading each to it's full potential with the best projectiles for the job. In fact, with that in mind, neither is enough of a better round from muzzle to target distance to negate the positives of the other. Neither is capable of taking game farther than the other when they're loaded to full potential, and the game animal will never know the difference.

That is the truth, can you handle that ?

Now that we've established that, your choice comes down to a few things.

Cheap long range, available store bought ammo. ( This goes to the Grendel )

Cheap available hard hitting game ammo. ( This goes to 6.8, more factory loadings )

Total factory loaded choices. ( 6.8 wins here )

Availability overall for all offerings. ( 6.8 wins )

Steel case plinking ammo ( Grendel this one )

Availability of parts, barrels, number of manufacturers / quantity . ( 6.8 wins )

Ammo loaded in a full production cycle of 150 million military rounds annually by ATK Federal ( 6.8 )

Other ammo / hunting ( fusion/ GD / being produced in high quantity by ATK due to the contract. (6.8 )


Why do you want a 6.8 OP, when there is really little difference ? It's doing nothing but growing more popular every day, more mil units are using it, the DEA is using it, and more agencies are looking into adopting it.  New ammo, projectiles, etc are coming on line constantly. There are other big players looking into producing it.

A steel case loading is in the works, but , we can't count that. It took the G several years and the G was ahead of us in line by a year, plus the case is already basically there for them to make much easier. We will see it though, but it depends on market and politics as to when.

"More" than the two Arab units previously discussed? What other military units are using it? Puhleeez. Get back to me when an army adopts it to replace 5.56x45. Then I promise to be duly impressed.

Yeah, and when I pointed that out on 68forums a couple years ago, there were howls of indignant protest. I was slammed for being "too negative," that 6.8 "wasn't 6.5" and steel case 6.8 would hit the market in 2013 as promised. Guess who was right.

No, not more than two.

Two more and 150 million more rounds per year than the Grendel has.

Yep, you were right, and I will always admit when I am. Also if you can find the thread, I think I made a bet with you, so I owe you whatever it was.

See, I'm honest, and I don't bullshit. I don't try and pick words or parts of sentences to take them out of context to make an invalid point either.

I may be wrong from time to time, but I will never lie.

YOU REALLY ARE AS CLUELESS AS EVERYONE STATES.

Enjoy you twisted perception of reality.
Enjoy your G diddy dog zilla.

Your a wack job sir.

I can show you crono proof of 2550 out of a 16 inch Bison with a 120 SST.
So really just keep your visions of grandur where they belong, in your head.
All of the things have been addressed already that you just put up.
But you keep regressing
I can see why they call you the puffer.
So yea, sometimes you can debate someone just so long and ya have to just say ya know what.
A box of summers eve is just a box of summers eve.
Ya cant change its mind or get it to reason beacuse its just a box of douche.
So enjoy your fallacies.

The Grendel is like the ugly girl that wants to be prom queen
Shes got talent, but not as much as the competition and shes just not attractive enough
So mass produce your ammo and your pipe dreams.
The 6.8 is the publics choice
Also the industries choice
As well it gets the crown

Yes, the 6.8 does a better job on harder to kill game.
Are you shocked I said I dont think the Grendel is a bad round?

THIS....IT DOESN'T GET ANY MORE TRUE THAN THIS.

Thats why your on the 6.8 team Pav, you cant have those kind of morals and be a Grendalien.

I couldn't agree more....I'm sure the puffer is getting ready to blow.

SO why did LWRC use the 6.8 and not the 6.5G for their contract cartridge. I mean, they could have used either right.

Why does Barrett offer only 5.56 and 6.8 in their REC7 and not the Grendel?
They build some of the most badass military rifles on the planet, why 6.8 and not 6.5G?

Because someone in the middle east PAID THEM AND ATK A LOT OF MONEY! Not because it is such a great military cartridge!

PERIOD!

That was dumb.

Of course they paid them alot of money.
Why didnt they build a 6.5 weapon instead of the 6.8 weapon.
The farking money would have been the same Einstein

A little history: Barrett was the very first manufacturer, in 2003, of a prototype 6.8-AR they hoped would be 6.8 SPC contract rifles for the U.S. military. I was there from Day 1, when Doc Roberts first hit the interwebs with his strident promotion of the 6.8 SPC and showed photos of the Barrett and his 6.8 gel tests. Both Barrett and Remington salivated at the thought of making a ton of money on fat U.S. govt contracts.

The 6.5 Grendel came along six months later, and didn't have that "Special Forces!" hype surrounding it. Plus, it was invented by a little David, and has had to fight the Goliaths of the industry to this day. The fact that Barnaul is mass-producing steel-case 6.5 Grendel in 2014 is nothing short of miraculous.

OK, let---me---explain---it---to---you.

It is called "free market capitalism". In free market capitalism people get to buy what they like/want without anybody telling them what the should or have to buy. For example:

Client A (Yama_Raja or some rich middle eastern gentlemen) likes 6.8 SPC and places order with vendor (AR Performance for Yama_Raja and LWRC for rich middle eastern gentlemen). When vendor delivers goods client pays vendor. Everybody is happy (except possibly LRRPF52 because he likes the 6.5 Grendel and proselytize it. He really likes those sexy sleek long slender bullets.

Client B (LRRPF52), however likes 6.5 Grendel places order with Alexander Arms. When vendor delivers goods client pays vendor. Everybody is happy (except for Yama_Raja, he is pissed because LRRPF52 bought a 6.5 Grendel instead of 6.8SPC. You see, he really like those sexy short squatly bullets and validation is always a good thing.

The one odd thing about free markets is the the "best" does not always prevail in the market place. For example the Sony BetaMax verse the VHS. Sony BetaMax was better technology but was proprietary while VHS was an open standard.  Kind of like how the 6.5 Grendel started out as a proprietary standard while the 6.8 SPC was an open standard.

So as I stated in my first post:


Peace Brother

Thanks for the history lesson.
So what, it still does not address the question.
Your comments did nothing to address the question.

Why do 2 companies with contracts with multiple contracts with governments use the 6.8 and not the 6.5.
So they are in it for the money, they are  in business.
That said if 2 companies with all the support and mony they have could have used any caliber they wanted to produce what they needed to fill the contracts.
Why did they chose the 6.8?
Why not something else even if not the Grendel.
I mean think about it, they can use anything they want.
The money is still the same.
SO why did they use the 6.8 over the 6.5?????
WHY????

They get the same FAT payday as you so aptly put it, no matter what the caliber, as long as it does the job.
As long as it meets the standards.
Why the 6.8 over the 6.5G???
I mean by what you guys say the 6.8 failed, its substandard by your accounts.
Its out classed by your beloved 6.5G according to you.

So why in the hell would they be using the 6.8, the audacity of them.

Tell me why? Its not the 6.5G or any other current cartridge they are using?

Could it possibly be the the 6.8SPCII is the best damm cartridge for the job?
Nah it makes no sense they would do that.
There must be some sinster plan.

Why would LEO agencies, major companies, governments get behind a substandard cartridge when there are better options just sitting there?

Why would the 6.8 survive the fubar move by Remington, they sure didnt help it any as you suggest.

Why, because its the best god da** caliber for a 12in to 16 in M4 style AR15 carbine, thats why.
From the suburbs to the sahara.
All this other crap is just that.

I don't recall what your proposed bet was, but it's not important. I take no pleasure in the lengthy delay in bringing 6.8 steel case ammo to market. While I generally like to be proven right, this is one case where I would rather have been wrong.

I never thought you were dishonest.

See I don't care that you bought a Grendel.
I don't care who buys a Grendel.
As long their choice isn't filled with intentional or misinformed bad information.
What I don't want is for someone to be disillusioned when they don't reload and can't find ammo locally after spending their hard earned cash listening to drivel and giving up on black rifles.
Because that's what would happen around here, isn't one box on the shelf anywhere.

You want to build a 6.5G, then build one. Want to buy one buy one.
But do it with a decision based on facts, true current facts.

Knowing the industry it supporting something similar that makes ownership a bit easier

Do you have statistical data on the number of "harder to kill" game shot with each round, which shows that 6.8 actually has a higher ratio of killed versus wounded animals? Or is that a claim you can't substantiate?

Not in the least. After all, you previously agreed that 6.8 and 6.5 perform pretty much the same on game at typical hunting distances.