I have an SPR which shoots like a dream. However, it seems to lack something in range and terminal ballastics. In trying to find the 'missing link', I happened upon the Alexander Arms 6.5 Grendel. I have been very interested in the Grendel for some time. When compared to the Remington 6.8 SPC, I think it offers superior performance (at least from the data that I have seen). It shoots a 123 gr round that retains 500lbs energy at 800 yds from an AR style rifle!!! However, I have held off on picking one up due to the limited niche market. It is only available through 2-4 dealers that I am aware of. Ammo isn't readily (same dealers) available. It seems that the Grendel just never found favor anywhere. So, I remain a distant fan and reluctant to buy one as I worry that I will get stuck with a very expensive decorative item.

Should one consider the Grendel as something that will be around or do you think it will disappear from commercial availability?

The last thing I want is a rifle that I can't find ammo for (I don't reload).

Grendel is alive and well.  A major ammunition importer has gotten behind the round and inexpensive boxer primed brass cased ammunition will be appearing on dealers shelves this fall.  Distribution of the company is extremely good, you will be able to buy ammo anywhere.  As Grendel cases can be formed from 7.62x39mm cases it will always be possible to make ammo.  Grendel will continue to get better and better, much going on behind the scenes with the round.....
currently ammo, cases, dies and reloading info is all available.

the official announcement of this new ammo will be in the Guns&Ammo AR-15 annual coming out in a couple months....

hope this helps

Quoted: Grendel is alive and well.  A major ammunition importer has gotten behind the round and inexpensive boxer primed brass cased ammunition will be appearing on dealers shelves this fall.  Distribution of the company is extremely good, you will be able to buy ammo anywhere.  As Grendel cases can be formed from 7.62x39mm cases it will always be possible to make ammo.  Grendel will continue to get better and better, much going on behind the scenes with the round..... currently ammo, cases, dies and reloading info is all available. the official announcement of this new ammo will be in the Guns&Ammo AR-15 annual coming out in a couple months.... hope this helps

I did not vote for one or other other because I see the application of both the 6.5G and the 6.8SPC. There are several major ammo manufactures that are suppose to come on line with 6.8SPC ammo.

I'm currently only interested in a 6.5G in 16.5-20", which (as far as I know) not available. I already have a 6.8SPC in 16.5" and I'm looking at at least a new set of twins.

Quoted: Quoted: Grendel is alive and well.  A major ammunition importer has gotten behind the round and inexpensive boxer primed brass cased ammunition will be appearing on dealers shelves this fall.  Distribution of the company is extremely good, you will be able to buy ammo anywhere.  As Grendel cases can be formed from 7.62x39mm cases it will always be possible to make ammo.  Grendel will continue to get better and better, much going on behind the scenes with the round..... currently ammo, cases, dies and reloading info is all available. the official announcement of this new ammo will be in the Guns&Ammo AR-15 annual coming out in a couple months.... hope this helps I did not vote for one or other other because I see the application of both the 6.5G and the 6.8SPC. There are several major ammo manufactures that are suppose to come on line with 6.8SPC ammo. I'm currently only interested in a 6.5G in 16.5-20", which (as far as I know) not available. I already have a 6.8SPC in 16.5" and I'm looking at at least a new set of twins.

There is a 19.2" version of the Grendel "Overwatch"



and a 20" version of the Grendel "Hunter"

Quoted: Grendel is alive and well.  A major ammunition importer has gotten behind the round and inexpensive boxer primed brass cased ammunition will be appearing on dealers shelves this fall.  Distribution of the company is extremely good, you will be able to buy ammo anywhere.  As Grendel cases can be formed from 7.62x39mm cases it will always be possible to make ammo.  Grendel will continue to get better and better, much going on behind the scenes with the round..... currently ammo, cases, dies and reloading info is all available. the official announcement of this new ammo will be in the Guns&Ammo AR-15 annual coming out in a couple months.... hope this helps

+1

The 6.5 Grendel also fills a niche that needed filling (that the 6.8 cannot fill).  Looks like the Grendel will likely replace the 6mm PPC as a primary match cartridge.

Quoted: The 6.5 Grendel also fills a niche that needed filling (that the 6.8 cannot fill).  Looks like the Grendel will likely replace the 6mm PPC as a primary match cartridge.

Only to still be beaten by the 260 Remington, 6mm-250, 6mm XC, and 6mm BR.

SWO -

Will any of those rounds you listed fit in an AR-15 sized package?

pcurtis -

CSS had plans prior to Christmass to build a SPR style rifle - they decided against it since KAC parts were/are pretty scarce.  I know you have several rifles from MSTN - I would love to see WES get in the 6.5 game - I would buy one from him in a heartbeat.

Spooky

Will the Grendel become extinct???  

If it does, it will die right after the 6.8 SPC dies.

Here to stick around:
It is a multi-role versatile rifle cartridge.
It has backing by F-class shooters.
It stands to take the cake with AR competitions surpassing all else.
It is extreme long range capable.
It improves on 5.56 lethality, range, wind drift, and drop. (also better than 7.62 nato except short-med range energy delivered)
It has backorders on production.
It has plenty of ammo available + two new ammo suppliers.

The 6.5 Grendel is here to stay and not remain an obscure cartridge like others.
The 6.5 Grendel has not had large manufacturer ad campaigns but is doing as well as or better than other new cartridges (eg. 6.8 SPC).

Quoted: Here to stick around: It is a multi-role versatile rifle cartridge. It has backing by F-class shooters. It stands to take the cake with AR competitions surpassing all else. It is extreme long range capable. It improves on 5.56 lethality, range, wind drift, and drop. (also better than 7.62 nato except short-med range energy delivered) It has backorders on production. It has plenty of ammo available + two new ammo suppliers. The 6.5 Grendel is here to stay and not remain an obscure cartridge like others. The 6.5 Grendel has not had large manufacturer ad campaigns but is doing as well as or better than other new cartridges (eg. 6.8 SPC).

If you read the article in the latest special edition G&A AR15 magazine that is on the stands, there is an article comparing the 6.5 Grendel to the 6.8SPC.

I think anyone who reads it will find the 6.5 Grendel superior in everyway.

Yet, all I have heard much about industry/military wise is the 6.8 SPC.

Quoted: Yet, all I have heard much about industry/military wise is the 6.8 SPC.

The 6.8 was developed within the military on private funds from remington, barret, ect. The grendel is a commercial round, developed for the private market.

I want one...


20" hunter... Must resist!

Quoted: ...I think anyone who reads it will find the 6.5 Grendel superior in everyway. ....

Flight Ballistics?  Grendle 6.5 wins hands down

Terminal Ballistics?  6.8 SPC is the winner  (It was developed with terminal ballistics very much on the mind and yes 6.5 was tried before they settled on 6.8).

Ammo Availabiliy?  Neither is great, slight advantage to the 6.5 at the current time.

Magazine Availablity?  I'll put money on the fact it's easier to get 6.8 magazines

Barrel & Bolt Availablity (i.e. repair or build your own) Hands down the 6.8 is easier to get.  The 6.5 is a propriety system and you can only get it from a limited number of dealers.  I can get the 6.8 from a variety of dealers inexpensive chrome lined from Model 1, high end chrome lined from Barret, and Stainless Steel match grade from places like MSTN, PRI, and AR15Barrels.com. Then build the upper the way I want.

Beware of what you read in any G&A publication, they frequently publish erroneous information.

As long as someone's pushing it, it will live.

Wolf and Lapua seem to think it's here to stay ;) To say that the Grendel has a "slight advantage" in the ammo department is a pretty strong understatement.

As for the 6.8, claimed superior terminal ballistics don't account for shit if you can't buy ammo or brass, lol. I also would like to see some ballistics test with bullets other then 123 and 144gr Lapua FMJBT's that exhibit the overpenetration that's been credited to the Grendel. The ammo used in civilian rifles isn't bound by LOAC, I wonder what some of my 100, 120gr Nosler BT's would do to a block compared to the 6.8?
As for availability, I agree, the 6.8 is easier to be had by more dealers then the Grendel and at a cheaper price. With Wolf coming on line now with MUCH cheaper brass cased ammo for the Grendel in the very near future hopefully that will change. I really wish the 6.8 could have made it, I would have liked to have had one but I think all the nails are in place on that coffin.

6.5, 6.8, etc... It won't catch on unless a large steady supply of ammo hits the mainstream market.

Quoted: 6.5, 6.8, etc... It won't catch on unless a large steady supply of ammo hits the mainstream market.

6.5 is pretty much readily available, it's the upper receivers at $1K that was driving people away.  6.8 has no ammo available, to speak of, but you can get an upper from M1S for around $500.

The 6.5 Hunter may be the answer.

With the Wolf and Lapua ammo announcements, you bet it is here to stay.  

AA is cranking out uppers as fast as possible, and Speedy Gonzales is beginning to get orders for BR and F Class custom Grendel rifles.  

With no problems in getting brass, the cartridge is already viable for any handloaders.  

I bought 8 new boxes of 6.8 of dealers shelf last week. My new order coming in two weeks. I dont think ammo is going to be a problem. -Justin

The Grendal would be way more successful if AA allowed other manufacturers build/load it too.

Quoted: The Grendal would be way more successful if AA allowed other manufacturers build/load it too.

Boy isn't that the truth.  If they'd let a couple of reputable sources (i.e. GA precision)  have a couple of reamers it'd be the "Cat Ass".

Quoted: Quoted: The Grendal would be way more successful if AA allowed other manufacturers build/load it too. Boy isn't that the truth.  If they'd let a couple of reputable sources (i.e. GA precision)  have a couple of reamers it'd be the "Cat Ass".

If you want a bolt gun just contact SGY Rifles www.sgyrifles.com - Speedy Gonzales.  In addition to world-class BR rifles, he builds hunting rifles and tactical rifles as well.  Just no ARs.  

The license fee AA charges is peanuts, they just want to assure quality and standards are maintained.  

Quoted: Quoted: The Grendal would be way more successful if AA allowed other manufacturers build/load it too. Boy isn't that the truth.  If they'd let a couple of reputable sources (i.e. GA precision)  have a couple of reamers it'd be the "Cat Ass".

Or sell parts to some of the other vendors here:  MSTN, ADCO, etc.  Right now CSS seems a bit slow (I know production issues) and unable to fit customer's exact desires like MSTN and ADCO can...  As for what I would want my 6.5G to look like...



Spooky

In Reality , it doesn't  matter if the Grendel is a "better" cartridge than the SPC.

The Free Enterprise system and simple Market Dynamics will decide which Triumphs.

And as Forest  alluded to , the 6.8SPC may already have the edge.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The Grendal would be way more successful if AA allowed other manufacturers build/load it too. Boy isn't that the truth.  If they'd let a couple of reputable sources (i.e. GA precision)  have a couple of reamers it'd be the "Cat Ass". Or sell parts to some of the other vendors here:  MSTN, ADCO, etc.  Right now CSS seems a bit slow (I know production issues) and unable to fit customer's exact desires like MSTN and ADCO can...  As for what I would want my 6.5G to look like... images.snapfish.com/343%3C27%3B523232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E2336%3D4%3B7%3D575%3DXROQDF%3E23238%3B548%3B%3A%3C5ot1lsi Spooky

Grendel GDMR - factory rifle.    

I fired that very rifle here in Houston on two occasions.  Ran like a champ and was damn accurate.  Great balance and top-o-the line parts.  

Quoted: In Reality , it doesn't  matter if the Grendel is a "better" cartridge than the SPC. The Free Enterprise system and simple Market Dynamics will decide which Triumphs. And as Forest  alluded to , the 6.8SPC may already have the edge.

Based on what?  More uppers sold, brass availability, ammo availability, more rounds downrange, or based on comments here at the tiny market representation of AR15.com?  

Further, why does one have to triumph??  I simply don't understand this mentality that there is only room for one.  In David Fortier's (Gunwritr) article in the Book of the AR15, he notes that they get compared, but, in reality, serve different purposes.  

In the AR15.com tradition, get both!!!!!!!  

Quoted: The Grendal would be way more successful if AA allowed other manufacturers build/load it too.

+1

Quoted: In Reality , it doesn't  matter if the Grendel is a "better" cartridge than the SPC. The Free Enterprise system and simple Market Dynamics will decide which Triumphs. And as Forest  alluded to , the 6.8SPC may already have the edge.

Since this has been disscussed and agrued for way too long, I didn't vote. Both the 6.8SPC & 6.5G have their place. For CQB and mid-range for me personally its the 6.8SPC no question. Past that the 6.5G needs to be considered. But that drives the question of other calibers, if you really need greater than 500M+ capability (is it 1000M or more),  why not just go with (civiy applications) .338L or (Mil) the Barrett (.50Cal).  No, they are are not M16/M4 capable, but both more effective than the 6.8SPC or 6.5G That is my opinion and only my opinion. Both are in the current LE and Mil food chain.

Quoted: Further, why does one have to triumph??  I simply don't understand this mentality that there is only room for one.  In David Fortier's (Gunwritr) article in the Book of the AR15, he notes that they get compared, but, in reality, serve different purposes.   In the AR15.com tradition, get both!!!!!!!

In a way, I already did. I have a MSTN built SPR (along with the M4 for <300m). Then, I saw the Grendel. That was my basis for comparison. 400-800m work. I would sell my SPR in a heartbeat for the ballistic advantage the Grendel offers, but didn't want to get stuck with a niche gun that dropped off the radar screen after a few years. I don't want to be stuck with a firearm that is hard to impossible to find ammo, mags, and parts for.

I've been agonizing over this for months. The 6.5 would suit my style of shooting i.e. 200-900 yds.Also I'm worried that because the 6.8 looks dead as far as mil. use goes there won't be much futher development of bullets other than for deer hunting. The 6.5 has plenty of match bullets already, it would be easier to sellect the one with the best terminal ballistics. Lastly the 6.8 brass problem seems to be almost eternal. Have I talked myself into a decision? Almost.

Quoted: Have I talked myself into a decision? Almost.

Me too.

Quoted: ...In David Fortier's (Gunwritr) article in the Book of the AR15, he notes that they get compared, but, in reality, serve different purposes.

That is an excellent point.  While they are both 6.x mm cartridges they have different intended purposes

In the AR15.com tradition, get both!!!!!!!

Wish I could - I only have the budget currently for 1  - and mine's going to be a 6.8 (barrel has been ordered).  The range advantage of the 6.5 really does nothing for me, perhaps if I lived in a land of wide open spaces it would have been different.

Quoted: Quoted: 6.5, 6.8, etc... It won't catch on unless a large steady supply of ammo hits the mainstream market. 6.5 is pretty much readily available, it's the upper receivers at $1K that was driving people away.  6.8 has no ammo available, to speak of, but you can get an upper from M1S for around $500. The 6.5 Hunter may be the answer.

Thats absolutely why i dont have one yet.
The 5.56 will do everything for me the 6.5 will do, at half the cost.
If the costs come down on the 6.5, I will have one. And most likely sel my 5.56 varmint upper.

anyone get the impression all the 6.8 ammo is going down the 2 way firing line in south asia?


if i saw a grendel do the terrible things to jello that 6.8 does, i'd buy one.

Quoted: if i saw a grendel do the terrible things to jello that 6.8 does, i'd buy one.

Then just load a Grendel with a varmint bullet like was used for the jello pics you've seen for the 6.8....   A 95gr VMAX will make it look like a little hand grenade went off in the gelatin.

I've read the threads about Rem. having so much trouble with heat treating 6.8 brass i.e. one batch too soft next one too brittle. Is this something that's specific to 6.8 or a broader QC problem? Hornady doesn't have it's own brass mill as far as I know so they are relying on someone else for small runs of specialty brass i.e. 405 win. In 6.5, lapua brass is about as good as it gets. Wolf? who knows what that will be like. As far as I know they have never made brass cased boxer primed before. Upper prices aren't that different between the two. 6.5 Hunter @ $695 compared to Bravo Co. @ $500 add $40 something to that for a mag. $160 extra seems cheap when you get a walther bbl. compared to mod. 1 sales even if it's made by ER Shaw. The 6.5 AWS compares well in price with 6.8 uppers from ADCO and MSTN.

Quoted: Wolf? who knows what that will be like.

I just don't see Wolf as a viable option in a Grendel.  But I guess if you want to put many hundreds of rounds down range, it is cheap, but I wouldn't expect any type of accuracy out of it, especially at extended ranges - 600-1000 yds.  I just wouldn't see myself putting hundreds of rounds down range with a rifle that is essentially a precision platform, so the money saved, vs. the accuracy drop makes no sense to me.

Druncuncas wrote: "If i saw a grendel do the terrible things to jello that 6.8 does, i'd buy one."

Druncuncas, I'm wondering if the impressive gel test results being used to market the 6.8 SPC are actually supportable outside of the prototype stage, in the real world.

David Fortier writes about the 6.8 SPC in the 2005 issue of Guns & Ammo's Book of the AR15: "One thing to keep in mind is that you cannot achieve the listed 2,800 fps from a 24-inch barrel with available powders while staying within safe pressure limits. Expect to achieve 2,500 to 2,600 fps from an 18-inch barrel" (p.42). Hodgdon's reloading data gives us a 6.8 115gr bullet at a max velocity of 2608 fps at a pressure of 53,300 psi from a 24-inch barrel (see www.hodgdon.com/data/rifle/68mm-rem-spc.php).

So if we're getting 2,600 fps from an 18-inch, or even a 24-inch barrel, the gel test photos that have been used for marketing that show a 6.8 115gr Hornady OTM doing 2697 fps from a 16-inch barrel need further explanation. Was it fired from an AR platform or a test barrel? And do we have pressure data? Do we actually have production 6.8 SPC ammo that is getting 2697 fps from a 16-inch barrel?

Before believing that every 6.8 SPC round will exhibit terminal effects as marketed, I think we need to have the discrepancies explained.

On the flip side, I am as eager as you are to see Grendel gel test results, but I haven't seen any. And it's not likely we will ever be able to see the results SOCOM recorded last July with the 144gr Lapua FMJBT; they specifically forbade any leaks of the results for marketing purposes. As for gel tests with a variety of other 6.5  bullets, if we could get Bill Alexander to stop making guns and play with jello for a bit, I'd like to see that as much as you!

Until then, I think we're all mature enough to know that 6.5mm and .270 caliber bullets both have a solid terminal-ballistics history of killing big stuff quite dead. Quibbling about which bullet has a fraction of a percentage more permanent wound channel than the other is missing the big picture of wound ballistics. Many wound ballisticians will remind us that the real-world differences between 9mm and .357 SIG and .40 S&W and .45 ACP, for example, are largely academic; what matters is shot placement and your adversary's state of mind and motivation.

And I stand by my earlier arguments that you can name the desired terminal effect you'd like to see in gelatin and one can engineer a bullet to meet those specs. It is done all the time in the industry. As a matter of fact, Hornady did just that with their 6.8 bullet! You are just not going to see that much difference in the real world between similarly-constructed 6.8 and 6.5 bullets of similar weights. Are you?

John

TWL wrote: "Minuscule variations in wound cavity or neck-depth before yaw. . . . It seems like 'grasping at straws' in an attempt to justify."

TWL, apparently, our posts "crossed" in the ether, but, yes, that's some of what I'm trying to say.

John

I am starting to think that I may be parting with my SPR Mod0 very soon.

I like the looks of the 6.5 grendel better, I also think it has the ability to have several other wildcats based on the cartridge (hard hitting 357 and 40 caliber magnum pistol class) all using the same bolt.  I think the downfall will be the tight control of the "proprietary cartridge"  If they allowed the reamer manufactures to sell the reamers (Manson pulled their reamer at Alexander Arms request) I think the cartridge would take off.

$.02

Both 6.8 and 6.5 are wildcats at this point and can vanish never to be seen again without being missed much. Both need adoption on a large scale in either the Commercial, LEO or .Mil sector to Survive


Designer cartridges come and go, but at the end of the day I think most people will stick with 5.56 and 7.62 NATO.

TWl, I was under the impression that the new followers cured the feeding problems, is this still an issue? I'm only going on what I've read so I'd like to know.

Quoted: TWl, I was under the impression that the new followers cured the feeding problems, is this still an issue? I'm only going on what I've read so I'd like to know.

The only real isse with the mags was the bolt not being held back on an empty mag.  This has been cured with the new blue magpul followers.  I shot both my upper and Arne's A2 with the new mags and had 100% function with both.  

I had one of the original 5 Grendel uppers and never had a single feeding problem, regardless of the magazine and bolt hold back issue.  

Sorry to hi-jack but I have a question. Is Alexander Arms pretty good?

Local store has a AA .50 beuwolf upper for around 550$. Looks like it may be used. But I figure that is still an OK deal. 16'' barrel also. I bet its loud.

Quoted: Both 6.8 and 6.5 are wildcats at this point and can vanish never to be seen again without being missed much. Both need adoption on a large scale in either the Commercial, LEO or .Mil sector to Survive Designer cartridges come and go, but at the end of the day I think most people will stick with 5.56 and 7.62 NATO.

I completely disagree.  

You say "most" people will stick with 5.56 and 7.62, most of what people?  Most of the competition (other than Service Rifle) shooters already shoot other cartridges than either 5.56 or 7.62.  Most hunters use other cartridges, .243, .270, 30.06 etc.  If you mean most arm chair commandos, I would agree.  Just remember, there is a MUCH bigger world out there than the civillian AR15 world.      

Versatility is what may just make the Grendel survive.  The Grendel is viable in not only the AR platform (Mil & LEO), but also in the Comm market via the BR and long range competition crowd.  Add in the hunting community who already loves the 6.5 bullet (6.5x55 Swede).  The competition market alone is comparable to the civillian AR market, probably greater, and of course, the hunting market dwarfs the civillian AR market.    Versatility is the key to survival, and as the 6.8 has all its eggs in the Mil basket, that could spell trouble...    

A growing # of Benchrest and long range competition shooters are purchasing Grendel based rifles, and having successes in matches.  Speedy's Grendel orders are increasing, and he himself has plans to shoot the Grendel in some BR matches.        

Show me the % of  BR or long range competitor shooting either 5.56 of 7.62, it will be small.  Of course there will be some AR10 shooters, but most are shooting 6BR, 30BR, .260, 6.5x284 etc, and these cartridges are doing just fine.  There has been no large scale adoption of any of these rounds, yet all can be found on ranges across the country on any given day.    

Again, the license fee for a builder to pay to produce Grendel rifles is tiny.  AA just wants to assure quality and standards are met at this point in time.  AA should have the right to earn back their development cost, and if keeping the cartridge close to the vest in the short term is what it takes, we should respect this.  Maybe seeing AA get its development $$ back will encourage others to invest in new cartridges ae well.  

Personally, I would love to see both the 6.8 and Grendel survive and prosper.  Options are good!!!    

   

Quoted: Sorry to hi-jack but I have a question. Is Alexander Arms pretty good? Local store has a AA .50 beuwolf upper for around 550$. Looks like it may be used. But I figure that is still an OK deal. 16'' barrel also. I bet its loud.

try the big bore thread in the ar15 forum

And the .50 beowulf is loud and the recoil lets you know it's there but not that bad

If I order the Hunter I'll need to get a folding front sight to go with the LMT rear that I have, any recomendations?

Quoted: Quoted: Both 6.8 and 6.5 are wildcats at this point and can vanish never to be seen again without being missed much. Both need adoption on a large scale in either the Commercial, LEO or .Mil sector to Survive Designer cartridges come and go, but at the end of the day I think most people will stick with 5.56 and 7.62 NATO. I completely disagree.   You say "most" people will stick with 5.56 and 7.62, most of what people?  Most of the competition (other than Service Rifle) shooters already shoot other cartridges than either 5.56 or 7.62.  Most hunters use other cartridges, .243, .270, 30.06 etc.  If you mean most arm chair commandos, I would agree.  Just remember, there is a MUCH bigger world out there than the civillian AR15 world.       Versatility is what may just make the Grendel survive.  The Grendel is viable in not only the AR platform (Mil & LEO), but also in the Comm market via the BR and long range competition crowd.  Add in the hunting community who already loves the 6.5 bullet (6.5x55 Swede).  The competition market alone is comparable to the civillian AR market, probably greater, and of course, the hunting market dwarfs the civillian AR market.    Versatility is the key to survival, and as the 6.8 has all its eggs in the Mil basket, that could spell trouble...     A growing # of Benchrest and long range competition shooters are purchasing Grendel based rifles, and having successes in matches.  Speedy's Grendel orders are increasing, and he himself has plans to shoot the Grendel in some BR matches.         Show me the % of  BR or long range competitor shooting either 5.56 of 7.62, it will be small.  Of course there will be some AR10 shooters, but most are shooting 6BR, 30BR, .260, 6.5x284 etc, and these cartridges are doing just fine.  There has been no large scale adoption of any of these rounds, yet all can be found on ranges across the country on any given day.     Again, the license fee for a builder to pay to produce Grendel rifles is tiny.  AA just wants to assure quality and standards are met at this point in time.  AA should have the right to earn back their development cost, and if keeping the cartridge close to the vest in the short term is what it takes, we should respect this.  Maybe seeing AA get its development $$ back will encourage others to invest in new cartridges ae well.   Personally, I would love to see both the 6.8 and Grendel survive and prosper.  Options are good!!!

Yeah Yeah. Fact is if Grendal had a solid future threads like this wouldnt exist. I dont see many "Is 7.62 NATO or 5.56 going to be extinct" threads going. That alone should tell you something

6.8 and Grendal have questionable futures at best.  There is a big difference between "doing just fine" and being successful.

I would be careful about those you call "arm chair commandos". Without adoption its these people who will decide the future of Grendal. Not a handful of competition shooters

I dont have a personal grudge against grendal. Hell I think the marines should field Grendal rifles instead of the SR25, but we need to be realistic about its future until it gathers a sufficient following to ensure its future

Quoted: Yeah Yeah. Fact is if Grendal had a solid future threads like this wouldnt exist. I dont see many "Is 7.62 NATO or 5.56 going to be extinct" threads going. That alone should tell you something 6.8 and Grendal have questionable futures at best.  There is a big difference between "doing just fine" and being successful. I would be careful about those you call "arm chair commandos". Without adoption its these people who will decide the future of Grendal. Not a handful of competition shooters

Again, wrong.  

"Arm chair commandos" may determine the fate of a 2 piece rail, or a BUIS, whose primary market is decently represented here, but never that of an entire cartridge.  The Grendels market is only partially the AR crowd.  The market is simply so much bigger than the "arm chair commandos" they will never make or break the cartridge.  As far as threads like this not existing, there are constant threads about boycotting Colt due to poilitcs etc.  Do they have any impact, no.  A few threads here and there mean absolutly nothing in the grand scheme of things.      

I think you vastly overestimate the influence, importance, & impact of this site.  If you spend any time at the gun ranges, 95+ percent of the folks have never even heard of AR15.com, and could give a shit less what is said here.  Hell, most of the AR shooters I run into here in Houston have never even heard of this place.      

If you think the AR15.com audeince is more powerful and larger than the "handful" of competition shooters, you need to do some market research.