Quoted: all i can find are complete uppers. are any barrels in the works? -Spaceman

I've inquired about the same thing here and at most of the Grendel sites with no luck.  I was basically told that I need to buy an upper.

Don't mean to steal your thread, but it seems you have found sources for what I want.

I am interested in a complete 6.5 Grendel flat-top upper (with bolt) ready to hang on an existing lower.  Is Alexander Arms the only source?  If so do I get it directly from them or a dealer?  I want an informal target rifle with 20" or so barrel, simple free float handgaurd that I can slap on a 3-9X  scope or similar and hunt varmints/targets out to 500 yards or so with a possible deer hunting option.

Only way to currently build up a Grendel is by buying a complete upper. You can order them through Competition Shooting Sports which is the route I went. Arne is great to deal with and I would not hesitate to buy from him again. As a matter of fact I plan on buying my Beowulf through him.

6.5 Grendel barrels and bolts are not available through anyone.  You must purchase the complete upper from Comp Shooting Sports, Midway, or any Alex Arms licensed dealer.  

The chambering, 6.5 Grendel, is proprietary so other gunsmiths cannot build or chamber barrels without a licensing agreement with AA.  Scott Medesha is the only smith so far with the license and he sells through Comp Shooting Sports.  

There are no plans to sell only barrels and bolts at this time.

I have dealt with Arne (Comp Shooting Sports) for a while now and he is a stand up guy, you should give him a call.  

I got a few quick questions...  Isn't the cartridge name the tradmarked part?  Couldn't someone just have a reamer set up in their own similar deminsions and named in a metric designation and sell barrels in that caliber?  They do it with the .300 Whisper and the .300 Fireball.  Lastly, does it use the same bolt face as the 7.62x39?  I don't know 100%, I've haven't seen cartridge deminsions.

Quoted:
I got a few quick questions...  Isn't the cartridge name the tradmarked part?  

The name and the dims are protected.  

Couldn't someone just have a reamer set up in their own similar deminsions and named in a metric designation and sell barrels in that caliber?  

Yes, but it would be an infringement on AAs rights to do this.  

AA incurred significant cost to develop the 6.5 Grendel.  They deserve the right to sell said product, and recoup and profit from their investment.  

How is this different from any other product sold in the world.  If a company takes the time, money, and risk to develop new technology, you cant just copy what they did and take it to the market.  Unfair, unethical, and illegal!!!  

If you want the Grendel, go buy an upper from AA, it is that simple...

Further, as there are many other parts custom to the Grendel, the thing would never work properly with just a barrel and bolt.  

I have nothing to gain, no financial stake in the 6.5 at all.  I just do not want to see future development of other cartridges stopped, which will happen, if developers know that the technology will be immediatley available for use by the entire market.    

Quoted: There are no plans to sell only barrels and bolts at this time.

Which is exactly why I can't warm up to the Grendel.  I think the Medesha spacegun upper would be just the ticket for a great High Power match rifle, however, after a hard season of shooting who is going to rebarrel it?  I recently talked to a fellow competitor who's been waiting for over a year for an AR-10 spacegun upper from Medesha.  While I've heard nothing but glowing reports concerning Mr. Medesha's work, I'm not sure I'd want to buy into a proprietary rifle that I can't have readily rebarreled by someone like Holliger, White, etc.

Though I understand Alexander Arms' position, it doesn't make alot of sense to me.  IBM tried the same thing with their successor to the original PC.  How many PS/2s have you bought lately?  Oh I forgot -- they haven't been made for ten years.  The Tubb 2000 is propietary as well, but you can still get barrels elsewhere...

I would love to get a 6.5 Grendel that copies a USMC East Coast SAM-R - basically a 20" flat top upper with a nice scope...  Unfortunately I don't see such a thing offered at CSS...  I would love to have a reputable dealer like Wes/Paul at MSTN build one...  But we'll wait and see!

You should call Arne at CSS and talk.  They will work with people on specific requests.  

I have emailed Arne a couple times...  Deleted because I had the wrong info - Sorry, Arne!!!

Quoted: I have emailed Arne a couple times...  Something about laying out big bucks then having to wait 4-8 weeks is weird...

When I've dealt with CSS, they didn't charge me a dime until they shipped my stuff....

Proprietary systems always die. I like the Grendel, but if they try pulling this off, I speak for myself in saying I won't buy.

Is the grendel cartridge patented? Has AA managed to secure a patent on the breech-loaded, cartridge-firing rifle? The first would guarantee nobody else could make the cartridge The second permits AA to restrict people from making barrels in that chambering. If AA doesn't have the second, anyone can manufacture a barrel with the 6.5 chambering. Just don't refer to it as "6.5 Grendel". I suggest "6.5 Youknowwhatitis"

Quoted: Proprietary systems always die. I like the Grendel, but if they try pulling this off, I speak for myself in saying I won't buy. Is the grendel cartridge patented? Has AA managed to secure a patent on the breech-loaded, cartridge-firing rifle? The first would guarantee nobody else could make the cartridge The second permits AA to restrict people from making barrels in that chambering. If AA doesn't have the second, anyone can manufacture a barrel with the 6.5 chambering. Just don't refer to it as "6.5 Grendel". I suggest "6.5 Youknowwhatitis"

As TX65 stated,  If the product is represented to be able to use 6.5 Grendel ammo, the maker and seller of the product is open to civil and criminal liability.   If you think otherwise, you should cousult with your attorney.  

I dont understand what anyones issue is with the fact the AA invested time, money, and effort in developing new technology.  It is their technology and they control its use.  This no different from a tech company developing web technology.  Google damn sure did not turn their technology over to the market for free.  The case design is the technology, not the rifle.  

The fact that AA is negotiating with multiple gunsmiths across the country shows that they want people to have a choice in who does the work.  They want to get the cartridge in the market.  Any reputable gunsmith will be willing to pay the license fee.  Why would they not?  They didn't make the investment in the development.  Can they profit off AAs technology, sure, but they should pay a little bit to AA for the right to do so.  

If it isn't a "barrel and a bolt", then I don't want anything to do with it.

I WAS pretty hot about the idea of getting a 6.5 Grendel, because I liked the ballistics and accuracy of the round. I wondered what was taking them so long to get the barrels and bolts and magazines available. Now I see. They want to sell us a whole bunch of parts we don't need along with the barrel and bolt, or we can't use the cartridge. Since I have a quick-change-barrel upper receiver, I will never need an "AA" upper receiver, or AA handguard tube, or AA barrel nut, or AA anything else. They seem to be saying that I can't get what I need, only what they want to sell me, which is a whole load of stuff I will never need.

Sorry AA, but if this is the way you are going to go, you can count me out. I will go to a 6.8SPC from a company that is willing to take my money and give me what I want. I don't need some company to try to shove a bunch of unnecessary crap down my throat, just because I want a barrel and a bolt.

Exclusivity is okay, but not meeting customer's needs and market demand is something else. Give us barrels and bolts, or else the grave is already dug for this cartridge. Talk about marketing suicide, sheesh!

I can imagine going to the tire store, and having them tell me that in order to buy tires I have to buy a whole new car from them. Ridiculous!!!!!!!!

A terrible fate to what looked like a promising cartridge.

Our patent system is such that it only rewards very specific, NOVEL innovations. There is not anything novel about the Grendel. While the original metallic cartridge was a novel innovation, the Grendel is simply another cartridge, with a specific performance window. AA has invested more time, money, and effort on marketing than engineering, if their great foray into USCG contracts is any indication. That ought to be punished, and will naturally be punished by market forces, which AA has no ability to restrict.

Saying the barrel is made by AA is a problem. Saying that an aftermarket barrel is able to use 6.5 Grendel ammo will never be a legal issue. If I make a car, there is not a damn problem in the world if I say it can use Mobil-1 oil. There is a problem if I say that Mobil makes the car.

Oh, here's feed for the legal sharks: AA will be opening itself up to prosecution under the Sherman Act for its anticompetitive tying arrangement.

BTW, WTR.. What's your dog in this fight?

Marketing suicide???  How about investing thousands of dollars in developing new technology and then giving it away - that is business suicide.  This mentaility will drive every small manufacturer and developer out of business.  

How can AA pay for the development if they dont hold license to the technology???

BTW, AA never had any invlovement in the USCG contracts, that was Leightner-Wise I beleive.  

Ask a patent and trademark lawyer about proprietary technology.  It is hardly anti-trust to maintain rights to technology you have developed.   Patents are good for only 20 years.  This gives the developer of the technology the chance to profit for a limited time, then the technology becomes public.  This is why the analogy of the auto is not exactly accurate.  

BTW, my reason for being active in this debate is that I love guns, and I love new things.  If we stop trying new things, we stop moving forward.  The Grendel and the SPC are developments forward.  However, these developments come with a cost.  

If no one is willing to pay the cost for development, it will stop, we will ultimately pay the price by being stuck in the past.  Barrels and bolts, barrels and bolts, if any other gunsmiths or developers out there working on a newer, better, badder cartridge, they will wonder why when they read this thread.  They cant do it for profit as eveyone feels "entitled" to the technology at no cost.  Business, money, this is what drives development, the private sector at its finest.  If the private sector can't make money building guns, they will make money buliding something else, and who suffers - the guys who LOVE GUNS...  

Do I have a Grendel upper - yes.  Have I posted about it here in this forum - yes.  I bought a Grendel because I could get one, and brass, and magazines, and I am shooting the Grendel currently, have been out four times already.  Do I prefer the Grendel to the 6.8, yes, but only because I shoot at long range in a match environment.   I am not interested the terminal effects of the 6.8 as I am not in the military, nor will I ever shoot anything other than paper.  For my needs and wants, the Grendel far outshines the 6.8.  

Again, there is also more to the Grendel than just a barrel and bolt.  The barrel extension is different for starters.  This is why AA is selling only complete uppers at this point, they control everything.  Imagine the damage that could be done to the Grendels reputation if somebody just slap a barrel on it, and it does not function properly.  In your auto speak, you are talking about putting racing slicks on a yugo.  There just might be problems with that...   It is not just the cartridge, although that is the proprietary part, but the entire package that makes the Grendel so special.

WTR  

   

   

 

I'm not saying they can't make money.
In fact, I think they are getting in their own way.
I only want a barrel and a bolt and a magazine, and I don't need their other stuff.
There is nothing proprietary about an AR upper receiver, or a free-float handguard, or a barrel nut, or any of the other non-proprietary stuff they insist on foisting on us.
If they want to sell proprietary barrels and bolts and magazines, that's fine.
Leave off the rest of the unnecessary crap.

Like I said, when I go to buy tires, they don't tell me I can't have tires, but instead have to buy a whole new car.

I think we need a patent lawyer to settle this dispute.  Not_A_Llama hit the nail on the head with his 'novel idea' concept.  People have been wildcatting cartridges for ages.  Besides a few length/shoulder changes by a few inches or degrees, I see how no cartridge can be 100% unique enough to receive a patent.

My .300 Whisper comment was dismissed, so what about the .45 Super and the Detonics version that Triton made when they didn't want to pay Ace Customs rights for the .45 Super name?  I think it's all in the cartridge name, not the cartridge design, unless you can show me a patent number.  That would end this discussion right now.

I'm not asking these questions to cheat AA out of money.  I'm doing it to find an affordable alternative to an $1100 upper.  There no reason to shell out all of that money for fancy accessories when I'm wanting to just convert a plane jane AR for hunting deer.  If they offered the parts themselves, I would buy.  Fact is they aren't, so I'm searching for alternatives.

Quoted: As far as rebarreling your hard shot 6.5 Grendel match rifle, Scott and I already are already laying out a refit program for this to provide customers with a fresh new barrel, bolt, barrel extension and gas tube.  Of course, you have to own a Medesha built 6.5 Grendel to use the refit program.

Hope to hear more about the refit program -- particularly the cost of the package -- after you  finalize that option.  A spacegun is definitely in my future.  It'd be nice to have enough information to make an intelligent decision when the time comes to finally hang up the service rifle and move on to aperture sights...

Quoted: I think we need a patent lawyer to settle this dispute.  Not_A_Llama hit the nail on the head with his 'novel idea' concept.  People have been wildcatting cartridges for ages.  Besides a few length/shoulder changes by a few inches or degrees, I see how no cartridge can be 100% unique enough to receive a patent. My .300 Whisper comment was dismissed, so what about the .45 Super and the Detonics version that Triton made when they didn't want to pay Ace Customs rights for the .45 Super name?  I think it's all in the cartridge name, not the cartridge design, unless you can show me a patent number.  That would end this discussion right now. I'm not asking these questions to cheat AA out of money.  I'm doing it to find an affordable alternative to an $1100 upper.  There no reason to shell out all of that money for fancy accessories when I'm wanting to just convert a plane jane AR for hunting deer.  If they offered the parts themselves, I would buy.  Fact is they aren't, so I'm searching for alternatives.

That is exactly what the 6.5 Grendel is -a wildcat 6.5 PPC with a little neck/shoulder tweaking. Like you all I want is a barrel and bolt at a reasonable cost.

Here is a link from which I base my claim:

www.65grendel.com/art001devnotes.htm

Quoted: That is exactly what the 6.5 Grendel is -a wildcat 6.5 PPC with a little neck/shoulder tweaking. Like you all I want is a barrel and bolt at a reasonable cost. Here is a link from which I base my claim: www.65grendel.com/art001devnotes.htm

You link to Arne's development notes.  You should catch in there that he had a complete upper built for the 6.5PPC project, not just a barrel and bolt.  The 6.5 Grendel is not just a barrel and bolt, and if you think you can add just the two, you are mistaken.  The rifle will NOT work properly.  The feedramps were redesigned to handle the cartridge, and .223 feedramps will simply not feed the 6.5 reliably.    

Further note that Arne knows and worked directly with Dr Lou Palmisano, the developer and owner of the PPC case design.  He did the 6.5PPC "wildcat" with Dr. P's. knowledge, assistance, and blessing.

I am sure you will, at some point, find a smith who will offer a 6.5 Grendel barrel and bolt only.  Be prepared to have wasted your $$.  Buy right the 1st time and dont sweat it, then if you find a smith to re-barrel for cheap, well I just would never let AA know....  

 
 

IIRC patents are worthless after what is it 20or25 yrs. The PPC cartridges were introduced in 1974. They are both in widespread use among benchresters and probably varminters. If the 6.5 Grendel is standardized by SAAMI then it will be available. As far as the feedramps are concerned they are a function of the barrel extension and are nothing more than reconfigured cuts. Most likely they are quite similar to those found on 7.62x39 extensions. Note that I said similar not the same. When initial sales slacken then the 6.5 Grendel will become more widely. I give it a year maybe two then we will see better availability. I want one but I can wait. Got enough projects going on right now anyway. Still haven't finished my 6.8 SPC. Waiting for an incorrectly bored bolt to be replaced & the stock assembly to come in.

Quoted: Since I am the one who wrote what you are basing a claim on, let put forward some clarifications 1. The 6.5 PPC was an original prototype and I never laid any claim to a cartridge which was developed by Dr. Lou Palmisano - a close friend of mine. 2. The 6.5 PPC chamber I did is my secret, no one but two other people, knows my chamber dimensions including the reamer maker (there are ways to do that). 3. The 6.5 Grendel is not a 6.5 PPC, if you take a 6.5 PPC round and load it in a 6.5 Grendel chamber, it will rattle around.  If you load a 6.5 Grendel round in a 6.5 PPC chamber, the bolt will not even close. I am just pointing out a trademark that is owned by Alexander Arms and I pointing out there are civil and criminal penalties for trademark, copyright and patent infringement.  You may want to risk your business and your assets challenging that and that is your choice.  You can also risk driving 100 MPH down the freeways in Los Angeles and may get away with it or you may end up with 100 of LAPD's finest chasing you with 12 news helicopters showing you being placed in the back of a police car.   More importantly, I am pointing out that the 6.5 Grendel is more then a barrel and a bolt.  Yes, there will be someone out there who thinks they can design their own chamber and call it the 6.5 Wizbang.  If they do and dont have the other key parts, you will find the 6.5 Grendel magazines you will want to buy wont work.  If they use a 7.62x39 bolt designed around a cartridge with 38,000 PSI, you will also expose yourself to the risk of having a bolt come apart with your face inches from it. If you buy one of these 6.5 Wizbang and you end up with a receiver coming apart in your face, you will quickly learn that the person who did it might not even have product liability insurance as you face $50,000 in plastic surgery expenses.   I said in the beginning that Currently, as in August 26th, that 6.5 Grendel barrels and bolts for the AR15 are not for sale as parts.  However, like I said earlier, this cartridge is in the release phase and the program is evolving and what is available in 3 months or 6 months is not written in stone.  Maybe there will be an option, maybe there wont... I dont know, Alexander Arms does not know.

I have no intention of making my own. I can appreciate the effort that went into developing it. If it comes into common availibility I will build one if not so be it. Something else will come along. The fact still remains that it started out as a wildcat round based on the PPC cartridge. It has know become a factory produced cartridge which removes it from the realm of wildcat. The heated and taken out of context discussions over the 6.5 Grendel and the 6.8 SPC are frankly getting to be a little ridiculous. Both appear to be good cartridges and both apear to fill niches which people are interested in following. For either cartridge to survive their must be followings of shooters who use that cartridge(s) or they will die on the vine. I want one but will not have until I can obtain what I want. That simply put is reasonably priced barrels, bolts, ammo and preferably brass. Nuff said.

Quoted: I am just pointing out a trademark that is owned by Alexander Arms and I pointing out there are civil and criminal penalties for trademark, copyright and patent infringement.

Trademarks and copyrights aren't a problem.  Would you mind posting the patent number so that I may look it up at the US Patent Office.  If the cartridge dimensions truly are patented, then that is a simple and reasonable request I think.

As for those bolt pressures, one could easily open up a 6.8 SPC bolt a tad if they cared to.  Those are rated for at least 55k PSI, though I doubt a 7.62x39 bolt would have problems handling the pressures anyway.  When it comes to the feedramp, I'll WESCOG it and save some money.  Same goes for obtaining and using magazines.

tagged

Quoted: Trademarks and copyrights aren't a problem.    When it comes to the feedramp, I'll WESCOG it and save some money.  Same goes for obtaining and using magazines.

Sounds like a conspiracy to commit theft of technology.  Posting illegal activities on public forums is not necessarily a good idea.  You just don't know who is LE here and who isn't.   It is also against AR15.com policy.    

Quoted: Sounds like a conspiracy to commit theft of technology.  Posting illegal activities on public forums is not necessarily a good idea.  You just don't know who is LE here and who isn't.   It is also against AR15.com policy.

hahahahhahahahahahhahahahahaha.. are you for real?

I'd say you're a shill, except that nobody would hire a person so.. I dunno, creative?

1) If it's patented, that's that. The dimensions are available to the public.
2) If it's a trade secret, reverse-engineering is a legal method of obtaining trade secrets. For instance, on the casing, give me ONE single casing, and I'll do it with calipers and a dremel tool. Hell, I'll publish it on the net, too.

C'mon now, invent another "charge" to slap on me.

Quoted: Quoted: I am just pointing out a trademark that is owned by Alexander Arms and I pointing out there are civil and criminal penalties for trademark, copyright and patent infringement. Trademarks and copyrights aren't a problem.  Would you mind posting the patent number so that I may look it up at the US Patent Office.  If the cartridge dimensions truly are patented, the that is a simple and reasonable nrequest I think. As for those bolt pressures, one could easily open up a 6.8 SPC bolt a tad if they cared to.  Those are rated for at least 55k PSI, though I doubt a 7.62x39 bolt would have problems handling the pressures anyway.  When it comes to the feedramp, I'll WESCOG it and save some money.  Same goes for obtaining and using magazines.

So do you steal everything you desire or do you occasionally pay?  That is a "simple and reasonable" question I think.

Quoted: Quoted: Sounds like a conspiracy to commit theft of technology.  Posting illegal activities on public forums is not necessarily a good idea.  You just don't know who is LE here and who isn't.   It is also against AR15.com policy.     hahahahhahahahahahhahahahahaha.. are you for real? I'd say you're a shill, except that nobody would hire a person so.. I dunno, creative? 1) If it's patented, that's that. The dimensions are available to the public. 2) If it's a trade secret, reverse-engineering is a legal method of obtaining trade secrets. For instance, on the casing, give me ONE single casing, and I'll do it with calipers and a dremel tool. Hell, I'll publish it on the net, too. C'mon now, invent another "charge" to slap on me.

Personal attacks - thats pretty mature.  

I'm not inventing anything, just stating the facts.  If you have a legitimate arguement, put it out there.  

Antis watch this board.  An Anti will assume that if these people are willing to break one law, i.e. trademark infringement, and happily post about in public, they are probably willing to break others.  If you want to do illegal and unethical things, keep them to yourself.  Otherwise, you ultimately jeopardize everyone's rights..

Quoted: Antis watch this board.  An Anti will assume that if these people are willing to break one law, i.e. trademark infringement, and happily post about in public, they are probably willing to break others.  If you want to do illegal and unethical things, keep them to yourself.  Otherwise, you ultimately jeopardize everyone's rights..

Is it a trademark or a patent?  Make up your mind, they're completely different and have different limitations.  Patents are public information, that's why they're publicly accessible, free to search, and most people are proud of them posting the patent number so you don't infringe on their invention.

02Overlander, if they have a patent on it, then it would be called stealing.  If not, well then it's just another chambering.  It is anyway.  I see nothing wrong with chambering a barrel for their cartridge, seeing as I'm still using their ammo and brass.  Your comment is almost like saying resizing surplus .30-06 brass to .308 and reloading is 'stealing' from Winchester because you aren't buying commercial brass marked ".308 Win".  It has no basis in fact.

Quoted: Is it a trademark or a patent?  Make up your mind, they're completely different and have different limitations.  Patents are public information, that's why they're publicly accessible, free to search, and most people are proud of them posting the patent number so you don't infringe on their invention. 02Overlander, if they have a patent on it, then it would be called stealing.  If not, well then it's just another chambering.  It is anyway.  I see nothing wrong with chambering a barrel for their cartridge, seeing as I'm still using their ammo and brass.  Your comment is almost like saying resizing surplus .30-06 brass to .308 and reloading is 'stealing' from Winchester because you aren't buying commercial brass marked ".308 Win".  It has no basis in fact.

In reality, it does not matter, trademark or patent, or both.  The fact is that AA spent the time and money, and took the risk to develop the "chambering."  You say, "well, its just another chambering."  Like it was free to develop, test, and bring market.  Maybe one day, when you own a business and somebody decides that thay can just take technology that you have spent time and money developing, you will understand.  Until then, as I stated before, you should talk with an attorney and get their opinion on what you "see nothing wrong with." I will guarantee that all the reputable smiths will respect the protection the law provides AA.  Unreputable smiths, well they are just that.  Reputable smiths will understand that they may someday want to do what AA has done, and they will want the same protection.  

What incentive will any developer/manufacturer have to ever develop another "chambering" if it immediatley becomes public and they cannot even recoup their development cost.  None.  Get it, this mentaility that you are entitlied to this free is just silly.  

This reaks of the "Napster" generation.  "I'm not doing anything wrong, this music is played on the radio every day, I am entitled to record it, use it, and never pay a dime to the artist that developed it."  You see where that got Napster today.  Court, now charging a fee (royalty) to get the music.  

Tell me any difference between Napster and what you are doing here.  

   


 

Terrible.

Your legal knowledge is as flawed as your reasoning.

First you're trying to scare people with some crackhead claim that this is illegal. If anything, it'd be a civil issue, so let the mods worry about it.

Then you've got some lame excuse again to stifle this by saying that anti's will see our purported illegal actions. Dude, I'm sure HCI's giggling away about how they're gonna bust us gunowners as all trademark infringers. Oh man, we're all gonna have a black eye from that.

Bystander1: "See that guy? He owns guns.."
Bystander2: "Ohmygod. He must also be one of those trademark infringers!"
Bystander3: "He'll probably kill us, too, if he infringes on trademarks. Let's ban guns!"

Then somehow, it's unethical to design *interfaces* to technologies.  If AA has innovations on the AR15 action, those are patentable. Nobody should infringe on those. If they have patents on the cartridge, nobody should manufacture it.  If they have trademarks, nobody should represent their product as being that product. Everything else is legal and ethical

How much are they paying you to act like a clown on these boards? It's embarrassing.

Oh, if anyone has a round of 6.5 Grendel, I will purchase it for.. say, $5, or a Gmail invite. I need an article for my webpage.

Quoted: Oh, if anyone has a round of 6.5 Grendel, I will purchase it for.. say, $5, or a Gmail invite. I need an article for my webpage.

You can order all you want from Competition Shooting Sports as I did, lol. If you two hadn't come off as such hard ass's I'd have happily mailed you a round for free.

Quoted: Terrible. Your legal knowledge is as flawed as your reasoning. First you're trying to scare people with some crackhead claim that this is illegal. If anything, it'd be a civil issue, so let the mods worry about it. Then you've got some lame excuse again to stifle this by saying that anti's will see our purported illegal actions. Dude, I'm sure HCI's giggling away about how they're gonna bust us gunowners as all trademark infringers. Oh man, we're all gonna have a black eye from that. Bystander1: "See that guy? He owns guns.." Bystander2: "Ohmygod. He must also be one of those trademark infringers!" Bystander2: "He'll probably kill us, too, if he infringes on trademarks. Let's ban guns!" If AA has innovations on the AR15 action, those are patentable. Nobody should infringe on those. If they have patents on the cartridge, nobody should manufacture it.  If they have trademarks, nobody should represent their product as being that product. Everything else is legal and ethical How much are they paying you to act like a clown on these boards? It's embarrassing.

Still with the personal attacks??  That really shows how immature you actually are.   Cant you do any better than that, can't you manage to keep the discussion about the topic at hand instead of resorting to personal attacks.    

First, I am not trying to "scare anybody."  Last time I checked, whether criminal or civil, illegal is still illegal.  To appease you, I will drop the illegal discussion, lets just talk about what is ethical.  That is the crux of my passion towards this thread anyway.    

Second, an expressed willingness to violate ANY law cannot, in any way, be good for our cause, that being the RKBA.   Your analogy above with the bystanders, that is about how it works with the damn gungrabbers/democrats.  That is just about how they think, look at Schumers comments specifically on the AR15, "Good people dont use those."  We should not offer them ANY reason, no matter how silly it might sound to us.  To them, they put 2 and 2 and come up with 3.      

Third, I am not being paid by anybody, I am not associated with CSSI, AA, or anybody associated with the Grendel in anyway.  To me, this discussion is 5% about the Grendel, and 95% about what is right.   I stated that earlier in the tread.    

Fourth, You state that innovations on the AR should be protected.  There is a unique design of the barrel extension to make the upper function correctly, well that sounds like an "innovation" to me.  

I enjoy the lively debate here, and thats what this is to me, but if you keep getting personal you can count me out...    

Get off the high horse; you're the one avoiding the meat of the discussion.

You're hardly "appeasing" me by putting the illegal argument down; you're avoiding the crux of the issue. There is absolutely nothing illegal or unethical about either chambering a barrel in 6.5 Grendel.

If there were something illegal, you've yet to have pointed out what it is. What is illegal about manufacturing a barrel in that caliber, exclusive of the "special" feeding system?

I don't like trademark violations. But realize that practically nobody in the public cares about trademark violations. At all. Remember your Napster argument? It's widespread, and nobody cares. Your assertion is extreme.

If AA has made an innovation with the barrel extension, then they should get a patent. Otherwise, they ought not expect to be protected like every other manufacturer that invests and goes through the published and well-known process. They also should not expect to receive protections on anything but that feedramp, if that's all they've patented.

I personally don't care for the posts of a shill; this is a patent law excercise for me.

Quoted: I personally don't care for the posts of a shill; this is a patent law excercise for me.

I will finish with, I am not sure how this became an "exercise in patent law" when nowhere in this thread does anyone specifically state that anything is patented.  You and Rook are demanding proof of patents when nobody stated specifically about a patent.  What was stated is simply that there is protection for AA and people can get in trouble for representing their product to be the Grendel, or represent their product to use Grendel ammo, brass, or dies.      

Good luck with with your projects, guys!!  You can keep up your "patent law exercise" while I am shooting my Grendel over the weekend.  I hope you enjoy it as much as I currently do, at least that is when you manage to get your bolts, barrels, and a properly functioning upper.    

WTR

I'd love for a patent lawyer to come into this thread as well.   When I spent near an entire semester reviewing conceptual property rights laws it was one of the more interesting classes I took in school.   What I took away from the class is as follows and the following would be my argument based upon what I remember from that class.




Trademarks protect the names of businesses and products so that they have exclusive rights in the market place to that specific name and will be the sole entity to reap the rewards of market success.

Hence the reason why Colt, Armalite, Knights, and others will struggle so hard to protect the good name of their products and pay to keep the trademarks up to date on names such as "AR15",  "AR10", or "SR25".

Plenty of businesses go out and Trademark their company, corporate, or product names so that others cannot come along and make monetary gains off of that name.

If somebody came along to market a "6.5 Grendel", without paying for the rights to do so, then damn sure there is gonna be trouble to be had because somebody already owns the rights to such a product name and is entitled to the exclusivity of using such a name.    Rip off the name and try to profit off of it and you'll land in hot water for sure.    Come up with a 6.5x35mm wildcat that is darn near a duplicate but call it something different and no Trademark laws are being broken.
SSK and the 300whisper trademark as opposed to 300Fireball analogy seems appropriate here.


As to design patents, it is said that a design patent is "intended to protect the ornamental and cosmetic aspects of products – but not their function."      If a patent exists on the physical design of the cartridge itself then I too would like to see it because it could be argued that the design of the cartridge is not anymore novel than any other cartridge, especially cartridges designed to operate within a specific performance envelope with regards to balistics.    If somebody else were to come along to make a cartridge and ream barrels/chambers that were dimensionally similar inorder to achieve the similar performance there is unlikely to be any case to be had.     Even if somebody were to copy the dimensions outright, so long as they are seeking to duplicate the function of that cartridge, operating in an AR15 and providing the balistics of the cartridge, it is very likely that patent law will not apply.    It's just not that novel a departure from what any other catridge can do even if the 6.5 Grendel is perceived as being better or superior for some tasks.

But designs, especially "improvements", to a rifle and various parts of that rifle meant to reliably feed that cartridge and work safely with that cartridge.    Those belong to conceptual property protection laws where a patent could definitely be applied.    In the same vein as Colt's patents regarding the M4, Armalite's patents concerning the AR10, and patents regarding the specific operation of the firearm.

Go out and buy a 6.5Grendel rifle that has patented parts only to copy the designs and resell them, that will probably wind up in court.

Use your wildcat chambering in a rifle that has been assembled with WECSOG type improvements to existing common parts to work with your chambering, unlikely to infringe on patents even if said WECSOG improvements were inspired by things seen on the patented Grendel.


About the only analogy I can think of is if I wanted to go out and go through the trouble and expense of making my own M4 handguards for my own use, down to the double heat shield, Patent law does not state that I have no right to do so as it's for my own consumption.     But if I were to go out and start producing them and start selling them to the public, when a patent out there exists giving Colt the exclusive rights to that product, I would suddenly be landing myself in hot water.


With the 6.5 Grendel though the question that has to be answered is, "can the cartridge dimensions and corresponding chamber demensions be protected by patent law" and the various issues revolving around function and whether the concept is novel will enter into that.


One of the things I took away from the class was a notion that a person is free to make a patented product or use a patented process for their own consumption, that is not the definition of infringement.    A patent does not state that a person must goto the business/creator/holder of said patent and do business with said entity if they donot wish to.

If they wind up entering a business environment and competing with the holder of the patent, that is the criteria for infringement.

If I wanted to copy the Smith Enterprises Vortex design and machine it entirely myself out of the same materials I am free to do so provided I do not sell it.    The costs I incur for time, effort, and materials may well wind up being more expensive than having simply gone to Smith Enterprises in the first place to buy the product.

Patents help a company in that if they can get a sizeable quantity of scale they may reap the rewards as cost of production go down with each additional product produced.    And this is where people wind up just forking over the dough as they realize that it isn't worth the trouble of trying to supply the product themselves due to prohibitive costs.


And I will gladly eat my own words on any of this if a professional experienced in patent law comes in to clarify or outright correct anything I posted.    I have a passing interest in how these sorts of things relate to the gun industry as well as potential products that I wouldn't mind seeing come to market.

Chambering a rifle for a cartridge with dimensions identical to the 6.5 Grendel is not a trademark infringement, but putting the 6.5 Grendel name on the barrel is since the name is the trademark.  We have yet to see if they have a patent on anything related to the 6.5 Grendel, cartridge dimensions or for the extension.  If you can provide factual information that they have patented these two objects, then you can rant and rave about illegal activites you want.  If they have not patented the cartridge but have the extension, it can be worked around by avoiding the points made specific in the patent.  There's more than one way to skin a cat.

At this point, I'm basically arguing for the sake of getting to the bottom of this issue.  Just show me the patent number(s) and this whole debate will be over with.  Give us some form of fact, not talk of supposed illegal activites or saying we should care about the thoughts of antis.

Quoted: Thank you Rook and as I originally said.  If a company produces a product using the 6.5 Grendel name or represents that product to be a 6.5 Grendel by saying or implying that their " 6.5 Wizbang can use 6.5 Grendel factory ammo, brass and dies"  They are violating the trademark even though they made a feeble attempt to avoid it by calling it something else.

I think you're once again confusing trademark and patent uses.  The fact that the rifle can use Grendel ammuntion, dies and brass is not a trademark infringement.  Otherwise Model 1 wouldn't be selling .300 Fireball rifles.  Once again back to the Whisper/Fireball comparison.  J.D. Jones can do nothing more than say 'using Whisper ammo in these rifles might cause problems, I cannot guarantee their specs or operation.'  Same goes for the aforementioned .45 Super of Ace Custom and Triton's Detonics cartridge.

This is all very interesting. But I have a few questions.

Is the 6.5 Grendel SAAMI approved? USA AND OR EUROPE, For those who know where Im going with specs.

For the special someone who owns one of these nice well engineered uppers.
1.How wide are the locking lugs on the bolt?
2.How about spacing?
3.Gas port diameter, and port positioning on the barrel.
4.Gas tube OD and ID
5.How heavy is the bolt carrier? Length?
6.Barrel extn feed ramp angle?
7.Magazine follower any difference? How about the lips?

Do we need a TS clearance to know these figures?
I DON'T WANT TO SELL THIS THING!!!!!!
I DON'T WANT TO MARKET THIS THING!!!!
I DON'T WANT TO BUY WHAT I DON'T NEED!!!!!

This should not be such a difficult nut to crack. THIS not some XM307 or super advanced weapon system. Its an AR UPPER in a different cartridge envelope. Reverse Engineering has been used by those in the know forever.

Obviously these gentleman who developed this round, did not develop the AR weapon.
Think about how they collected data to make this thing work. I bet a little bit of reverse engineering was used to spec 5.56 and 7.62x39mm parts, and see what load limitations were realized in the original package.

I just don't see what all of the FUSSSS!!!! is about.

This cartridge is cool, sure but all of this PATENT WHOOP-LA is silly.  I do understand Protecting your investment. But why can I buy a 6.8x43 reamer and a .243WSSM reamer both cartridges developed recently and both available in an AR package. But I can't buy a 6.5x38 reamer and build a gun my self for my self if I have the tooling and mechanical knowledge to do so?

Anyone remember the .224 BOZ cartridge? Same kinda thing going on here.