Since the issue was completely off the topic of the OP's question in this thread:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=121&t=519805

My original post is in regular print, JFA's reply is in bold.



Quoted:
This gets SOOOOO tiring.

Since the first Grendel was shipped by Alexander Arms, AA has used the same chamber. That chamber IS the Grendel chamber. Muttt is 100% correct.

There is proof where the chamber has been changed at least two times. Proof of this , besides the two chamber prints I've discussed in a previous post, is your statement right below this where the CSS chamber only differed in the neck. So if that is true then why doesn't the Hornady ammo fit some CSS chambers? Don't give me that the problem is the neck of the Hornady ammo, because it's the head space dimension of the Hornady ammo that is the problem.

CSS (and subsequently Lothar Walther) had a chamber that differed only in the neck, and was often referred to as the "Match" Grendel chamber. It had/has a .295 neck vs the .300 of the chamber used by Alexander Arms. Alexander Arms never marketed that chamber themselves, but CSS was a licensed builder and did use that chamber. In all other aspects the chambers were identical. Both chambers used a compound throat.

It's been said that in the very very early days a few rare Grendels from AA did have a .295 neck

Some, but not all, of the CSS chambered barrels had issues with Hornady's initial run of ammunition, and some appear to have issues with the 2nd run as well, but there is some confusion about which ammo is which, and so there may be some overlap to the problem.

The .264 LBC chamber was later developed, and uses conventional throating. It was designed by Les Baer to take advantage of the new Hornady brass and Amax 123. Some, but not all, of the rifles thus chambered have had difficulties with Hornady ammunition. This may be due to several different issues and has been addressed ad nauseum over the past year.

There were certainly multiple drawings of chambers that were used initially as the Grendel was developed, and it is certainly possible that they might be floating around out there.

Here is were you really stick your foot in your mouth because the two prints spoken of are dated most recent, these are not early development drawing as you so claim.

Irregardless, there is ONLY ONE Grendel chamber, as Muttt points out. It is the only licensed Grendel chamber, it is the chamber used by both Lapua and Hornady to spec their brass and ammo, and the chamber used by Wolf for their ammo.

And that's why the Hornady ammo is over the maximum head space length specification huh????????????

Finally, there has been at least one report of Alexander Arms chambered rifles which had difficulty with Hornady ammunition. To my knowledge, Alexander Arms offered to investigate and correct that issue, but the reporting individual was a handloader, and didn't feel a need to do so. He succeeded in making Hornady factory ammunition work simply by setting the shoulder back very carefully on the loaded ammunition. Warning, do not try this at home!

So enough.....

There are many good barrel makers. I personally want a Satern, though I had a good Lothar until it went south after about 5000 rounds.


Bill

First, JFA, if you are going to quote someone, please do it properly, so anyone is capable of figuring out what words are yours, especially since I used bold in the original post to emphasize a point and you then used bold to answer, but did so within the quote marks!

I tried to make it obvious by cleaning it up in my post above.

Second, YOU don't know why the Hornady ammo fit some CSS and not others, so obfuscating the point doesn't make yours. Actually, the only independent party to do extensive research posted that the Hornady ammo he had was hitting on the neck angle, not the shoulder datum point, if I recall his post correctly. And if your point is that it is a headspace issue, why does it fit SOME, but not all, of the CSS chambers? Production tolerance issues would seem to be the most obvious explanation. Or was CSS's quality control such that they cut some chambers with more headspace than others?

It's been said that aliens visited Earth and made the Nazca drawings, which has just as much pertinence to the issue as does your statement. There were NO Alexander Arms Grendels shipped to paying customers which had the .295 neck, if you are aware of some, please produce the evidence. CSS did sell that neck, though.

Hmmm....dated most recent....dated most recent to what? The only GRENDEL chamber is the one used by Alexander Arms, previously used by CSS and Lothar Walther. The only thing the drawings that anyone else may have PROVES is that there were multiple iterations of the chamber prior to Alexander Arms setting the final dimensions. If what you propose is true, why has the ammunition which has supposedly a different headspace (the new Hornady) had no problem fitting any of the Alexander Arms chambers, with the exception I have previously mentioned? BTW, that was a brand new rifle, so if the chamber drawing was different, and a new spec was used, why didn't that chamber work?

Once again, the only thing you are trying to do is besmirch Alexander Arms. You don't care about the OP's question, you don't try to answer it. You simply want another chance at a shot at Alexander.

For those who are unfamiliar with JFA, he posts elsewhere as OldJoe, or Tiger, or Starmetal or some such.

The only common thing is his antipathy to Alexander Arms, which you will find in any of his posts.

Bill

Bill,

If it's getting tired tell AA to stop it's untruths about the matter. By the way that post was in the other thread because it's tiring that some AA crony has to always bring up Hornady's ammo not fitting the CSS chamber.  It doesn't fit because the AA chamber has been changed as pointed out and the Hornady ammo is over the maximum length. Know what? It fits now and you know what again? CSS did it by lengthing the head space.  Has nothing to do with the necks. I really like how in the beginning CSS and Grendel chambers were one in the same except CSS gave the two different neck diameter options.  So you still haven't exlained why the Hornady ammo fits the AA but not the CSS especially if the AA chamber never changed.  Phil Murphy has pointed out the discrepancies on the overly long Hornady head space dimensions.

You know what, none of these arguments would probably never have happened if AA didn't do the trademarking of the name.

The chamber drawings are very recent with Bill Alexanders signature on them. They aren't development drawings. They are also prints of the current company making the reamers for AA because Dave Kiff out at PTG won't make reamers for AA anymore.

Doesn't matter what name I use on what forum, everyone still knows who I am the one and same person.   What you claim me to be is the same for you and your other cronies who buy into all of AA's BS.

Joe, for your argument that the chamber has been changed to work, it would mean that there are AA rifles out there that the Hornady ammo doesn't work in, but NO ONE with one of those rifles has ever chimed in. The simple fact is that the chamber may have changed, but ith happened before Alexander shipped any customer rifles, and since day one of shipping Grendels to customers, it has not.

Phil Murphy has pointed out the discrepancy, and then posted that the ammo was striking on the neck, not even getting to the datum point!

Some of the old CSS chambers worked just fine with Hornady ammo, can you explain that? Plenty of people posted on the Grendel board that it worked fine in their CSS chambers. So you are now saying that CSS has changed the CSS or LBC chambering so the ammo fits? Hmmmm....that should be interesting, when the headspace for Lapua based ammo will then be too great! You used to post that Hornady was going to change the ammunition, and that you had talked with them and been told that was the case, what happened to that?

And what does trademarking the name have to do with a technical issue? Alexander wanted to make money off an intellectual property, the name. You can't make money by patenting a chamber, and so he chose the trademarking route.  Hmmm.....last I checked, making money was what a free market was all about! A free market is why he came here from gun banning Great Britain in the first place!

So you are claiming the current reamer maker gave you copies? That's interesting.

No, not everyone knows all your aliases, I get emails asking who JFA is, or Starmetal, or Tiger, because people can't understand your antipathy. Once they find out you are OldJoe, it makes sense to them.

And why don't you just pick a name and stick to it? As Robert Whitley stated in one of those thread where you posted as Tiger:

"The thing that strikes me most about this thread is how many of the people are making postings under an anonymous forum handle and won't put their true name to their writings.  To me that says more about the poster than anything else.

Frankly I think there should be a forum rule that those who make postings must sign their real name to them so we know who they are - that might stop a lot of the offensive stuff you see.

Whether or not you like Bill Alexander and Alexander Arms, the 6.5 Grendel would not be with us if it were not for them - and they deserve credit and praise for bringing the 6.5 Grendel to the US market and making it a reality (with Lapua brass too)!

The AR-15 business is a "rough and tumble" business enough already and a little less drawing of "battle lines" might be a good thing."

Bill

Well let's see. Phil Murphy measured the head spacing of the ammo and that was found to be way over the maximum. I can assure you it's not the necks giving the problem.

No I did not say the reamer manufacturer gave me the prints, in fact I didn't say anything about who gave me the prints. That's another one of your bright imaginations. It's also your routine to twist what a poster says or put words into his mouth he didn't say.

It's very possible for the Hornady ammo to fit some CSS chambers. Some reasons are I highly doubt after some use the head space isn't the same as it left the factory.  Also there is variance in the ammo.  We're also not talking about enough excess head space to cause a problem. You know for a fact that you put an AA bolt on a CSS chambered gun and highly doubtful that the case will ruptured and that's .011 excess head space!!!!!! BTW don't anyone do that. There are no reasons to do that and there are plenty of the correct bolts available.

I didn't say trademarking had anything to do with technical issues....you did!!!!!

You seem to have a real problem with using different sign in names. I think that in today's day and age with the internet that it would be foolish to use your full real name. Too many crazies on the internet.  Everyone seems to know me no matter the name......take you for example...you seem to know my sign ins.  

I'd like to close with if AA is so great why is the Grendel forum down and yet AA's website is still going?  Why doesn't AA take care of the forum that promotes their firearms the most?  Why doesn't AA have a forum on their website (because they let Hanka spent his money and time to do it for them).  Also what happen to the big hype about it was hacked and you all are looking into it and the people responsible will be dealt with?  

Last but not least, where is the new major foreign ammunition manufacture that is going to make the 6.5 Grendel?  Did they go the way of Fiocchi? The one thing I'm saying about Hornady is you sure don't see anymore 6.5 Grendel coming out of them in large quantities....why is that?

Phil may have measured headspace, but he POSTED that the ammo was striking in the neck area, not the datum line. Check with him. I'm only restating what he posted.

Correct, you did not say it, you implied it. You have them, you got them from someone, thus either directly or indirectly, you got them from him. Semantics is all you are playing here. And  I twist what others say? You are the recognized expert on that process, as well as attempting to throw the discussion off course whenever someone points out the error in your reasoning.

It's not possible Hornady ammo fit some CSS rifles, it is an established fact. People posted that it worked fine in their individual rifles. Maybe you are an maybe you aren't talking about enough headspace to cause problems. You would know better than me. But suppose that Hornady did make the adjustment you trumpeted so loudly that they would make, would that not then possibly create an issue?

You simply implied there would have been no issues if AA hadn't trademarked the name. Trademarking has nothing to do with any of the issues under discussion, so why bring it up? You did, so I pointed out it had no impact.

I do have a problem with people hiding their identities and then posting, because there is then no responsibility for the content of their post. I have no problem with someone who consistently posts as the same individual, but to have at least 4 names smacks of trying to hide something.

The Grendel forum is down because Hanka hasn't chosen to put it back up. He plans to do so, but will do so at his choice. This is a busy time of year for him. It will happen when it happens. I do know that Bill Alexander has offered him any support he needs, as have I. I have no idea what is happening with the investigation into the hacker. I suspect I never will unless the investigating agencies choose to make it public, or bring criminal charges. There wasn't much made public about the Jon Benet Ramsey investigation either, and it was much higher profile than this!

Last but not least, there are some new developments in the ammunition market that warrent some further investigation into bringing on a new manufacturer, especially someone offshore. Just as a point, ever wonder where all the TULA labeled ammo came from all of a sudden? Do you wonder why? Who makes steel case ammo? Who doesn't? Who has a US distributor all of a sudden, after not using one for years?

Bill

Ooops, forgot to address the Hornady issue.

There was a WHOLE bunch of Hornady out there a few weeks ago. I picked some up, as did several friends. Is it all gone already?

Forgot to point out that Fortier posted that mini review on an AK Grendel, wonder why that was? Maybe someone who makes AK's knows someone who makes ammo?

Maybe that's a game changer?

Bill

HUH?

this will end well i'm sure.

See post.