I will first say that 5 weeks is not a very long time to wait for a barrel, but.... When it shows instock and is instock the wait seems excessive.  Ordered  a barrel from CSS, a day or two later a drop them an email asking if the barrels were really in stock.  "Yes the barrels are in stock but with the changes in this cartridge we are waiting for more ammo to become available so we can validate the chamber.   Should be ready to ship in 5 weeks."  I emailed them telling them I was only going to reload for this rd and told them what components and die set I was going to use.  I prefer the tighter chamber and .295" nk on the LBC and CSS chambers as opposed to the looser grendel.  I guess if I wanted that chamber profile I would have ordered the barrel else where.  Hopefully they will not try to rechamber these barrels to some other standard now.  I have waited for more then 20 wks for kreiger and bartlein blanks, the wait is not bothersome.  The instock, buy, still instock but wait 5 weeks for a chamber validation on a reload only barrel.  Headspace it and send it.

I've heard of 6.5 CSS as sold by Model 1 and have read where Lothar Walther may have referred to their 6.5 as CSS.   Since you didn't mention the vendor my thought is this sounds like something Model 1 would say.

Ordered from CSS in Tx.  Not mad at all just wish the explanation in the email was better or a warning was on their website about the delay.  I could have a 24" satern in hand in a week, prefer it had a plain target crown instead of threaded muzzle though.  I planned on having this upper built for my brother who is soon to be back from the sandbox, as a welcome home gift.  Just cant figure why a barrel chambered in "6.5  CSS" needs to be validated with all 6.5 grendel ammo when the buyer of this barrel (Me) has stated already that it will be a handload only proposition, and will have complete control over what brass, nk dia, OAL, etc., etc.

Keep us posted on it! I just completed my grendel 6.5 an hour ago! Tomorrow will be the range test!

details on your build?

Just received an email from CSS. good people.  They explained what the delay was caused by and I don't blame them for trying to do the right thing even if it takes alittle while.  I am happy they are forthcoming with info and the delay was not with them but AA.

So........Lothar Walther is blaming the delay in sending you a barrel on






Alexander Arms........

Oh man.......I can't wait to see where this thread goes..............!

Please explain how AA can affect LW? The cartridge (and chambering) are approved by SAAMI, the trademark has been released. The ammo from Alexander Arms, Wolf, and Hornady has been being built to the SAAMI spec since its inception.

This is smoke being blown at you, nothing else.

I'm with Gunwritr, this should be interesting!

It was late when I posted that, I need to clarify.  The email did not say it was directly AAs fault for LW not having correct headspace.  It just said that 3 of the barrel makers for AA have three different chamber prints, thus leading to confusion.  I know LW has both CSS and AA grendel chamber reamers, maybe their grendel reamer is not the current one being used or maybe LW goofed.  Was not intending to assign blame.  I am not a grendel historian, but what I have gleaned here and at 6.5grendel.com that there has been a, shall we say fluid, chamber dimensions of the 6.5 grendel over the years.  Isn't that why hornady brass OAL  is shorter then current 6.5 grendel chambers OAL, because it has changed over the years.  I beleive I read that from a statement from Bill A on 6.5 grendel.com.  I do know that the only 2 barrels, then a LW,  I want on a long range build is a brux or bartlein.  Put the flamethrowers away it was my lack of communication skills.

No flames intended. The Grendel chamber has always been the Grendel chamber since day one. Nothing has changed. The issues with Hornady brass on the initial run had nothing to do with the Grendel chamber itself. The brass fit every single PROPERLY chambered Grendel chamber. The issues were with chambers that were Grendel-like such as the .264 LBC and 6.5 CSS. Years ago, while CSS was still independent of Lothar Walthar, there were some "Grendel Match" rifles and barrels made specifically at their request. Those barrels had a Grendel chamber, except for a .295 neck, which was desired by some because it was supposedly more accurate. Bill Alexander did not then, nor does he now, believe that to be the case, but made the rifles and barrels as requested. That has caused some of the confusion, undoubtedly.

BUT....the Grendel hasn't changed since the initial marketing, apart from that single instance, contrary to what some on the internet would like to say.

Regardless, though, I'm confused as to why LW doesn't just pull the SAAMI specs and build to that requirement, since the whole purpose of SAAMI certification is to standardize the chamber and cartridge so that everyone IS building the same thing when they talk about any specific requirement. Why put the issue on someone else, when the cartridge has been standardized?

16" AA grendel upper, superior lower, PSA lower parts build kit, completed waiting on firing!

http://johnvh.smugmug.com/photos/i-tvqjfDR/0/L/i-tvqjfDR-L.jpg

Caution, Thread Hijack.



Gunwriter:



Two entities which you approach with caution appear to be Mauser rifles and Lothar Walter barrels.



As I have numerous offspring with which to equip with their first center fire rifles; a mid century M98 rebarreled to 257 or 6.5X55 via LW seems to be an affordable option.



Is there a different concept which you would recommend that I consider?



 

That rifle is the twin sister to the 7.62x40 I just built.  Handguard and all!  I went with the Kaspa Tactical 1.5-6x.

No, I am not a huge fan of the 1898 Mauser action. I don't like the 90 degree bolt rotation or the length
of bolt throw. But they are popular and readily available. 6.5x55 is a classic cartridge with very respectable
exterior ballistics combined with relatively light recoil. Many people are very happy with their LW barrels.
I would be very interested to hear back from you with your results. I am very much a fan of the 6.5x55mm
and it would be an interesting project.

Very nice step given them each their own custom rifle. My first centerfire rifle was a chopped Lithgow
No.1 Mk III* Lee Enfield. Wasn't much to look at I suppose, but I was a very proud 11 year old.

Accuracy Int. could use any barrel they want, they choose LW.  As do many Olympic shooters and Euro F-class shooters.  Oh and Larue.  Hey I am just stoked about building the 6.5 grendel/CSS/LBC in an AR platform as I am quite late to the party.  I do think the tighter neck is a definite improvement for accuracy, just look at all the tight nk 6PPC's in BR.  Now the natural progression is to no turn nk chambers.  Being just a couple .001 bigger then loaded nk dia has a direct link to brass life and stellar accuracy.  Not Myth, but facts proven at the lines in any BR match in the country.

All true, when you are discussing bolt guns. The AR, unfortunately in that respect, isn't.

I've got nothing against LW barrels, my first Grendel had one which shot lots of .25 inch groups until I had more than 5000 rounds down it. Even then, it shot sub MOA and would have been a fine hunting rifle.

The simple truth regarding the tighter throat is that it affects reliable function in a semi-automatic. If you are going to reload, it makes no difference, because you are going to size your brass based on best accuracy. If you are going to use it as a plinker, running different ammo, steel case, etc. like the rifle was originally designed for, then the larger throat makes sense.

Either way, I hope your build goes well. My only concern here was that you are being fed misinformation, not that you shouldn't use whatever components you feel you should!

The SAAMI spec is a .300 throat. If you want a tighter throat, than it shouldn't matter at all what anyone but the guy cutting the chamber is doing. It should be done the way you wanted it, just like you mentioned in your early posts! Blaming someone else about specs is ridiculous, and nothing but an excuse to not get you what you want.

Good luck with your build!

Gunwriter:



Thank you for the response.  The desired outcome is that the kids have a rifle with a better value proposition than a Stevens 200, and that they put some of the build time towards completion.  While not exactly custom, each rifle should have more meaning than a retail, over the counter experience.  Because of the enthusiast density of the greater Phoenix area, I have literally been given dozens of objects towards completing numerous rifles (bolts, barreled receivers, Redfield receiver sights, etc.).



AdamJ:



I am with you that the LW is a good starting place for a barrel; this is why I asked.  I think I had seen Gunwriter offer some thoughts when other persons compared their LW barrel to a Bartlein or Kreiger in long range applications.  For the M98, I think that the long chambered barrel with honed chamber is the better approach vice the short chambered barrels.



Thanks to all, and the thread hijack shall now end.

Man...!!!  I love the Grendel...!!!  you would think that one would get fustrated and or discouraged with all the Drama behind this and that and this chamebr is better and NO No No...!!! its the long throat that makes it differant.. and Blah Blah Blah...   but i tell you what..!   when im up in the wee hours in the morning becuase my new born daughter has awaking the whole house in need of some comfort or a bottle... i sure do love comming on this Message board and reading all the whoopblah about the grendel...  makes me get sOoo motovated im going to have to go to the range and shoot mine agian tomorrw..

actually i still dont have a grendel... lol... my vairant is the Model 1 Sales 6.5 Sporter... wich i wish i knew what the differance is.???  AH-HA..!!! i think i will post a new thread and ask..