Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 3/14/2006 7:50:30 PM EDT
I always thought that the 6.8 and 6.5 were answers in search of a problem. Even more so with the Olympic Arms WSSM uppers now out there in proven numbers. As far as the military is concerned, is the 6.8spc a dead end?
Just wondering,
Gos.
Link Posted: 3/14/2006 7:52:46 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/14/2006 8:00:32 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/14/2006 8:06:34 PM EDT
Ummm......everyone in uniform shooting the 6.8s seem to think otherwise. It's a better cartridge for the carbine/SBR length rifles, getting most of the performance at 16". It hits much harder than the 5.56 and fits inside the AR-15 envelope. It is extremely well suited to FA use, which will be an issue when dealing with SAWs.

Funny thing is that despite heavier recoil, it generates no more torque and thus muzzle climb than the 5.56, possibly due to the very short pressure curve. It's pretty easy to keep all 3 rounds of a burst on a 12" steel gong at 100 yards.

Shoot Larue reactives and you'll see the plates go down, while the 5.56 really needs to hit the red zone to do the job.

The only reason the 5.56 and 6.8 are popular is the ability to capitalise of cheap surplus ammo.
6.8 and 6.5 ammo is still substantially mroe expensive than surplus and Wolf.

The problem is 5.56 doesn't deliver the goods when run from shorter barreled weapons.

Simon
Link Posted: 3/14/2006 10:30:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/14/2006 10:35:42 PM EDT by Capn_Crunch]

Originally Posted By SimonTan:
Ummm......everyone in uniform shooting the 6.8s seem to think otherwise. It's a better cartridge for the carbine/SBR length rifles, getting most of the performance at 16". It hits much harder than the 5.56 and fits inside the AR-15 envelope. It is extremely well suited to FA use, which will be an issue when dealing with SAWs.

Funny thing is that despite heavier recoil, it generates no more torque and thus muzzle climb than the 5.56, possibly due to the very short pressure curve. It's pretty easy to keep all 3 rounds of a burst on a 12" steel gong at 100 yards.

Shoot Larue reactives and you'll see the plates go down, while the 5.56 really needs to hit the red zone to do the job.

The only reason the 5.56 and 6.8 are popular is the ability to capitalise of cheap surplus ammo.
6.8 and 6.5 ammo is still substantially mroe expensive than surplus and Wolf.

The problem is 5.56 doesn't deliver the goods when run from shorter barreled weapons.

Simon



6.8 recoil isn't really THAT bad. A 12" 6.8 isn't as squirrely as a CQBR.

And, AFAIK, USAF has funding for purchase of 6.8 weapons.
Link Posted: 3/14/2006 11:20:38 PM EDT
Ammunition manufacturers will keep providing ammunition, and word is even more manufacturers are tooling up for 6.8. Military adoption is not the only criteria for a cartridge to be successful, and I suspect that the 6.8 will be readily available from now on in the civilian marketplace.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 12:28:49 AM EDT
No.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 3:00:16 AM EDT
I think Remington is offering the M700 in 6.8 now.

Cheers,

Phil
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 4:06:50 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 4:29:45 AM EDT
Nice rifle!
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 4:30:35 AM EDT
I can only speak for myself.

If 6.8 ammo were as cheap and available as .223 then I would switch in a heartbeat. And that’s the key right there. My guess is that if ammo is cheap then civilians will buy the rifles.

As far as what the military does…

Honestly, that decision rests with a handful high ranking officers and there’s no way to know what they think about the issue. If it were up to the troops I’ll bet we would be switching right now.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 4:44:53 AM EDT
Damn Denny, that 6.8 is just all over the place. Terrible Accuracy I tell ya....just terrible.

Even if Uncle Sam adoptes the 6.8, ammo prices will not come down appreciably as there will not be any surplus, on seconds for a long time.

Link Posted: 3/15/2006 4:49:19 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 5:03:31 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 2:12:30 PM EDT
Unlike some folks, LeitnerWise has provided very good information...
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 2:34:35 PM EDT
Someone told me the mags are interchangable ,with a minor modification.

This can not be true, 6.8 x 43 , vs 5.56 x 45 ? Or is it?
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 3:03:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By LeitnerWise:
6.8 SPC for military use is anything but dead however it has a path to travel; legal reveue, safety certification, DODIC numbers, all of these need to be completed prior to adoption on anything but a limited scale. Are the military seriously pursuing this option - yes, are they in full agreement - no. Does 6.8 SPC meet the requirement - yes. There are purchases of small numbers of weapons going on at the moment and it seems that everyone is waiting for the first group to put their hand up and say we're in.


[start of rant]
This is normal and expected out of DoD and has been for years ( or decades ). Most individuals don't realize that what is now known SOCCOM was targeted to be completely eliminated under the '76-'80 POTUS, if re-elected. The SOF community (NSW, USA & USAF resources) at the time had no preceived value (post Vietnam, pre-Iran). Same applies to more effective round compared the the current 5.56MM (this includes the MK262 Mod0/1). [end of rant]

There have been many posts about logistics issues with the 6.8SPC (and others such as the 6.5G) in the field, resupply etc. Under those conditions, if re-supply of any small-arms ammo is an issue, they (former and current) SOCCOM teams can run an AK47/74 better than their opponents. This is a non-issue. IMHO.

What is important is a "Land Warfare Legal" cartiridge that drops the opposition faster than any of the current 5.56MM loadings. The 6.8 SPC was the first in place with ALL the requirements. The requirements including terminal performance AND available hardware (16" and shorter barrels & mag capacity). The 6.5G has only recently meet those requirements. I am waiting for DocGKR testing on the 6.5G. As I have posted before, if the 6.5G is equal to or exceeds the 6.8SPC, then I will also have at least two POW (Personaly Owned Weapons) in 6.5G, in addition to my 6.8SPC.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 3:17:09 PM EDT
My what a shooter! The 6.8 does seem to always shoot well out of a decent barrel.....

it's not going away, that's for sure!

Link Posted: 3/15/2006 3:26:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Gunwritr:
My what a shooter! The 6.8 does seem to always shoot well out of a decent barrel.....
it's not going away, that's for sure!



, where is this directed? And no it (6.8SPC) is not going away.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 3:43:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/15/2006 3:46:33 PM EDT by watersniper]
Sure I'll pile in here too...

Here's my dead end, no-cheap-ammo-available-POS rifle:

It's a "slow" round (2400-2650FPS) so that means when I shoot at you down range, your 3200FPS bullet will kill me right before my bullet kills you...

ETA: BUT... Since it's a LITTLE slower that means my barrel MIGHT last a LITTLE longer than yours!



Link Posted: 3/15/2006 3:58:42 PM EDT
See..another 6.8 that shoots all over the page....LOL.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 4:15:46 PM EDT
I don't think 6.8 is going anywhere but up. It's the only caliber I'd consider in an AR aside from the conventional 9mm, 5.56N, and 7.62N.

I think the 6.5 is a cool round too, but it's still a specialty round. I have had some nasty thoughts of a 16" Rem 700 chambered in 6.5 with a suppressor though. Don't ask, it just popped into my head one day.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 4:17:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/15/2006 4:18:36 PM EDT by Gunwritr]
Pcurtis
It was originally directed at the groups in dennysguns post....but watersniper's look fine too..........
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 4:46:30 PM EDT
I would chose either a 6.8 or a 6.5 looooong before a WSSM....
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 5:00:49 PM EDT
My theory is that even if the .mil never ever thinks of the 6.8 or 6.5 again, the demand from civilian shooters is high enough to keep these cartridges around. .mil adoption is not necessary for there to be cheap ammo. Popularity will drive the prices down.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 5:13:49 PM EDT
I hope 6.8 comes commerically available.

Because 5.56 wound probably come down in price. I would be able to buy more.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 5:17:30 PM EDT
I'm not trying to start a flame war here. I've just recently started to read about the 6.8 vs 6.5 calibers. That said, what am I missing here in this data from a Glocktalk Black Rifle thread? It seems to me that the Grendel is superior to the 6.8 Rem SPC across the entire range spectrum from 0 to 1,000yds.

Range(yds)      Vel(fps.)      ft/lbs.     drop(ins.)    drift(ins.)
6.5mm Grendel 123 grain Lapua Scenar (reload)

0 2450.0 1639.1 -1.5 0.0
100 2295.8 1439.3 0.0 0.71
200 2147.1 1258.9 -5.1 2.94
300 2004.0 1096.7 -17.76 6.85
400 1866.9 951.7 -39.09 12.6
500 1736.1 823.0 -70.4 20.38
600 1612.5 710.0 -113.27 30.39
1000 1210.3 400.0 -441.73 96.43

6.8mm SPC 110 grain V-Max (reload)

0 2539.0 1574.3 -1.5 0.0
100 2308.4 1301.3 0.0 1.02
200 2089.8 1066.6 -5.05 4.26
300 1883.8 866.6 -18.08 10.08
400 1691.6 698.8 -40.95 18.87
500 1515.8 561.1 -76.02 31.06
600 1359.5 451.4 -126.27 47.08
1000 987.0 237.9 -559.03 150.8
Also, why does the 6.8 group have a sticky on the AR15 Discussion link but the 6.5 group only have one under AR Variants? With the Wolf Ammo coming out for the 6.5 rather than the 6.8, it seems to me that the ammo gurus think the 6.5 has a future.

Those of you who have one or the other or both, I'd like to understand what you think are the pluses and minuses of each.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 5:18:40 PM EDT
6.8 is commercially available. Rem, Hornady and SSA are all gracing shelves and in stock across the land of Sam.

5.56 is not gonna fall any lower IMO as the rock bottom rpicing is all steel cased and surplus.

Simon
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 5:28:20 PM EDT
So, if one waits for the Wolf ammo for the 6.5 to come out this fall, do you think it will help drive down the price of both the 6.5 and 6.8 ammo?

Balistically, it looks to me like the 6.5 is a better round (flatter shooting for a heavier bullet) as it carries its power out farther.

What about a 6.8 in a heavier bullet like 130 - 150grn?
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 5:28:26 PM EDT
I think 6mmx45mm is the real ticket to a little extra thump out of the AR platform. Same mags, bolts and brass as .556. Get an extra 100 fps for the same bullet weight vs. .556.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 5:33:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/15/2006 5:34:08 PM EDT by watersniper]
I will seriously look at a Grendel in an AR when it becomes a caliber option I can have MY local and trusted gunsmith/ARFCOM dealer chamber a barrel and tweak it to my liking... If that doesn't become a reality then I may look at an SBR 6.8SPC with an ACOG or something of that nature... (NO I'm not going to pay his 6.5 licensing fees first, either.)

Yes, the 6.5 is supposed to be balistically superior. I don't base my gun purchase decisions based on balistics alone. Apparently most of you do?
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 5:36:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By LeitnerWise:
6.8 SPC for military use is anything but dead however it has a path to travel; legal reveue, safety certification, DODIC numbers, all of these need to be completed prior to adoption on anything but a limited scale. Are the military seriously pursuing this option - yes, are they in full agreement - no. Does 6.8 SPC meet the requirement - yes. There are purchases of small numbers of weapons going on at the moment and it seems that everyone is waiting for the first group to put their hand up and say we're in.



Thanks for sharing Paul. It's nice to have an insider's input.

Take care brother.

Justin
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 5:44:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By watersniper:
I will seriously look at a Grendel in an AR when it becomes a caliber option I can have MY local and trusted gunsmith/ARFCOM dealer chamber a barrel and tweak it to my liking... If that doesn't become a reality then I may look at an SBR 6.8SPC with an ACOG or something of that nature... (NO I'm not going to pay his 6.5 licensing fees first, either.)



I guess you aren't sincere about that because you could have done what you say you want months ago if you'd even looked into it...
www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=329990

Get your credit card ready and act fast when Midway gets another batch of reamers in because they usually sell out quick.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 6:09:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Griz:

Originally Posted By watersniper:
I will seriously look at a Grendel in an AR when it becomes a caliber option I can have MY local and trusted gunsmith/ARFCOM dealer chamber a barrel and tweak it to my liking... If that doesn't become a reality then I may look at an SBR 6.8SPC with an ACOG or something of that nature... (NO I'm not going to pay his 6.5 licensing fees first, either.)



I guess you aren't sincere about that because you could have done what you say you want months ago if you'd even looked into it...
www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=329990

Get your credit card ready and act fast when Midway gets another batch of reamers in because they usually sell out quick.



OK I stand corrected! So Randall and ADCO and Denny can just go to town making these then? (I see Randall is/was in the process of licensing???) Sweet. I'll tell Steve to tool up and make me one. Now do I have to pay for that reamer because it's technically one time use? Or can he pay for it and crank out barrels to cover the reamer cost?
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 6:24:32 PM EDT
I'm a HUGE advocate for the Grendel. It's a great round with ballistics that are superior in every way, I believe. The only missing piece was a cheap source of ammo. Insert Wolf here!!!

Link Posted: 3/15/2006 6:27:59 PM EDT
SSA is presently working up .277 (as opposed to 6.8) bullets for the 6.8. These tend to be longer and have a better BC. Just how successfult hey are will be determined by how fast you can drive them. If they can take them to 2,400fps or so....they should comfortably compete.

The 6.8 started life as a fighting cartridge to deliver better terminal effects in an AR-15 package at combat ranges of up to 300m. That's why the development bullets were LOLW compliant OTMs.
It's also extremely FA and belt feed friendly with its case profile. All it's development was done using short and shorter barrel lengths.

6.5G started with the premise of designing a case around a VLD type bullet like the Scenar. It's original function was to produce a long range precision AR solution. That's why the development was primarily on rifle length and longer barrels. I am lookign forward to the data from the SBRs.
One question that I keep asking and have not yet received a reply to is the function of the 6.5G in FA.

OTH I know that 6.8 performs like a champ in FA. I have personally observed 3 round bursts all ringing Larues at 100 yard. Does that mean that 6.5G can't? I dunno.....but I haven't seen it do so.

I do KNOW that 6.8SPC is actually safety certified for at least one Service Branch.

What I don't get is the notion that there can only be one successor to the 5.56. If 6.8 floats your boat, good luck to ya. If 6.5G floats yer boat, ditto. The commercial reality is that despite the oft repeated claims of the imminent demise of 6.8 is that it is now SAAMi specified and rolling out the doors of 3 major manufacturers to the tune of mroe than 1.5 million rounds a month. It's in Midawy and Cabelas and is now seen on shelves in gun stores. Ammo is catching up with the increasing number of manufacturers offering 6.8SPC.

Best of all, I know that it will do 2400fps from a 10.5in barrel. Which is exactly what I am interested in.

Simon


Link Posted: 3/15/2006 6:46:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/15/2006 6:48:30 PM EDT by WalkerTexasRanger]

Originally Posted By SimonTan:One question that I keep asking and have not yet received a reply to is the function of the 6.5G in FA.




Simon,

Bill answered this question after you asked it in the 6.5 Tactical Update 3 thread:

"Fully automatic function was tested and signed off before the units were released."

Bill Alexander

Also, here is an, albeit short, video of a piston auto running the Grendel.

www.aresdefense.com/GSR-35/GSR-35-Grendel.MPG
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 6:53:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By watersniper:
So Randall and ADCO and Denny can just go to town making these then?



No, they can't get into the buisness of selling Grendel barrels without being licensed by AA. *YOU* as an individual consumer can buy a reamer and send it to the gunsmith of your choice and have him use *your* reamer to make a barrel for you. If you want something really custom, AA has made reamers available to you, but it's going to be more expensive than just buying an upper from a licensed manufacturer and you're on your own as far as tweaking the barrel extension geometry to make it function reliably.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 9:35:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/15/2006 9:37:51 PM EDT by Onslaught]

Originally Posted By Griz:

Originally Posted By watersniper:
So Randall and ADCO and Denny can just go to town making these then?



No, they can't get into the buisness of selling Grendel barrels without being licensed by AA. *YOU* as an individual consumer can buy a reamer and send it to the gunsmith of your choice and have him use *your* reamer to make a barrel for you. If you want something really custom, AA has made reamers available to you, but it's going to be more expensive than just buying an upper from a licensed manufacturer and you're on your own as far as tweaking the barrel extension geometry to make it function reliably.


Exactly my (and a lot of other folks) holdup with the Grendel. Even AA himself will tell you that it takes more talent than your average yahoo can muster to assemble a Grendel that works properly.

I've waffled back and forth, but held my money so far... I have purchased a box of 6.8 from my local dealer even though I don't have a rifle... just because I can. I asked about the Grendel, and the guy behind the counter said "huh? what type of rifle is that?"

So unless my compulsion wins, I will continue to hold my cash until after this majical $5 per box Wolf ammo shows up in "May, June, July". Next time I hear it mentioned, I'm sure it will have changed to August.

OR I may just buy a 6.8 now, and sell my AR10 if the Grendel ever makes it to dealers shelves near me.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 10:10:49 PM EDT
I am curious as to how the soon to be released m14 magazine adapter for the MGI lower is going to play into all this. IT will allow the use of a standard sized AR upper to fire .308, or at least the MGI QCB upper. It seems like everyone is trying to get .308-ish performance out of a standard AR platform, now someone has figured out how to get a .308 into an AR...sorta.

Link Posted: 3/15/2006 11:12:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SimonTan:

The 6.8 started life as a fighting cartridge to deliver better terminal effects in an AR-15 package at combat ranges of up to 300m.




Understanding this statement is key to understanding the issue at hand.
Link Posted: 3/15/2006 11:13:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By yekimak:
I am curious as to how the soon to be released m14 magazine adapter for the MGI lower is going to play into all this. IT will allow the use of a standard sized AR upper to fire .308, or at least the MGI QCB upper. It seems like everyone is trying to get .308-ish performance out of a standard AR platform, now someone has figured out how to get a .308 into an AR...sorta.




The bolt is paper thin. I have some concerns. Not only that, but I have no clue how they plan to time it. AR10 carriers are MASSIVE.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:11:58 AM EDT
Are there any gel tests for the available 6.8 rounds? It was my understanding that the excellent results were from early, pre-producton ammo that was significantly hotter than anything being sold, and perhaps a different construction? I am reminded of all the AK74 guys who base their effectiveness claims on the Soviet combat ammo that is not available in the US.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 5:16:22 AM EDT
Silver State 115gr OTM comes in at 2650fps form a 16" barrel, which is a smidgen more than the original spec.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 5:36:31 AM EDT
I plan to buy a 6.8 upper so I can use my AR for deer hunting this year so I can retire my Model 99 Savage from woods duty. (Anyone know if the 6.8 is legal in Minnesota?) It may not have the ballistics of the Grendal, but I can buy a complete upper for around $350, I can get ammo at the same store where I buy ammo for my Model 99, and deer don't seem to notice minor differences in ballistic charts when they die.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 5:37:26 AM EDT
The 6.8SPC will only get stronger, production ammo, mags, suppressors, quality equipment and not to mention it's own merits of a defense round. Don't listen to people that compare it to other cartridges. Take it for what it is and what it will do, others have, and it is catching on. Talk with people that have a 6.8SPC and not folks that just read about it or parrot what others say.You will see alot more of the 6.8 SPC. Get on board, you will love it!
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 6:46:44 AM EDT
I just learned one strong argument in favor of the 6.8 SPC over the 6.5 Grendal, at least for Minnesota residents: the 6.8 is specifically legal for hunting deer. The 6.5 G is not mentioned by name. That doesn't mean it's illegal, but if you had the bad luck to run up against a game warden with a hard on against black rifles he could at the very least cause you enough problems to end your hunting trip. At worst you could end up an expensive test case, losing your hunting priviledges and rifle in the process. To me that is a hell of a lot more incentive to get the 6.8 then some ballistics chart on the Internet.

But then what do I know? I use my guns for hunting and shooting and don't just yap about them online so I probably don't qualify as an Internet expert.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 6:58:17 AM EDT
Tag because I am torn between the 6.5 and 6.8
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 7:00:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 7:02:37 AM EDT by WalkerTexasRanger]

Originally Posted By lobotomyboy:
I just learned one strong argument in favor of the 6.8 SPC over the 6.5 Grendal, at least for Minnesota residents: the 6.8 is specifically legal for hunting deer. The 6.5 G is not mentioned by name. That doesn't mean it's illegal, but if you had the bad luck to run up against a game warden with a hard on against black rifles he could at the very least cause you enough problems to end your hunting trip. At worst you could end up an expensive test case, losing your hunting priviledges and rifle in the process. To me that is a hell of a lot more incentive to get the 6.8 then some ballistics chart on the Internet.

But then what do I know? I use my guns for hunting and shooting and don't just yap about them online so I probably don't qualify as an Internet expert.



This exact issue is addressed in the email below:

Wed, 04 Jan 2006 10:24:52 -0600
From: "Ross Opsahl" <ross.opsahl@dnr.state.mn.us> Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
To: walkermarka@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Legal Cartridge list

Mark, the list is update approximately annually. If a cartridge meets
the statute language for case length and caliber it is a legal big game
cartridge regardless if it appears on the "list". Both cartridges you
reference meet the caliber and case length minimum and will be added to
the list with the next update. Thank you for your interest in the list.

Sincerely,

2LT Ross Opsahl

>>> Mark Walker <walkermarka@yahoo.com> 1/4/2006 9:43:30 AM >>>
Hi,

I was wondering what it would take to get a couple of
cartridges added to your legal cartridge list?

I am specifically referring to two current Alexander
Arms products, the .50 Beowolf and the 6.5 Grendel.

Info on both can be found at www.alexanderarms.com

Thanks!!

Mark Walker

Link Posted: 3/16/2006 7:10:46 AM EDT
Thanks Mark. I'd advise anyone hunting with a 6.5 Grendal in northern Minnesota to print that email and carry it with them while hunting because of the possibility of running into a game warden who is a real Dudley Dooright prick.

To be honest, I haven't encountered a real jackass game warden up there since Ted Sinada retired 15 years ago. Maybe they're being a bit more selective about who or what they hire these days. Every one I've encountered in recent years has been professional and polite. I guess I can't shake the heebee jeebees I still get from the bad old days.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 7:18:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 7:19:50 AM EDT by WalkerTexasRanger]

Originally Posted By lobotomyboy:
Thanks Mark. I'd advise anyone hunting with a 6.5 Grendal in northern Minnesota to print that email and carry it with them while hunting because of the possibility of running into a game warden who is a real Dudley Dooright prick.

To be honest, I haven't encountered a real jackass game warden up there since Ted Sinada retired 15 years ago. Maybe they're being a bit more selective about who or what they hire these days. Every one I've encountered in recent years has been professional and polite. I guess I can't shake the heebee jeebees I still get from the bad old days.



No problem. It came up earlier, in Jan as you can see, and I figured the issue might as well be addressed right then.

Good hunting with whatever you choose!!!
Top Top