Search results for query: *

Grump Quote: "I'm still not sold on the 144-gr 6.5mms. It's virtually the same amount of metal overall as the M80 ball bullet, and has a much more loopy trajectory. Goes to slow for me. I would *guess* that it would take longer to flip over on the terminal ballistics side of life."...

Quote from Das Pherd: "My head is killing me. After do many searches, all I see is people quoting ballistics etc. I know nothing about ballistics. Can someone do a side by side of these two rounds in laymans terms?" ____________________________________________________ Basically the two...

From what I've read the 6.8 SPC is shooting at 1.0 MOA at 300 meters - the cutoff threshold. Doesn't matter anymore...the SOCOM requirement is now a light version that must be in 5.56 and a heavy version that is in 7.62 and can take other calibers for long range shooting. From Remington...

The latest news from The Gun Zone on the SCAR is: NSWC-Crane releases "Draft Performance Specification: SOF Combat Assault Rifle Light." The caliber conversion requirements for the SCAR-L have been removed in favor of optimizing the weapon for the use of 5.56x45mm ammunition. (The proposed...

Quote from Bill Alexander on the development of the 6.5 Grendel: “In May 2003, the first 6.5 Grendel prototype rifle was unveiled to the world during an event at the Blackwater training center. The rifle and cartridge delivered outstanding accuracy with total reliability. Feedback was...

If the military adopts the 6.8 SPC or the 6.5 Grendel (large scale), they will have bullets made to military spec - most likely unlike the current bullets being used in either round. ...on the other hand, current 6.5 bullets in use are used against very large game and for game at long ranges...

In stating "identical terminal performance at short range", I meant "a wash" as you agree. You can't get identical terminal effect out of two identical rounds from the same manufacturer! ...but terminal performance is likely to be very close.

The Ballistics table above is correct: Yes, when you consider terminal energy the the 7.62 M118LR round delivers more energy at under 1000m ranges than the 6.5 Grendel (superior as you stated above). The 7.62 NATO M80 is surpassed by the 6.5 Grendel at 600m+ in energy delivered. The 6.5...

Ballistics of 6.5 Grendel compared to 5.56 and 7.62 NATO: 6.5 Grendel / 5.56 NATO / 7.62 NATO / 7.62 NATO 123 S.Lapua / M262 / M80 / M118LR .542 BC / 340 BC / .418 BC / .496 BC 2750fps / 2600fps / 2700fps / 2500fps Muzzle Velocity 1293ftlb / 1846ftlb / 2379ftlb / 2429ftlb Muzzle...

The military will be using the 6.5 Grendel as well. Spec Ops has great latitude in what they choose to use. Example: H&K SOCOM (MK23) was developed by military contract for US Spec Ops use yet various Spec Ops groups still adopted different pistols (Seals - Sig due to being more compact)...

Preacherman: The 6.5 Grendel will fit the same amount of rounds in the same magazine as the 6.8 SPC. There is only the thickness of a sheet of paper difference in case diameters!

Ballistics Comparison: 6.8 SPC / 6.5 Grendel Sierra 115 gr / 123 Scenar Lapua .340 BC / .542 BC 2422 / 2427 fps at 100m 1498 / 1609 ftlb at 100m +6.06 / +5.76 in drop at 100m 1.20 / .90 in drift at 100m (10mph) 1916 / 2102 300m Velocity...

I don't want another compromise round (6.8 SPC) The 6.8 SPC is a "limiting" cartridge in that it's effectiveness is less at longer range. :( I don't want another cartridge that limits me in some way.:mad: The 6.5 Grendel can be a good round for some of the long ranges we are now seeing...

I say the US Military should go with the 6.5 Grendel. The 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel have identical terminal performance at short range.:) The 6.5 Grendel has better ballistics at all ranges and better terminal performance at longer range.:D The 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel both overcome the 5.56...