6.5 Grendel vs the .243 what would you rather have?

Where the heck are you finding $6/box Grendel ammo at an Academy or Wal-Mart? Are you thinking 7.62x39?

 

Nope, 6.5 Grendel steel cased goodness from Wolf. Our local stores occasionally have it in stock for about $6 a box, depending on sales. Plenty to be found online in cases at reasonable prices (shipping costs less for larger orders per case or can shop around for free ship at some stores).

https://ammoseek.com/ammo/6.5mm-grendel

Pretty sure its my next AR.

 

My reasons are simple. I have a .243. It works perfectly for what I want it for. I have dies, brass, bullets and I was impressionable when it came out in, I believe, 1955. "500 ft lb at 400 yards".

 

I have a 6.5 Grendel AR-15 and a 243 Win. Encore rifle. Neither really set my life on fire in either of these rifles.

As far as 243 Win, the Encore rifle probably is a great limiter in getting the most from the round. A bolt rifle would probably be better.

I just cannot get enthusiastic about working with the 6.5 Grendel AR-15, or a 6.8 SPC AR-15, or a 6mmx45 AR-15. I have all three. They have their purposes but none of them fit the performance that I'd like to have.

Sorry for all the negative waves.

 

More people should shoot the Grendel. I need more brass in the ground for me to pick up, and more demand for 6.5 bullets so factories scale up production and drop price. I really like my grendel, it's just kind of expensive to load...

 

I'd take the 6.5 Grendel. I don't hunt so terminal performance is irrelevant. The .243 has more recoil and expense than I need to punch paper. Steel case 6.5 G ammo can be had for $.25 per round for plinking and there's great, accurate higher end factory stuff for hunting, etc. I'm really thinking of picking up the Howa Mini in 6.5 Grendel to be honest.

 

And I am 180 from that I have an irrational HATE of these new flavors that are so close to the old standards it drives me batty. I would never own the 6.5 but am on the hunt for a nice vintage 243.

 

Never thought I would see 243 marked for recoil.
I would go with the 243 simply for the market availability and versatility. A lot of needs are covered between a 65gn and 95gn bullet, and up to 110gn with the right twist rate.
A few years of popularity could change that but it's hard to ignore things like brass availability and price.
The biggest advantage of the new cartridges are the factory offered rifles. They are barreled with twist rates that favor heavier bullets with high BCs, many of which won't stabilize in the factory offerings for other cartridges of the same caliber.

 

I don't dislike the new cartridges but do have a distaste for the things said about them. I would like to see someone re-barrel a 260 with a faster twist so I can watch it outperform the Creedmoor. Not for anything worth while. Self admittedly it would be purely for the neener, neener moment. Petty, I know.

 

I chose the .243. I guess I'm set in my ways. The Rem 788 in .243 I bought 40 some years ago has accounted for over 40 deer and numerous coyotes and foxes, and been used by my daughters, sons, brothers, friends and Dad with no complaints. I've got the components and so many loaded rounds that I'll never have to by more.

A new rifle in the 6.5 might be nice but my newest rifle is that modern wiz bang cartridge the .45-70 in a Marlin GG.

 

You say the rifle is the same, so what kind? If a bolt action, I guess I'd say 243. For a semi auto I'm not sure, so I didn't vote above. I'm not really a fan of either caliber personally just because neither suits my needs and I think for many applications there are other better cartridges.

Really, I'd say forget both and go 6.5 Creedmoor or .223 in either bolt or semi unless it's a dedicated hunting gun and then 243 makes sense. The problem is that 243 and 6.5G are different length cartridges suited to different guns so it's difficult to compare them.

 

I forgot to mention another plus the Grendel has in it's favor is that it uses roughly 1/4-1/3 less powder.

 

Not saying it’s not a good/great cartridge. Just that it has more to do with rifle it’s offered in than cartridge design. I’ve owned one so I don’t mind new cartridges. I love the 204 and look forward to a 6.5 prc.

 

IMHO it really comes down to the AR fanboi....I really think half of these new flavors would not exist if they did not want to put them in that platform. You like your black plastic toaster of a gun...fine more power to you. You will never see someone 100 years from not going look at the lines on that rifle, so sleek it is just art in gun form. I don't hate the AR but to me it is about as good looking as a P38 can opener.

Now show me a Model 70, 700, even a savage 99 in 243 and yea there is some beauty there to go along with the function......and as to putting a hole where you want to put a hole....they all do it about equally as well....the old bolt guns may do it better.

Now shut up and get off my lawn.

 

For the most part I don't like ANY of the intermediate cartridges because they fit in an ar15. A lot of them are designed for ar pattern rifles, but the grendel comes from the 220 Russian, in the family of the 7.62x39. Those cartridges are not really best suited to the ar, but they work like a dream in a bolt gun... And nobody can argue my cz 527 is ugly

 

I always thought the lines of the A1 are iconic and aesthetically pleasing.





Polymer and metal, an abstract composition.





I was about to post:

You can't get them in the same gun if you want an AR platform as you are going to go large frame for the 243 and small frame for the Grendel.


Between the two I would go Grendel.

 

My CZ 452 Lux might be the 'prettiest' rifle that I own. I love a beautifully constructed bolt action.


If I were going to buy a bolt action in either 6.5 or 243 it would be the Grendel, because I would use it as a lightweight deer rifle and the Grendel is plenty potent for that. Nothing wrong with a 243 though. Great cartridge.

 

Agree. I liked the A1 I was issued, and very much liked my M16A2 I got later on (aside from 3rd burst). Always liked the full sized dimensions, fixed stock, great adjustable sights, and all business look. Those 'things' shown in the second photo... To each their own, just not my cup of tea and I'm sure they bring great joy to their owners.

 

Those two on the bottom are mine. If you shot them I bet you would change your tune. Lots of refinements like adjustable gas, match grade triggers, etc that make them shoot like a dream. Yeah, they look like space guns though.


I know what you mean though on some of the beautiful old standards like a blued Model 70 with a walnut stock with a lot of figure. Simply elegant.

 

Not having a bolt gun for the Grendel, I cannot disagree. About not really being best suited for an AR...the 6.5 Grendel was designed for the AR by Janne Pohjoispää, an engineer working for Lapua, and Bill Alexander. The AR was the gun of choice.

 

243. Its my favorite deer rifle, and I have been using it for years, which places us in the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" scenario. Also, I have never had difficulty finding ammo for my 243.

 

A grendel sounds like something you would shoot with a .243.

 

I have a 527, and even with all the hype it gets I still think it is not enough, color me a big fanboi of that rifle. Mine is in 223, as I had buckets of the stuff. I bought my AR back in the 80's before they got cool....I think it has not been out of the safe in about 10 years now. I guess being an early 80's gun (still have the 5 round mags) it is worth something in some places, but I will never sell it, some tacticool guy with the perfect bend in his hat will take it all apart and screw it all up. I think it might endup like being like a 4th gen supra, where everyone is screwed up but those originals are something special....then again it could just be another ugly plastic fantastic.