Better performing round: 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC

[usmarine0352_2005]

.


What is the better performing round, the 6.5 Grendel or the 6.8 SPC?







What would be better on coyotes?

.

 

[rbernie]

I would imagine that the answer depends in large part on how far away you will realistically be shooting and whether you want to handload or not.

 

[MrSpiffy]

With good shot placement, either will kill a coyote. Shoot... a .22LR would kill a coyote. I doubt either would be a bad choice, albeit a bit more expensive to shoot than other, more common rounds.

 

[TheGrimReaper]

6.5 Grendal hands down.

 

[Taurus44]

Inside 400 yards, it's a wash. Beyond that and the Grendel starts to shine.

 

[68wj]

Bigger fights have been started with lesser questions.

I went back and forth between the two while doing a build and went with the 6.8 SPC. Couldn't be happier! So far it has killed quite a bit of paper and a decent sized doe. For whitetail 300 yards is a safe number, coyotes even further. Factory loads or handloading components are easily available with bullets in the 85-120 grain span and common powders.

The 6.5 is good too. They are a lot more similar than either give credit. Fortunately AA relaxed their control of the Grendel name and 6.5 ammo might be easier/cheaper to find.

 

[juk]

Wolf is supposedly coming out with steel cased 6.5 Grendel rounds. I was kinda in the same boat. I had it down to the Grendel and the 6.8. I decided on the Grendel, then read up on the newer SPC II chamber, and waffled around a bit before I decided that, to me, the Grendel looked better. I like to think that my builds main goal will be "long range" paper punching, but realistically I will probably not venture much further than 600 yards or so. From what I can tell about handloads in the barrel length I want, the Grendel would start to fly a little better past 3-400 yards. Its all subjective though. Whatever extra drop the SPC would have over the Grendel could be easily found and accounted for. I honestly believe that both are so close inside of 300 yards that you wouldn't really notice a difference. Nor would any animal you chose to fling a bullet at.

 

[Quiet]

IMO...
6.5mm Grendel = medium-long range
6.8mm SPC = short-medium range

 

[Ranger30-06]

Inside of 200 yards, 6.8mm
Outside of 200 yards, 6.5mm


The 6.8 is a little better as far as power, but the 6.5 holds its power better at longer ranges. The 6.5 though is a reloader's cartridge, however the 6.8 is a little more popular and cheaper of you don't reload.

 

[JustinJ]

I like the 6.5 as it is far more versatile. As others have said the 6.8 has the edge at closer range but not by that much. At distance the 6.5 is way ahead of the 6.8.

I'm just hoping the 6.5 x 45 (6.5 MPC) takes off. BC of the 6.5 out of an AR with only a barrel swap. 95 grain moving 2600 fps out of a 12" barrel. Who could ask for more?

 

[mokin]

I don't think the coyote will be able to tell the difference.

I wanted to build a 6.5 Grendel but the parts weren't available at the time. It seemed like the 6.5 had a slight edge on range and bullet selection. In the end though, I went with 6.8SPC as the build components were more readily available and I couldn't really see myself making many shots beyond 500 yards.

The rumored ammunition from Wolf has big appeal for the 6.5 Grendel. The variety of components available to build a 6.8SPC appeals to me there.

 

[HJ857]

Wolf Gold in 6.5 Grendel has been available for a good two years now. I messed with it and found it to be pretty poor and underpowered, and the brass was lousy too. My initial attraction to the Wolf ammo was the chance at a good supply of brass to reload. Maybe it's gotten better since I worked with it.

The other big question besides ballistics is which round has reliable magazines. Again, my experience is a couple years in the past, but getting reliable mags for the Grendel was a VERY sketchy and annoying process.

Maybe that's also changed recently, but if not, the Grendel can easily turn your semi auto AR into a rifle that's slower to operate than any bolt rifle.

My experience with the Grendel was expensive and frustrating. I came to the conclusion that my AR's are staying 5.56 and a decent bolt rifle in .308 would be a better option and a whole lot less expensive in the long run.

 

[TIMC]

I think for the most part its really a matter of what calls to you. I went with the Grendel and have been super happy with this round. I am running hand loads with a heavy bullet (129 grain SST's) My longest kill on a coyote so far is 275 yards. I find it very comfortable to shoot and extreemly accurate. out of my 20" barreled A.A. AR-15.

 

[Float Pilot]

The 6.8mm SPC (270 short) was intended as a replacement military round that would meet certain criteria.

1. Work well from the 14.5 inch barrel length of an M4 carbine.
2. Allow the same magazine curve & length, so field gear did not have to be redesigned.
3. Increase close range lethality / disabling over the 5.56mm.
4. Require minimal modification to a standard M4 small sized AR.

The selection of the .277 caliber was a compromise. During testing it was noted that the 6.5mm (264 cal) version did better at long range, while the 7mm (.284 caliber) did much better in creating wounds at practical carbine combat ranges. So they settled on a midway point, the .277 (6.8mm).


The 6.5mm Grendel really made a name for itself as being a very accurate cartridge which could also be used in an AR platform. For a long period of time the shoters in the Grendel camp have claimed higher velocities than those obtained with the 6.8mm SPC.
Although if you review most of that data it was with fairly hot hand-loads and with longer barrels.
The 6.5mm Grendel became a SAMMI cartridge about two months ago. So now you will see more loadings.

In many ways, both are spin offs from the .280 British (7mm NATO) project of the late 1940s. Which in itself was a spin off from the 7.92mm Kurtz.

Due to the constant disagreements regarding possible (real) velocity spreads between the 6.5mm Grendel and the 6.8mm SPC, I recently installed a 24 inch Black Hole Weaponry barrel on a 6.8mm SPC AR platform. Thus giving me a 16 inch and 24 inch barreled AR to test the 6.8mm SPC against the 6.5mm Grendel.

95 grain Bullets:

6.8mm SPC
95gr TTSX
28.3 gr H-4198
SSA virgin / CCI-41
2.275 col, no crimp
Vel= 3,080fps high 3,058 fps low. 24 inch bbl.
Vel=2,840 fps av from 16 inch bbl.
0.75 inch group including flyers in 24 inch
1.1 inch from 16 inch bbl.

6.5mm Grendel:
95gr V-Max
30.9 gr AA-2230
IMI/CCI LR
2.250 col
Vel= 2,885 fps from a 18 inch AR
0.40 inch grp at 100 yards.

107 - 110 grain bullets:

6.8mm SPC
110 grain Barnes Triple Shock
30.5 grains AA-2230
SSA Brass, CCI-400 primer,
COL-2.237, Lee Crimp
16 inch = 2,550 fps 1.5 inch group
24 inch = 2,820 fps 0.80 inch group


6.5mm Grendel

107gr Sierra match King
29.3 grains AA-2230
IMI / CCI LR
2.260 col
18 inch bbl = 2,680 fps
0.60 inch group at 100 yards.


Basically the two have about the same velocity curve of about 25 fps gained per inch of barrel.
The 6.5mm Projectiles have a slightly better ballistic coefficient and thus tend to hold more velocity past 300-400 yards. (past ethical hunting ranges)

 

[Boanerges57]

float pilot did a great job of describing it.

just to add
6.8 has three different chamber designs, the latter two are better, the original saami 6.8mm spc chamber is to be avoided.

6.5 has two chamber designs; the original 6.5 grendel and the 264 lbr (les bauer slightly "modified" the chamber, some say it is a slight improvement) now that grendel is a saami cartridge im curious if they will continue to make their own version.

 

[juk]

The 264 LBC had a compounded throat angle. I believe the chamber for 264 LBC was .295 while the Grendel has a non-compounded throat and chamber of .300. Someone please correct me if the info is wrong. I pulled that from memory.

Some say that the 264 is "inherently" more accurate than the Grendel, but when you are already shooting bugholes, I believe it comes down to the shooter more than "inherent" accuracy.

Make no mistake about it, both are very good rounds. If I were to build a hunting carbine, there is no doubt about it that I would go for the SPC. It was designed to offer very good results from shorter barrels. I have seen where people have combined the SPC II, a long pipe, and handloads and have done well out to 1K yards.

Either way, pick one and build it. You will like either cartridge.

 

[JustinJ]

Float Pilot, its my understanding that the grendel has a BC of .510 and the 6.8 has a BC of .35. Is that not more than "slightly better" lending to the grendel being signficantly superior at long distance with a realistic range out to 1000 yards? To me the real beauty of the grendel is that it could replace the 5.56 for standard infantry and 7.62 for DMR roles.

 

[wnycollector]

the grendel being significantly superior at long distance with a realistic range out to 1000 yards

This is an interesting article about the 6.5 at very long distances. http://www.6mmbr.com/65grendel.html

 

[Float Pilot]

Float Pilot, its my understanding that the grendel has a BC of .510 and the 6.8 has a BC of .35. Is that not more than "slightly better"

I did say within reasonable hunting (or combat) distances. And do not get me wrong,
I am a big 6.5mm Fan. Particularly in bolt guns where they can be loaded long, using the longer and heavier bullets.
But the shorter bullets often nessecary in an AR action are often not real high in the BC department.


For example: some 6.8mm (.277caliber) bullet B.C.s
6.8mm Bullets
90gr Speer HP= .275 BC not sure I believe that one
95gr TTSX = .296 BC
110 gr Accubond = .370 BC
110 gr Bares TTSX= .377 bc
120 grain Hornady SST= .400 BC
120 gr Barnes Banded = .438 BC Takes a 1 in 10 twist most of the time.
130 gr Nosler Bal-Tip = .433 bc
130gr SST = .460 bc

6.5mm (264 caliber) Bullets

85 gr Sierra HP = .225 BC
95 gr Hornady A-Max = .365 BC
107 gr Sierra HPBT = .430 BC
110 gr Barnes Banded Solids = .452 BC
120 grain A-Max = .465 BC
120gr Nosler Bal-Tip = .458 BC
130 gr Nosler Accubond = .488 BC

So.... If I fire a 120 grains .277 caliber Hornady SST (BC of .400) at 2,720 fps from my 24 inch 6.8mmSPC (which I do)
And then lets say we use a 24 inch barreled AR, for the 6.5 Grendel using a 120 grain A-Max (BC of .465) at the same velocity::::::::::

120 gr 6.8mm with BC of .400
100 yrds= 2,500 fps... 300 yrds=2,093 fps...600 yrds=1,563 fps..800yrds=1,283 fps

6.5mm, 120 gr with BC of .465
100 yrds= 2,530 fps...300 yrds=2,175 fps...600 yrds= 1,700 fps..800yrds=1,430 fps

But as you can see there are some 270 and 264 caliber bullets which are pretty close in BCs.

BTW I have loaded 150 grain Speer flat based spitzers up to 2250 fps from my 24 inch 6.8mm. But those were really hot loads.

 

[Stack]

When I look at a chambering option I look first at what range a projectile of a given weight will reliably expand. That's the maximum range at which, for that cartridge I will then begin to consider energy, the path of trajectory, drift, etc.
I think this gives me a realistic point from which to base a decision because for me although I mostly punch paper I need to know what I can or should expect on game etc. I hunt only hogs and coyotes these days but I still believe in a humane dispatch.

 

[juk]

The newer Grendel specific bullets from Hornady claim upwards of .5. I know the 123 A-Max is published at .510. Berger 130 VLD .552. 123 Scenars .547. SMK 123 .510. I saw all those figures posted by float pilot and had to go digging myself. Some of these bullets put out some impressive numbers. The lighter 6.5 bullets will dip down in the .3 range though. I'm sure if you looked around a bit you could find components to make a SPC load almost replicate a Grendel at extended distances.

 

[Float Pilot]

The problem with loading for an AR length platform is the darn tight COL.
here you can see how deep you must load a 120 gr Barnes banded solid in the 6.8mm case.
This takes up powder room.

Alexander Arms shot themselves in the foot by holding on to exclusive rights on the 6.5mm Grendel for much too long.

 

[GunNut]

I killed a coyote at 360 yards with one shot from my Noveske Recon 16" 6.8spc this year. Bullet was a 100gr Nosler Accubond loaded at near max load in SSA brass.

 

[Tirod]

My vote for coyote is 5.56. Frankly, as a builder of a 6.8SPC rifle I've used hunting deer, I wouldn't bother choosing it for a specific coyote gun. The downrange foot pounds of force aren't needed. Just get a nice accurate 20" 5.56 AR15 with low powered scope of choice.

AMMUNITION WILL COST THE SAME - if you're talking commercial loads specified for accuracy and quality. What you do the rest of the time might impact your choice. In an all purpose gun that gets used on a three gun shooting basis, the 5.56 would be preferred for less expensive and adequately accurate ammo. Live targets, the others obviously have a place when it's medium game. 5.56 might even be disallowed.

I seriously doubt this one gun will be used exclusively for coyote, what's more important is to evaluate what it will do 85% of the time, target and distances. Then go with what works best overall.

I DID build the 6.8 exclusively for deer, most hunters don't shoot past 300 yards on average. That's pointed out by the .30-30 being the most popular cartridge 100 years running, and it's max effective range is about 250 yards.

In the minority of situations where shots over 300 yards might be normal, there are cartridges for that rare situation. Since most live game is shot under 300 yards, a high ballistic coefficient bullet isn't needed, nor are the compromises in design. In the AR15, they are all stuck to the same maximum mag length anyway.

You can buy an AR under $650 to do the job, I don't think you'll get an alternate caliber under $850. That's the premium you pay for the higher powered cartridges being non military. If not needed, don't bother, the coyotes won't feel a thing different.