6.5 Grendel, a happy mistake.

a reply to: Anathros

I have a buddy who is addicted to builds. I think he is up to 7 right now. I keep joking with him - "how many can you carry at once, much less fire?"

Personally, I would get one good AR and carry extra ammo.

But that is just me.

a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

500 meters isnt that much with a scoped rifle and a decent shooter.

Edit:

There are hunters who regularly take game at 1000 meters or more. Though not likely with 6.5.

a reply to: network dude

The percentage of propellant gas used to cycle the action is really quite minimal. If you were to trap that gas instead of using it for cycling, you wouldn't get much more of a increase in range. We're talking 10s of feet here, if that.

I looked into the 6.5 Grendel at one point; but went standard socom instead. My decision was during the Obama admin, and ammo supplies were not reliably available in certain calibers, the Grendel among them. The prices I was looking at were excessive, to boot, since it was a "boutique caliber" in the eyes of local dealers. It sounds like pricing has come down.

I wanted SOCOM because it's so ubiquitously available; as well as the idea that, in a crisis, I can replenish my stores with what other people no longer need. (I was building a firearm for civil defense, not hunting).

I don't hunt with the AR platform; I only know 1 whitetail hunter who does, and he is on a brushy place down by a slow muddy creek--less than 100 yd to his target when available.

in my experience, semi-autos simply cannot deliver the accuracy of a good bolt action rifle. I haven't shot a Grendel myself; but I think the claim of accuracy to 1200 yd is dubious. It may have acceptable DROP to that distance, with no windage. That's not the same as hitting a cervid in the heart at any range on a cloudy day with multiple cross-currents. And I wonder about the spread at a thousand yards---20 inches or more is probable ( 36+ inches is more realistic). Which is fine for suppressive fire, but not acceptable to punch out your season tag.

I have too much respect for arms to "rate" them. I view the question only in terms of what is useful for my needs. I hunt for meat, so I want a bullet that will go half way in and stop. I make jerky out of shoulder meat, so I seek as little hydraulic shock and jellying as possible. I prefer to damage only the "near" shoulder. I hunt in the west, where 700yd is a real possibility at a bighorn on the next cliff-face. So, just because it doesn't do for Graysen in no way makes it less wonderful for men of goodwill world-wide.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

500 meters isnt that much with a scoped rifle and a decent shooter.

Edit:

There are hunters who regularly take game at 1000 meters or more. Though not likely with 6.5.

I have hunted all my life and shots that far are pretty much considered unethical by the folks I hunt with. At that range it is pretty easy to simply wound an animal because of a puff of wind. It isn't like range shooting where you have a bench and no animal suffers.

That is just me though. Every deer I have shot in the last 20 years or so has fallen down dead within a few feet of where it was shot. I won't take a shot unless I am 95% certain that it will be an instant kill.

a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

Not sure why this would be considered unethical.

Unethical would be taking a buck with .223, not shooting a buck with 6.5 grendel at 500m, well within its ballistic capabilities.

I've never shot a deer at more than 180 meters.

I've seen bear taken at 800m with .338 Lapua Magnum.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

Not sure why this would be considered unethical.

Unethical would be taking a buck with .223, not shooting a buck with 6.5 grendel at 500m, well within its ballistic capabilities.

I've never shot a deer at more than 180 meters.

I've seen bear taken at 800m with .338 Lapua Magnum.

Must have been a great shot!

I gave you a star to share with the person who made it.

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

500 meters isnt that much with a scoped rifle and a decent shooter.

Edit:

There are hunters who regularly take game at 1000 meters or more. Though not likely with 6.5.

I have hunted all my life and shots that far are pretty much considered unethical by the folks I hunt with. At that range it is pretty easy to simply wound an animal because of a puff of wind. It isn't like range shooting where you have a bench and no animal suffers.

That is just me though. Every deer I have shot in the last 20 years or so has fallen down dead within a few feet of where it was shot. I won't take a shot unless I am 95% certain that it will be an instant kill.

I live in the south and haven't gotten to take shots on game at over 500 yards. That said, I wouldn't anyways. My longest shot was 437 yards (Nikon rangefinder) across a soybean field on a buck. I can practice out to 1000 yards at a friend's farm but try to keep it down to 600 yards. Anything more than that is unethical to me. I can imagine varmint hunting out to 1000 yards but that's different.

I'm also not one for carrying an AR around for hunting either. To me, it just looks foolish. Give me a nice walnut bolt action rifle like my Tikka 300wsm or my 25-06 Browning A-bolt 2. Precision Rifle Shooting doesn't belong in the hunting world imo. I know people are capable of taking those long range shots but you only see the videos of them hitting their targets. I wonder what people would really think if they showed all their misses or injured and unrecovered game. I doubt it would be the fad it is now.

a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

It was. The guy behind the gun was a sniper turned army pilot.

Hell of a shooter.

a reply to: Anathros


I would use an AR to kill hogs or coyote, but would still make ethical shots to kill not wound. I like a bolt for hunting. Use a shotgun for birds. I like to shoot target at range, but like you, I really am more concerned with keeping the sport alive, hunting ethically, not pissing off the non-hunting public, treating the land right and not being a pig.

Too many hunters go out, get drunk, never pick up their shells, trespass, damage private lands, tear up the ground, rip out fencing.

These people are pigs. If they keep it up, more and more of the non-hunting public will turn against the sport, and ethical hunters will pay the price.

Keep the faith!

a reply to: network dude

I believe it is prized for its counter-sniper applications. Or is that could be 6.5 Creedmor I'm thinking of

Regardless, get yourself a nice .50 Beowulf offering and complete the set

Great to see how "mistakes" can turn out so wonderfully. I don't own any chambered in 6.5 Grendel but do own a .50 Beowulf, .458 SOCOM and 5.7x28 AR-57 upper

EDIT: Also the "boring" 5.56 NATO and .300 BLK. Haven't got into pistol caliber carbines too much, but found a CZ-Scorpion EVO S3 pistol with brace pretty cheap over the Holidays and picked it up ($600!)

a reply to: JBurns

My wife bought me an M4 upper from PSA. Not typically my cup of tea as I prefer totally milspec, but not bad for the price.

Came with an LPK and I bought a lower for 50 bucks at a local shop.

All told it was a reasonable quality AR for less than $400 bucks.

$319 For the upper and LPK bundle, 50 for the lower. I already had a metric buttload of mags and ammo. The only "extra" I purchased was a front night sight.