You should. My 12.5" ARP in 6.8 SPC II is sub-MOA all day long, and with all ammo I've fed it, be it factory or my own handloads.

Personally, I don't think there's enough difference between the two to warrant much of an argument. I do think the Grendel is riding the coattails of another cartridge of same diameter projectile.

If you are staying inside of about 300 yards, then the 6.8 will shine. BC is an important aspect of longer range shooting, so it is something to look at. But at shorter ranges, I personally do not even look at it. I go with a quality bullet that will give me the terminal performance I am looking for. The 6.8 is a good hunting round in the AR-15 platform.

If someone wants to know ft/lbs. BC has to be entered. Same as bullet weight, diameter, MV.

Unless there is a ballistic calculator, I don't know about, that will provide ft/lbs without BC being entered.

While BC must be put into the calculator it has near zero bearing at short range on lb-ft of energy or terminal performance. In fact, terminal performance is often higher with a low BC bullet of the same weight at say.. 50 yards. A bullet with a wide meplat and a lower BC will usually create a greater wound channel than a high BC bullet of the same weight and velocity. Of course this only works when the velocity is the same.

My views

If you are a hunter, you need to look at bullet selection & performance. That is what sold me on the 6.8 in a non-AR rifle. I suggest you look at the bullet tests on the 68forum. While not highly scientific they are very surprising - especially the Speer HC, GoldDot, & Corelok 130gr bullets. Yes they DO expand. It is NOT a long range cartridge but it is easy to hit things under 300 yds & the bullets work at low velocities.

6.8 bullet expansion tests

The 6.8 outside the AR platform becomes a different cartridge. A longer magazine means more case capacity if chambered properly. What AR shooters love about the 6.8 is how well it does in their rifles with 16" barrels. But put it in a 22" or longer barrel with slower powders the "baby .270" really begins to shine.

FWIW

From page 1...

oh dear God..
this one will never die
it doesn't really matter at the end of the day
I have been running 6.8s for 10 years for close range stuff, generally inside of 200
just works

Agreed!

… cool

Double Naught Spy sure likes his 6.5 Grendel that shoots Hornady V-Max 95 grain from ChadTRG42. The pigs don't. But only for a moment.

Back when I made the choice of 6.8 or Grendel I was already loading for 6.5s and had bullets that would work In the Grendel so that made it an easy choice to me in an AR. It worked well (all the critters I shot with it died quickly) but I am a boltaction fan for hunting so I had a CZ 527 converted into what has become my favorite boltaction hunting rifle. If that rifle was chambered in 6.8 I am sure I would be just as happy with it

For my hunting shots in reality a 6.8 would have served just as well as the 6.5, well not sure about the coyote at 450 yards but that is the only critter I have shot past 350 yards with it. I doubt I would have been busting rocks at 600 yards with the 6.8 but that fun is something that is just for fun and knowledge.

Another reason I liked the Grendel is the basic design the case is very similar to the PPC line of cartridges and we know they can be accurate and from the start Grendel came with good brass, Lapua.

I hadn’t given any thought about what bullets I already had on hand. The supply of 100 gr BTs for my 260 would have me lean toward the Grendel, I suppose.

I didn’t mean to start a “ford/chevy” argument.

I am a 6.5 Grendel fan, not a fan boy. I don't care what people shoot so long as it is effective for their particular needs. I actually got into Grendel over 6.8 because of an incorrect consideration that a higher sectional density would mean better penetration. I was coming from .308 after abdominal surgery and needed a lower recoiling rifle and I had been the .223 route, but wanted better. Well, the sectional density of Grendel bullets are higher than those of 6.8, but that only matters so long as the bullet remains true and doesn't expand or deform significant. Well, nobody hunting wants bullets that remain pristine, LOL. And, as it turned out, both have reasonable penetration for hunting typical hogs, deer, etc., normal fare.

In my experience, there seems to be a higher percentage of tinkerers in the Grendel community than the 6.8 community. Historically, this was out of necessity because of the lack of commercial builders of Grendel and the lack of ammo manufacturers of ammo. Grendel folks seem to swell with pride for having personally made guns and personally loaded ammunition, custom tuning the two together. Nothing wrong with that, but I am one of the lesser numbers that don't build my own guns and don't load my own ammo. The Grendel community is smaller than the 6.8 community and that small size seems to bond them together more tightly as a community, IMHO.

In my experience, folks on both sides who are more of fan boys will stress particular features that they claim make one platform superior over the other and the features that are superior are always deemed of greater significance than any superior features offered by the opposition. As far as I am concerned, it is nothing but a lot of noise. The two platforms aren't so different that the differences matter to most people or will have any sort of significant impact on the game that they hunt. It almost isn't so much a Ford/Chevy argument as it is a trying to decide between two slightly different version of the same model of car within a given manufacturer. You know, one is a little more sporty and one is better for longer trips. Big whoop.

I love my Grendels, but would have no reservations of switching to 6.8 if for some reason the Grendel caliber somehow stopped existing.

I wish more people understood this concept. SD was touted for penetration from people that used solids.

Seems like if both bullets expand then there is still something to the sectional density. The bullet with a higher sectional density likely retains more weight, given similar bullet upset/expansion.

And for this reason I am very happy owning both.

I have not tried the 6.5 Grendel but I'm enjoying how hard the 6.8 hits big hogs at 200 yards.



https://youtu.be/syHGSy5IKMY

https://youtu.be/C0DH8goYvMU

https://youtu.be/NC9W4koHYek

If you reload, get the 6.5 if you buy off the shelf ammo exclusively, the I'd get the 6.8 . I have both.

I like the 6.8 and have had great success hunting with factory Hornady 120 SST and Federal 115 Fusion ammo.

The 6.8 has quite the reloader following, actually.

Very true and more and more ammo manufactures are stepping up with Grendel loaded ammo. Get the one you like and roll with it or get both. Rarely I heard anyone say they have too many guns.

So, reading through all the comments, it seems like the consensus is the 6.8 rocks and little girls prefer the 6.5, is that about right?

Tim, little boys like the Grendel too. I had my little boy mount his own rings & scope Saturday, then clean never fired barrel (longest 2 hours of my life but remained patient as not to ruin the event).