Petrol & Powder
Well-Known Member
I'm trying to learn a little about this cartridge and frankly, it is outside of my bailiwick.
Please educate me on the 6.5 Grendel
- Thread starter Petrol & Powder
- Start date
Matt
Active Member
Full disclosure: I’ve never fired a 6.5 Grendel but I have handled sone ammunition. Think of it as a 6.5 mm PPC. Based on the 7.62x39 or the .22 Russian service round depending on the source. 120 grain jacketed bullet at about 2600 fps. Another round to fit in an AR-15 that will be a giant killer compared to the 5.56 NATO. Have my doubts, but I base that on years of shooting a 6mm PPC bolt gun and a couple hundred thousand rounds of 5.56 and .223 in AR15, M16, M4 etc.
Petrol & Powder
Well-Known Member
Yep, I see it as a 6.5 mm version of the 6mm PPC and it will fit & function in an AR platform.
RicinYakima
High Steppes of Eastern Washington
My son and I built a Grendel on an AR platform as a project during lock-down. It shoots very well with 123 grain Hornady bullets. It is no different than loading any other cartridge for an AR.
CZ93X62
Official forum enigma
I have pondered a build for my AR lower in a deer-capable caliber of some kind--mostly to torque off the hoplophobes here in Kalifornistan, but a 6.5mm to .277" gas gun has some real merit in a number of shooting venues. Of course, there is nothing wrong with the 7.62 x 39 Soviet for deer--it is every bit a self-loading 30/30 WCF. First, the manufacturers need to stir from their torpor before any of us get to build new toys or feed them.
Last edited:
CZ93X62
Official forum enigma
Beowulf has prompted discussion and controversy for at least a millenium. What the cartridge's developers failed to gather is that Grendel got his aspirations handed to him by Beowulf. Not the nomenclature I would want for a cartridge I'm going to fight with.
The absence of classical literature in modern education is most unseemly.
The absence of classical literature in modern education is most unseemly.
CWLONGSHOT
Well-Known Member
What are you looking to learn?
It was designed about 2003/2004 It is based upon the 220 Russian. It offers light recoil and fine accuracy.
The pressures run a AR safe 50/52K.
There is a Type I and a Type II. Difference is in the depth of the bolt head. (.136 II /.125 I) Type II is a reg Grendel. Type one is used by the 7.62x39 and the similar .264 LBC. So, One is deeper /taller then the other. They are not interchangeable.
Its designed to function in the AR-15 so OAL is kept under 2.260. A 30rnd AR is gonna be closer to a 20rnd Grendel magazine. It also needs a specific magazine. It can function with a reg magazine but functional capacity isn't five rounds.
Ballistically its built around a 123g bullet. Can do well from 85-130g it suffers because of powder capacity with heavier. Trajectories slightly superior to the 7.62x51.
It carries energies quite well but it sits behind the 6.5 Swede and Creedmoore.
I have two, a 22" Howa Bolt and a put together 20" Ballistic Advantage upper. I have taken a couple Coyotes and a couple deer.
I really like the caliber
CW
Petrol & Powder
Well-Known Member
From what I've been able to read, it looks like the 120 grain bullets are about the best compromise of weight/velocity.
You can pick up a little speed with a lighter bullet, but not enough to make that option attractive. You can go slightly heavier to around 130gr but I don't see the advantage in that either.
IMR 8208 and H335 seem to be the top picks for powder. (I was able to score a pound of H335
)
For a cartridge that fits/runs in an AR platform, it seems to have a lot going for it.
You can pick up a little speed with a lighter bullet, but not enough to make that option attractive. You can go slightly heavier to around 130gr but I don't see the advantage in that either.
IMR 8208 and H335 seem to be the top picks for powder. (I was able to score a pound of H335
)For a cartridge that fits/runs in an AR platform, it seems to have a lot going for it.
oscarflytyer
Well-Known Member
Watching/considering a Grendel build for one of my stripped lowers...
RicinYakima
High Steppes of Eastern Washington
In a bolt gun, you would have more options for powders. For deer hunting, I could consider it between the .223 and the 250/3000.
Case taper is almost the PPC, not the 7.62X39.
Case taper is almost the PPC, not the 7.62X39.
Ian
Notorious member
If you knew Bill Alexander it would come as no surprise.
RBHarter
West Central AR
Armed with this and because I have time in with it .........
I would recommend a 6.8SPCII barrel from AR Performance with a 1-10 twist and the NOE .279-124 and jacketed start loads for a 130 jacketed . The 6.8/22 NOS mags are readily available and if you don't want to spend for the 6.8 bolt you can just run 22 NOS brass in the 6.8 dies and trim as it shares the 223/556 rim on the 6.8 case .
The 270 120 SST is a varmint bullet in the 270 and a little bit not enough for a game bullet inside about 75 yd in the 6.8 SPCII .
I have 2 ARP heavy barrels and am very happy with them on and AR upper and Stevens 200 .
CWLONGSHOT
Well-Known Member
The cazes are pretty straight.
Compairing the 6.8 to the Grendle the grendle is superior. BUT so slightly & only really at range. Both are really pretty equal.
CW
Compairing the 6.8 to the Grendle the grendle is superior. BUT so slightly & only really at range. Both are really pretty equal.
CW
Petrol & Powder
Well-Known Member
A co-worker is building an AR for his son and decided on 6.5 Grendel. I'm trying to improve my knowledge of that cartridge.
Obviously, the Grendel was designed to fit & function in an AR platform. Despite the physical constraints of overall length, it appears to squeeze a lot of performance out of that small package. Short/Fat cartridges tend to be efficient, and the Grendel designers clearly exploited that as much as possible within the constraints of overall length and magazine requirements.
I think the decision to base the 6.5 Grendel on the 7.62 x 39 / 220 Russian was a good move. While that parent case does require a different bolt head than a conventional AR, the greater case capacity is well worth it. Nor can the linage of the 6mm PPC be denied.
The Grendel closest competitor appears to be the 6.8 SPC. I have a real affection for the 7mm family of projectiles (and that includes the .277” & the .284” diameters). I suggested the 6.8 SPC to my co-worker but the guy assembling the rifle persuaded him to go with the 6.5 Grendel. Frankly, I’m not sure the differences between 6.5 and 7 mm projectiles are significant enough to matter in an AR platform.
Obviously, the Grendel was designed to fit & function in an AR platform. Despite the physical constraints of overall length, it appears to squeeze a lot of performance out of that small package. Short/Fat cartridges tend to be efficient, and the Grendel designers clearly exploited that as much as possible within the constraints of overall length and magazine requirements.
I think the decision to base the 6.5 Grendel on the 7.62 x 39 / 220 Russian was a good move. While that parent case does require a different bolt head than a conventional AR, the greater case capacity is well worth it. Nor can the linage of the 6mm PPC be denied.
The Grendel closest competitor appears to be the 6.8 SPC. I have a real affection for the 7mm family of projectiles (and that includes the .277” & the .284” diameters). I suggested the 6.8 SPC to my co-worker but the guy assembling the rifle persuaded him to go with the 6.5 Grendel. Frankly, I’m not sure the differences between 6.5 and 7 mm projectiles are significant enough to matter in an AR platform.
CWLONGSHOT
Well-Known Member
I agree. The Grendel's advantage is only seen at longer ranges past hunting ranges. So maybe realized if long rage steel is your game. But as a hunting rig, pick your poison both are very good.
CW
CW