AR Cartridge for Hunting

[Formidilosus]

objective and subjective information is available to solve this little argument

Objective information- what is you personal
experience with the 6 ARC shooting and killing? Round counts please. Be specific.

What is your personal experience with the 6.5 Grendel shooting and killing? Round counts please.

and nothing say about the other guys types of comments? biased perhaps?

The only bias I have is that I use both. I was shooting the 6 ARC before most knew it existed.



So here’s objective. The 6.5 Grendel is a good round. It is hampered for killing and in hit rates compared to a 6mm version of same by relatively low BC bullets and low impact velocities. It does kill fine, but MV is already at the low end of the ideal window for terminal performance- 2,700-2,000fps with a fragmenting projectile. The last lot of Hornady 123gr I saw was 2,440fps MV from an 18” barrel. In contrast the 6mm ARC starts near the top of that window- the last lot of 6ARC I saw was a 106gr at mid 2,600fps MV, however since that ammo is not commercially available, I’ll use the last lot of 108gr ELD-M from an 18” barrel- 2,590fps.


Environmental data is the same for both- 5,000 FT DA. Precision is the same, though it is consistently better in the 6ARC from what I’ve seen. MV of 2,440 for the 123gr SST 6.5G, and 2,590 for the 108gr ARC.


Terminal Performance:

At close range (above 2,300fps impact), the wound width is nearly identical because of higher MV of the ARC. Bump the 6.5 Grendel up another 150-200fps MV and it creates a slightly wider temporary cavity. It is slight. At that same range (60’ish yards btw) the 108gr ELD-M penetrates about the same because of higher impact speeds. At like impact speeds the 108gr penetrates deeper than the 123gr SST. Once the 108gr gets below 2,500fps it penetrates deeper from then on.

The key here is that the terminal range for the Grendel- that is MV to 1,800’iah FPS is much shorter at 431 yards versus 607 yards for the ARC. At no point does the MV of the ARC stress the 108gr ELD-M. With the barrel touching an animal it will penetrate 16-17” straight line. It will maintain that same 16-18” of penetration until around 2,000fps impact (gaining more depth as speed drops) and between 2,000’ish and 1,800’ish it will penetrate a couple inches deeper.

Permanent tissue damage from the temporary stretch cavity generally stops or lessons somewhere between 2,200-2,000fps impact. 2,000fps for the Grendel is 289 yards versus 440 for the ARC.

The 6 ARC has a 29% longer terminal effective range, creates a wider wound at nearly all ranges, and is in the ideal terminal performance range for both bullets 35% longer.



Hit rates:

Again, environmental data is the same (5k DA), MV and bullets are as above, precision is set at 1.5 MOA ES for both as that is what the last lot of 6.5 Grendel did for 30 rounds. Read again: 30 round group extreme spread- not 3 round groups. 12” target, 400 yards and 600 yards for both.


6.5 Grendel 400 yards, 72% first round hit probability-



6ARC 400 yard first round hit probability 82%





600 yard 6.5 Grendel- 33%



6ARC 600 yards 43%-




Any way you look at it, the 6 ARC has a 10% higher hit rate and that’s ignoring the fact that in general the 6ARC produces better precision with the factory ammo that I’ve seen than the Grendel, if only slight. It also produces 10% less recoil, of course at the recoil level of both it isn’t much anyways, but it is there.


There is a reason that 6mm’s in the perforce category of the ARC have dominated precision field shooting marches, meanwhile no 6.5 in the Grendel category has done so.

The Grendel is a good round, and while the differences aren’t earth shattering, there is no category for shooting, hitting, or killing that the Grendel comes out on top. The Grendel sphere would have been 6mm form the start, however when it was created 6mm projectiles were not what they are now. Had it been, there wouldn’t be a 6.5 Grendel.

 

[menhaden_man]

Objective information- what is you personal
experience with the 6 ARC shooting and killing? Round counts please. Be specific.

What is your personal experience with the 6.5 Grendel shooting and killing? Round counts please.






The only bias I have is that I use both. I was shooting the 6 ARC before most knew it existed.



So here’s objective. The 6.5 Grendel is a good round. It is hampered for killing and in hit rates compared to a 6mm version of same by relatively low BC bullets and low impact velocities. It does kill fine, but MV is already at the low end of the ideal window for terminal performance- 2,700-2,000fps with a fragmenting projectile. The last lot of Hornady 123gr I saw was 2,440fps MV from an 18” barrel. In contrast the 6mm ARC starts near the top of that window- the last lot of 6ARC I saw was a 106gr at mid 2,600fps MV, however since that ammo is not commercially available, I’ll use the last lot of 108gr ELD-M from an 18” barrel- 2,590fps.


Environmental data is the same for both- 5,000 FT DA. Precision is the same, though it is consistently better in the 6ARC from what I’ve seen. MV of 2,440 for the 123gr SST 6.5G, and 2,590 for the 108gr ARC.


Terminal Performance:

At close range (above 2,300fps impact), the wound width is nearly identical because of higher MV of the ARC. Bump the 6.5 Grendel up another 150-200fps MV and it creates a slightly wider temporary cavity. It is slight. At that same range (60’ish yards btw) the 108gr ELD-M penetrates about the same because of higher impact speeds. At like impact speeds the 108gr penetrates deeper than the 123gr SST. Once the 108gr gets below 2,500fps it penetrates deeper from then on.

The key here is that the terminal range for the Grendel- that is MV to 1,800’iah FPS is much shorter at 431 yards versus 607 yards for the ARC. At no point does the MV of the ARC stress the 108gr ELD-M. With the barrel touching an animal it will penetrate 16-17” straight line. It will maintain that same 16-18” of penetration until around 2,000fps impact (gaining more depth as speed drops) and between 2,000’ish and 1,800’ish it will penetrate a couple inches deeper.

Permanent tissue damage from the temporary stretch cavity generally stops or lessons somewhere between 2,200-2,000fps impact. 2,000fps for the Grendel is 289 yards versus 440 for the ARC.

The 6 ARC has a 29% longer terminal effective range, creates a wider wound at nearly all ranges, and is in the ideal terminal performance range for both bullets 35% longer.



Hit rates:

Again, environmental data is the same (5k DA), MV and bullets are as above, precision is set at 1.5 MOA ES for both as that is what the last lot of 6.5 Grendel did for 30 rounds. Read again: 30 round group extreme spread- not 3 round groups. 12” target, 400 yards and 600 yards for both.


6.5 Grendel 400 yards, 72% first round hit probability-
View attachment 359003


6ARC 400 yard first round hit probability 82%
View attachment 359004




600 yard 6.5 Grendel- 33%
View attachment 359005


6ARC 600 yards 43%-
View attachment 359006



Any way you look at it, the 6 ARC has a 10% higher hit rate and that’s ignoring the fact that in general the 6ARC produces better precision with the factory ammo that I’ve seen than the Grendel, if only slight. It also produces 10% less recoil, of course at the recoil level of both it isn’t much anyways, but it is there.


There is a reason that 6mm’s in the perforce category of the ARC have dominated precision field shooting marches, meanwhile no 6.5 in the Grendel category has done so.

The Grendel is a good round, and while the differences aren’t earth shattering, there is no category for shooting, hitting, or killing that the Grendel comes out on top. The Grendel sphere would have been 6mm form the start, however when it was created 6mm projectiles were not what they are now. Had it been, there wouldn’t be a 6.5 Grendel.

At $2/round for ARC (if you can find it), don’t you think 223 is the way to go?

 

[Formidilosus]

At $2/round for ARC (if you can find it), don’t you think 223 is the way to go?

Absolutely. If I only killed medium/big game at 450 yards or so and under, I wouldn’t use anything but a 223/77gr TMK combo. The ARC just extends that out to around 600 yards.

 

[TxxAgg]

^^^ I appreciate the info. Easy to understand. To the point. And none of the childish bullshit.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

Objective information- what is you personal
experience with the 6 ARC shooting and killing? Round counts please. Be specific.

What is your personal experience with the 6.5 Grendel shooting and killing? Round counts please.






The only bias I have is that I use both. I was shooting the 6 ARC before most knew it existed.



So here’s objective. The 6.5 Grendel is a good round. It is hampered for killing and in hit rates compared to a 6mm version of same by relatively low BC bullets and low impact velocities. It does kill fine, but MV is already at the low end of the ideal window for terminal performance- 2,700-2,000fps with a fragmenting projectile. The last lot of Hornady 123gr I saw was 2,440fps MV from an 18” barrel. In contrast the 6mm ARC starts near the top of that window- the last lot of 6ARC I saw was a 106gr at mid 2,600fps MV, however since that ammo is not commercially available, I’ll use the last lot of 108gr ELD-M from an 18” barrel- 2,590fps.


Environmental data is the same for both- 5,000 FT DA. Precision is the same, though it is consistently better in the 6ARC from what I’ve seen. MV of 2,440 for the 123gr SST 6.5G, and 2,590 for the 108gr ARC.


Terminal Performance:

At close range (above 2,300fps impact), the wound width is nearly identical because of higher MV of the ARC. Bump the 6.5 Grendel up another 150-200fps MV and it creates a slightly wider temporary cavity. It is slight. At that same range (60’ish yards btw) the 108gr ELD-M penetrates about the same because of higher impact speeds. At like impact speeds the 108gr penetrates deeper than the 123gr SST. Once the 108gr gets below 2,500fps it penetrates deeper from then on.

The key here is that the terminal range for the Grendel- that is MV to 1,800’iah FPS is much shorter at 431 yards versus 607 yards for the ARC. At no point does the MV of the ARC stress the 108gr ELD-M. With the barrel touching an animal it will penetrate 16-17” straight line. It will maintain that same 16-18” of penetration until around 2,000fps impact (gaining more depth as speed drops) and between 2,000’ish and 1,800’ish it will penetrate a couple inches deeper.

Permanent tissue damage from the temporary stretch cavity generally stops or lessons somewhere between 2,200-2,000fps impact. 2,000fps for the Grendel is 289 yards versus 440 for the ARC.

The 6 ARC has a 29% longer terminal effective range, creates a wider wound at nearly all ranges, and is in the ideal terminal performance range for both bullets 35% longer.



Hit rates:

Again, environmental data is the same (5k DA), MV and bullets are as above, precision is set at 1.5 MOA ES for both as that is what the last lot of 6.5 Grendel did for 30 rounds. Read again: 30 round group extreme spread- not 3 round groups. 12” target, 400 yards and 600 yards for both.


6.5 Grendel 400 yards, 72% first round hit probability-
View attachment 359003


6ARC 400 yard first round hit probability 82%
View attachment 359004




600 yard 6.5 Grendel- 33%
View attachment 359005


6ARC 600 yards 43%-
View attachment 359006



Any way you look at it, the 6 ARC has a 10% higher hit rate and that’s ignoring the fact that in general the 6ARC produces better precision with the factory ammo that I’ve seen than the Grendel, if only slight. It also produces 10% less recoil, of course at the recoil level of both it isn’t much anyways, but it is there.


There is a reason that 6mm’s in the perforce category of the ARC have dominated precision field shooting marches, meanwhile no 6.5 in the Grendel category has done so.

The Grendel is a good round, and while the differences aren’t earth shattering, there is no category for shooting, hitting, or killing that the Grendel comes out on top. The Grendel sphere would have been 6mm form the start, however when it was created 6mm projectiles were not what they are now. Had it been, there wouldn’t be a 6.5 Grendel.

appreciate this direction!

well by numbers alone it's easy to sell the 6mm ARC

but this in best all around hunting cartridge this is where it will die compared to The Grendel

the designers of The Grendel played with them all but their goal wasn't a 1k rig, they wanted max performance in the 2-800 yard range out of the AR platform, you can read more about it's development another time, I'm just summarizing

I learned awhile ago that using the best or most winning on the range doesn't always translate to hunting, have been called out before by accuracy obsessed friends with their f-class rigs or full custom everything and handholds to friendly tests afield on 'what if' targets and I take my factory gear and factory ammo and put it in the proverbial kill zone out to 700 so far, it two instances I shot first both times, I bettered the full custom outfit one time and because I read the wind wrong a bit wrong on the second he had the advantage and was closer to to bull the second time. So while his rigs are built heavily for the range and crossing over to hunting, big charts, lots of data etc. I build mine the opposite, heavily hunting that can cross over to the range as sub-moa gets er done in the field, that first cold shot is where it's at for hunting. He can shoot tighter groups than me, but the animals don't give a shat.

I ran all the numbers of the 103-108 against the 123's in these two, the 103 offers 150 yard gain and the 108 175 yard gain for same impact velocities. We do both seem to have a pretty good handle on what happens after the bullets impact as well and we understand there is magic when you apply the right construction, right sd, and right impact velocity ranges for game intended and you get consistent performance across a certain range and surprisingly short recoveries and drt's getting this right. The ARC is less efficient here as in hunting 99% of it will be happening under 600 yards with these micro burners, 99% of it will be under 500 and a whole bunch of the good velocities in the ARC are beyond where it's all going to happen in the field of 99% of guys hunting. Advantage Grendel, you maximize this efficiency 0-600, you're not too hot up close, you're at the end of the magic range about 600 depending on barrel lengths. Even from a stubby 16" barrel I'm over 1600 fps at 600, 1700 fps at 500 and 1800 fps at 420 and launching at 2386 fps...so from 0-600 that 123 is in the magic range for that construction and sd. This is hunting range real world for most. I was actually using longer barrels on some rigs pushing those at 2605 fps and that to me was too fast, eld-m coming apart too quickly and not going as deep as if you slowed it down, so getting outside that efficiency range I like I was happy to go shorter barrel to slow things down. No need to push 30 gr of powder cartridge past 600 when the Creedmoor are available to push 43 gr of powder and better sd/bc to max that efficiency out.

Hunters have a typical field conditions moa and their rifles likely will outshoot them so the 10% hit probability stuff isn't a factor when you've got guys shooting half moa rifles to approx. 1 moa in field conditions, whatever their ability, my own averages are 3/4 moa regardless the accuracy of my rifles but I know my rifles shoot better than me when I'm averaging 3/4 moa. Lots of that objective data is useless in the subjective world.

Then we get to the line in the sand on bullet weight and diameter than most seem to have learned over time and for me it's the 120 and 6.5 threshold. Everything under has mostly been considered niche...ie; great antelope rig, or great deer rig, or great starter rig etc. but once you get 120gr and 6.5mm or better then its great all-round rig...as we are talking hunting here. I was a 6mm fan forever and love the numbers of those 103-108's but to get that increase in diameter and mass at the expense of a bit of bc and sd...for those ranges typically reserved to most hunters...the 123gr eld-m offers more.

I'm seeing better performance across the board from my Grendel eld-m than anything I ever did with a .243 but didn't have 103/108's in the .243, woulda been too fast anyway imo. I'm seeing shorter recoveries inside 400 yards than all the stuff I did with my fav .270 win and .270 wsm previously as those were my pets for ages. I've since migrated to keeping my big game hunting well inside 600 yards and mostly chase deer/sheep with the odd moose draw, meat over trophy, lots of predator calling...so for hunting The Grendel is the most versatile use of that 29.6 grains of powder. It has the longest barrel life and does the most things equally otherwise with that 123gr. I don't reload, and to make comparing even I just compare factory hornady for discussion purposes. Reloaders can wildly vary versatility with any cartridge.

So in reality we are splitting hairs between these two, we're talking a few percentage points between a multitude of parameters diameter, mass, bc, sd, velocity etc. and the ARC shows some advantage well outside the typical ranges of hunting and for long range shooting competitions but those are largely irrelevant to hunting whereas the 6.5 Grendel holds more advantages that matter inside the typical ranges of hunting, typical of hunters abilities, even beyond where most will consider it long range. It is more balanced and efficient for hunting than the ARC. That's my final answer Alex, but do enjoy working through discussions like this with other fluent ballistics nerds.

 

[bbell]

My daughter and I both have killed a blacktail deer with my Grendel. Both never took a step. Was shooting 123gr Eldm at about 2450fps. I really like it but the trajectory is lacking. Fine in the NW for deer but definitely was something to think about when she had her elk tag in eastern Oregon. It is a lightweight setup so I don’t have a scope for dialing on it.

 

[doverpack12]

Thank you Form! Confirmed I would like to build a lightweight 6 ARC, my Grendel turned out heavier than I thought.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

My daughter and I both have killed a blacktail deer with my Grendel. Both never took a step. Was shooting 123gr Eldm at about 2450fps. I really like it but the trajectory is lacking. Fine in the NW for deer but definitely was something to think about when she had her elk tag in eastern Oregon. It is a lightweight setup so I don’t have a scope for dialing on it.

some differences between the two using the peak eld-m factory hornady eld-m options

at 95% of rated velocity the 6mm ARC 108 eld-m will give a 6" MPBR distance of ~265 yards, the 6.5 Grendel 123 eld-m or sst will be 248 yards for a 17 yard advantage for the ARC (6.8% advantage)

The Grendel carries 18% more frontal area and 14% more mass at all distances.

ARC carries 3.6% more SD (penetration potential for same impact velocities)
ARC carries fraction of percent more ft/lbs and 7% more velocity at 100 yards.
ARC carries 2.6% more ft/lbs and 8% more velocity at 250 yards.

Now, considering both options more than enough for your 0-275 yard woods deer hunting one has to use imagination a little to see how that bigger slug going slower may impart more penetration potential and bigger holes than the faster lighter 6mm option which with slightly more SD that doesn't quite offset the velocity difference so in theory The Grendel is going to out penetrate in this scenario.

This is an interesting comparison as you can't really get much closer to splitting hairs than the top 108 eld option vs the 123 eld option...the 103 gr doesn't do as well as the 108 in this comparison so I chose the best of both options. You can make plenty of informed decisions looking at this snapshot.

I'll take the 123 slower inside 500 all day long. The ARC will give another 175 yards distance potential past where most will be long done shooting at big game. Is the 6.8% advantage in MPBR worth giving up that 123 gr slug and terminal potential? The 6mm will work better for deer and coyotes but the 123 will handle the deer better from more angles and also take elk/moose broadside better as well. They are both incredible options for burning 30 grains of powder, one will extract more from that powder than the other inside 500 yards for hunting.

One of the few examples I have of recovered bullet from my Grendel 123gr was a retained weight from an extreme angle quartering away whitetail buck at 200 yards and 2100 fps impact from a 16" barrel Grendel was 99.8 gr or 81%, it traveled 18" taking second last rib on way in, and exiting into the meat in front of the brisket (through bone at both ends). Most of my deer size game has all been exits including 420 yard quartering away doe this year. If the 108 eld-m from an ARC made it that far in the same buck and kept 81% of it's weight it would have been 88 grains when done but I think the added velocity of the ARC with only tiny bit more SD would have shed SD quicker and stopped a little shorter and carried less than the 81% retained weight to boot. Fine for deer. Just my opinion based on my objective and subjective experiences so far, and why I've moved away from the 6mm's up to the 6.5's and pushing more than 120 gr to start, much happier with my in field experiences. My retained weight was about what the ARC starts with. In my mind the 123 is going deeper and doing more work and a better blend for this rapid expansion construction at these velocities than the ARC. For the ARC I'd want a slightly tougher bullet, bonded eld-m perhaps to keep that weight up will still rolling back on itself nicely as it goes. No need for that bonding with the 123 imo, it gets free reign to expand and dump as it goes while retaining good weight/sd. Having said that when I ran bonded in my .270's and .270 wsm's I seem to prefer the shorter recoveries and performance I'm getting from this non-bonded slower set up with similar sd. I think if a guy fields both on game inside 500 yards for a length of time he will come away preferring the 123gr pills from The Grendel in the end. The guy on the range will come away preferring the ARC for his 'hit probabilities' past 600 yards.

Your mileage may vary.

Here's an interesting vid, yes it's a .243 vs a Grendel and you can skip to the 4 minute mark for the finale so the point of it is to show there is magic somewhere in matching the construction to the impact velocity to the SD for game intended and the Grendel 123 eld-m has hit the mark bigly for me. This .243 example is pushing too fast and a little less bullet than the ARC but I think the ARC 108 would still win against the .243 but I think the the Grendel 123 beats the ARC 108.

 

[ET8300]

We are in the panhandle of Texas. 6.8 spc II has been my workhorse. Killed everything from bobcats to Mule deer. LWRC A5, love that rifle.

 

[Macht]

As the back and forth in this thread shows, there isn't a huge advantage to either the ARC or the Grendel. Something to consider though is that the Grendel will be more efficient if you want to drop the barrel length below 20" for more weight savings. If you're looking at shorter ranges (250 or under), something like a 12.5" Grendel still carries a surprising amount of energy.

 

[Tahoe1305]

My 2 cents is 6.5 bullets have a better bullet selection for hunting larger game. I’d argue BC in the 120-130 range is better than 100-110 range of 6mm.

I’d also add that a handful of Grendel barrels are a slightly longer throat and if reloading you can get a little velocity bump from loading closer to lands. In my 20” I can send 123 a tad over 2700 and 130s a tad over 2600. I assume same May be said for ARC. If industry made some solid 110gr 6mm hunters with .6BC I could be swayed.

 

[menhaden_man]

some differences between the two using the peak eld-m factory hornady eld-m options

at 95% of rated velocity the 6mm ARC 108 eld-m will give a 6" MPBR distance of ~265 yards, the 6.5 Grendel 123 eld-m or sst will be 248 yards for a 17 yard advantage for the ARC (6.8% advantage)

The Grendel carries 18% more frontal area and 14% more mass at all distances.

ARC carries 3.6% more SD (penetration potential for same impact velocities)
ARC carries fraction of percent more ft/lbs and 7% more velocity at 100 yards.
ARC carries 2.6% more ft/lbs and 8% more velocity at 250 yards.

Now, considering both options more than enough for your 0-275 yard woods deer hunting one has to use imagination a little to see how that bigger slug going slower may impart more penetration potential and bigger holes than the faster lighter 6mm option which with slightly more SD that doesn't quite offset the velocity difference so in theory The Grendel is going to out penetrate in this scenario.

This is an interesting comparison as you can't really get much closer to splitting hairs than the top 108 eld option vs the 123 eld option...the 103 gr doesn't do as well as the 108 in this comparison so I chose the best of both options. You can make plenty of informed decisions looking at this snapshot.

I'll take the 123 slower inside 500 all day long. The ARC will give another 175 yards distance potential past where most will be long done shooting at big game. Is the 6.8% advantage in MPBR worth giving up that 123 gr slug and terminal potential? The 6mm will work better for deer and coyotes but the 123 will handle the deer better from more angles and also take elk/moose broadside better as well. They are both incredible options for burning 30 grains of powder, one will extract more from that powder than the other inside 500 yards for hunting.

One of the few examples I have of recovered bullet from my Grendel 123gr was a retained weight from an extreme angle quartering away whitetail buck at 200 yards and 2100 fps impact from a 16" barrel Grendel was 99.8 gr or 81%, it traveled 18" taking second last rib on way in, and exiting into the meat in front of the brisket (through bone at both ends). Most of my deer size game has all been exits including 420 yard quartering away doe this year. If the 108 eld-m from an ARC made it that far in the same buck and kept 81% of it's weight it would have been 88 grains when done but I think the added velocity of the ARC with only tiny bit more SD would have shed SD quicker and stopped a little shorter and carried less than the 81% retained weight to boot. Fine for deer. Just my opinion based on my objective and subjective experiences so far, and why I've moved away from the 6mm's up to the 6.5's and pushing more than 120 gr to start, much happier with my in field experiences. My retained weight was about what the ARC starts with. In my mind the 123 is going deeper and doing more work and a better blend for this rapid expansion construction at these velocities than the ARC. For the ARC I'd want a slightly tougher bullet, bonded eld-m perhaps to keep that weight up will still rolling back on itself nicely as it goes. No need for that bonding with the 123 imo, it gets free reign to expand and dump as it goes while retaining good weight/sd. Having said that when I ran bonded in my .270's and .270 wsm's I seem to prefer the shorter recoveries and performance I'm getting from this non-bonded slower set up with similar sd. I think if a guy fields both on game inside 500 yards for a length of time he will come away preferring the 123gr pills from The Grendel in the end. The guy on the range will come away preferring the ARC for his 'hit probabilities' past 600 yards.

Your mileage may vary.

Here's an interesting vid, yes it's a .243 vs a Grendel and you can skip to the 4 minute mark for the finale so the point of it is to show there is magic somewhere in matching the construction to the impact velocity to the SD for game intended and the Grendel 123 eld-m has hit the mark bigly for me. This .243 example is pushing too fast and a little less bullet than the ARC but I think the ARC 108 would still win against the .243 but I think the the Grendel 123 beats the ARC 108.

No offense intended, but not many people are going to read this long of a post. A good point shouldn’t be that hard to describe.

 

[Zappaman]

I recall reading years of controversy between the Grendel and the 6.8 SPC

I enjoyed reading it all back then, where the two camps remained entrenched for years. Meanwhile the average hunters out there gained a lot of good info re. both rounds and made their choice and went hunting! I feel for most of we hunting types, it was a flip of the coin in the end.

I chose the 6.8 because I already had 12 lbs of AA2200 (a darlin’ powder of the 6.8 crowd to this day). While a few were arguing which was the better round (all those years) many of us just built the AR of our choice and got out there and had fun with them.

I am sure I would have loved a Grendel if the coin fell to the other side. And all these AR calibers make excellent LIGHTWEIGHT hunting rifles that have put many “pigs in the fridge” as I’m sure the ARC will too.

With this said, as I can’t hunt right now…I want to thank all for the meticulous and heart felt opinions offered up here for me to enjoy reading (while forced to be in Dallas with PLENTY of time to truly enjoy reading ALL input here)

… and now I feel I might have to build BOTH a Grendel and ARC upper when prices come back into line… if they do . After all, I have all these 6.5 and long 22 bullets I have to use up!!!

Merry Xmas everyone!

 

[Stinky Coyote]

No offense intended, but not many people are going to read this long of a post. A good point shouldn’t be that hard to describe.

more of an info share than point making in that one, good thing you can choose to skip on by and look for the juicier drama

 

[Stinky Coyote]

As the back and forth in this thread shows, there isn't a huge advantage to either the ARC or the Grendel. Something to consider though is that the Grendel will be more efficient if you want to drop the barrel length below 20" for more weight savings. If you're looking at shorter ranges (250 or under), something like a 12.5" Grendel still carries a surprising amount of energy.

I didn't want to be the one to say that but another advantage for the Grendel yes and for AR discussion that's important. 16" in the Grendel mirrors the blast/efficiency of a .308 out of a 20" imo. I shoot 16" no brake or suppressor and would not want to be shorter without a can, it's got some pop.

I have a picture from another hunters Grendel kill of a perfectly mushroomed eld-m that came from a 12" AR at 320 yards with a 2200 fps launch and 1700 fps impact (790 ft/lbs) at his elevation, it was a broadside whitetail buck, through shoulder, recovered under offside hide, buck did a 40-50 yard runner. Didn't get weight of it but looks to be about 95% and peeled back to about 60% of it's original length with a nickel size frontal area. So that's where I've drawn the line for deer size game (1700 fps impact) and in my 16" barrel that gets me to 500 yards at my elevation, but will still send lead at coyotes at any distance. Reality is my fairly hard limit on big game is ~400 yards, my 420 yard doe this year was part of a double, my kid took first one at 355 and we needed the last doe for the freezer, it was last weekend of season so I grabbed the rifle and doubled up. That 1800 fps impact went through 15" and exited, drt. I'd have no issue putting that in the ribs of a moose or elk at 400.

So the info I've loosely collected on the 123 eld-m as follows.
I have a 2315 fps impact on a massive mule deer buck high shoulder from elevated ridge, caught the jacket offside and it peeled back about 75% of total length leaving 25%. If the core stayed and I had something to weigh then I'd speculate we'd have 50% retention.
I have the 2100 fps impact and recovered 81%(99.8gr) of the steeply quartering away whitetail and it peeled back 50% of original length.
The other guys 1700 fps example that mushroomed nice and looked to retain 95% weight and peeled back about 40% of it's original length leaving 60%.

So somewhere between 2100 fps (81% retention) and 1700 fps (~95% retention) the eld-m starts to hold together like a controlled expansion bullet, I'm speculating that starts above 1800 fps judging by the holes in my doe this year that exited. So until more recovered examples can be found I'd guess 2000-1900 fps is where we start seeing 90% or better weight retentions.

That's why I'm not a fan of the ARC speeds for hunting, they already 170-220 fps faster for the 108/103. They won't come into their own till beyond the typical hunting distances from most barrel lengths. If I was a long range hunter trying to max a 6mm then yes but that's not the bulk of hunters never mind 'AR' hunters. The bigger pill is where it's at. Impact velocities between 2350-1700. That's just past muzzle to 500 from a 16" Grendel running 123's (2386 muzzle-1700 at 500). Not sure what's more efficient than that, I've studied this awhile and put to use now for awhile also, only surprises have been pleasant ones.

on the 6.8 spc I had one of those also, custom asi ranch, shot a doe at 220 and few coyotes, did great, I would not stretch it like I do the Grendel, it's more of a point blank hold, deer or less, to 250 with the 110's imo, solid choice in AR if fits your needs, just falls on it's face after 250 and sd not high enough to push much past deer size game, I liked it, the Grendel just takes things to a different level with the higher bc/sd, more mass, and a little more powder behind it

 

[Lawnboi]

I didn't want to be the one to say that but another advantage for the Grendel yes and for AR discussion that's important. 16" in the Grendel mirrors the blast/efficiency of a .308 out of a 20" imo. I shoot 16" no brake or suppressor and would not want to be shorter without a can, it's got some pop.

I have a picture from another hunters Grendel kill of a perfectly mushroomed eld-m that came from a 12" AR at 320 yards with a 2200 fps launch and 1700 fps impact (790 ft/lbs) at his elevation, it was a broadside whitetail buck, through shoulder, recovered under offside hide, buck did a 40-50 yard runner. Didn't get weight of it but looks to be about 95% and peeled back to about 60% of it's original length with a nickel size frontal area. So that's where I've drawn the line for deer size game (1700 fps impact) and in my 16" barrel that gets me to 500 yards at my elevation, but will still send lead at coyotes at any distance. Reality is my fairly hard limit on big game is ~400 yards, my 420 yard doe this year was part of a double, my kid took first one at 355 and we needed the last doe for the freezer, it was last weekend of season so I grabbed the rifle and doubled up. That 1800 fps impact went through 15" and exited, drt. I'd have no issue putting that in the ribs of a moose or elk at 400.

So the info I've loosely collected on the 123 eld-m as follows.
I have a 2315 fps impact on a massive mule deer buck high shoulder from elevated ridge, caught the jacket offside and it peeled back about 75% of total length leaving 25%. If the core stayed and I had something to weigh then I'd speculate we'd have 50% retention.
I have the 2100 fps impact and recovered 81%(99.8gr) of the steeply quartering away whitetail and it peeled back 50% of original length.
The other guys 1700 fps example that mushroomed nice and looked to retain 95% weight and peeled back about 40% of it's original length leaving 60%.

So somewhere between 2100 fps (81% retention) and 1700 fps (~95% retention) the eld-m starts to hold together like a controlled expansion bullet, I'm speculating that starts above 1800 fps judging by the holes in my doe this year that exited. So until more recovered examples can be found I'd guess 2000-1900 fps is where we start seeing 90% or better weight retentions.

That's why I'm not a fan of the ARC speeds for hunting, they already 170-220 fps faster for the 108/103. They won't come into their own till beyond the typical hunting distances from most barrel lengths. If I was a long range hunter trying to max a 6mm then yes but that's not the bulk of hunters never mind 'AR' hunters. The bigger pill is where it's at. Impact velocities between 2350-1700. That's just past muzzle to 500 from a 16" Grendel running 123's (2386 muzzle-1700 at 500). Not sure what's more efficient than that, I've studied this awhile and put to use now for awhile also, only surprises have been pleasant ones.

on the 6.8 spc I had one of those also, custom asi ranch, shot a doe at 220 and few coyotes, did great, I would not stretch it like I do the Grendel, it's more of a point blank hold, deer or less, to 250 with the 110's imo, solid choice in AR if fits your needs, just falls on it's face after 250 and sd not high enough to push much past deer size game, I liked it, the Grendel just takes things to a different level with the higher bc/sd, more mass, and a little more powder behind it

Come on… we need more examples than 2 animals to back up these claims.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

Come on… we need more examples than 2 animals to back up these claims.

info sharing far more than 'claims' but if you have instagram you can see plenty of info on my page here https://www.instagram.com/65grendelhunters/ if not find a friend with it and borrow their phone for a bit, there's 4 years worth of info there, easier than typing it all out here, mostly get exits so try to study things when we don't and have collected a few good examples from others along the way

 

[justinspicher]

https://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthread.php?24911-10-Head-of-Big-Game-6-5-Grendel-%E2%80%93-4-Seasons

This dude seems to like his grendels.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

https://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthread.php?24911-10-Head-of-Big-Game-6-5-Grendel-%E2%80%93-4-Seasons

This dude seems to like his grendels.

yup, enough of the other two 21st century 6.5's the 6.5 Creedmoor and 6.5 PRC love already, The Grendel was here first and now that I've had some time to throw down and collect some useful information it's a good time to spread that info, sharing is caring

 

[Afhunter1]

yup, enough of the other two 21st century 6.5's the 6.5 Creedmoor and 6.5 PRC love already, The Grendel was here first and now that I've had some time to throw down and collect some useful information it's a good time to spread that info, sharing is caring

Why have you been dead quiet on here for 7 years but now pop up and spam the heck out of us with Grendel info? I wonder your motivation for pushing so hard (gram likes prob) and especially to take on Form who is one of the most highly regarded members here. You come across as a heel. Sorry. I’m truthful.

Grendel’s are for babies. Gap 4 S that 6.5!