- 39,148
- 274
From what I read a while ago the 6.5 has better ballistics than the 6.8.. I need to look up the details again to check it out.. I'll post it as i research again.
- 39,148
- 274
This is true but it's just marketing hype. The 6.8 has had a bunch of money thrown at it vs the 6.5.. I was doing some reading again last night and remembered correctly. The 6.5 has far superior ballistics and accuracy. 1,400 meters before it goes subsonic with damn near 308 ballistics at half the recoil.. However due to popularity the 6.8 is easier to find in factory loads, cheaper brass, etc. Everyone was saying the 6.8 is just fine as a short to medium range gun out to around 350 meters. But the 6.5 really shines out to 900-1000 meters.. Both of these rounds came from the armed forces need for a harder hitting CQB / MOUT round.. Lets face it the 5.56 just isn't a man stopper when clearing a building, nor is it very effective against light cover.. They have really been struggling with it in Iraq in an urban environment. This is also evident by the amount of rounds were firing over there. Lake city is sending over 1 billion rounds a year into Iraq.. Tons more money was dumped into the marketing of the 6.8 than the 6.5 to the military. Although the 6.5 won hands down the 6.8 would do just fine for the military needs of a hard hitting MOUT round with capabilities for engagement out to 350 meters.. Which is what 95% of the fighting will entail..
Yep. lol Not much more to add. They were also having problems dialing in the 6.5 round also. With a DI system they were having reliablity/function issues. It had some builders confounded because there really isn't that much difference in "theoretical" stresses.
Beentown
- 39,148
- 274
I think ya got it backwards. The 6.8 was the round with MOA issues but it's due to low BC. It has been dialed in more but the 6.5 gren is on the money.. It was trialed by the army in 2003 at Ft Knox on their 900m range. Tennis ball sized groups out of an AR Platform rifle.. The reason the 6.5 excels over the 6.8 is the length of the bullet and higher BC. At first they did have issues with FTF in 6.5 due to the angle of the shoulder and casing thickness. They were blowing some cases, and having FTF issues.. But that has now been fixed. This all came about when they were trying to put a 7.62 round in a M16 platform.. Obviously it would be nice if the army could just buy some uppers and switch their main battle weapons to 7.62.. Lowest bidder to reach the goal wins... Yet nobody was able to do it on the M16 platform.. Some went the way of developing a new cartridge. Others just blew up the Ar-15 into the Ar-10...
I didn't mean dial in as in making it accurate. I was meaning straight function. Very few are making 6.5 Grendel upper. Everything for it is just so expensive. I can see the want for the 6.5 but I can't justify its expense over the 6.8 SPC. The 6.8 does great to 500 and that is where it counts (at least for me). I am not a long distance shooter. My max is about 600 and that is with about a 10" group shooting a less than MOA gun. Inside 300 I am golden shooting about a 1.25 MOA (3.75 inches). I just don't get enough long range practice.
Beentown
Last edited: