Nomercy448

Seeing this thread title from these guys, I KNEW this statement would surface, and I wasn’t disappointed… but it’s exceptionally disappointing that this stupid claim keeps being passed around as if it were even remotely justified. There’s so very, very little difference in the performance of these two - in ALL BARREL LENGTHS - and this claim is just dumb. The expansion ratio of these two is VERY similar, similar operating pressure, similar bullet weight and similar diameter… saying one is optimized for short barrels while the other “needs” a long barrel to be optimized is dumb. I’ve built SPC’s as short as 7” and Grendels as short as 9”, and both as long as 24” - there’s the same penalty for length in both cartridges by going shorter and the same benefit for both going longer. I’ve been loading and building and shooting and hunting with these since the 6.8 was still “Spec I” and Grendel was only available on group buys direct from Wild Bill himself, and these comparisons made here just don’t make sense - I can load more Benchmark under a 120 SST in an SPC case than 8208 which fits under a 123 in the Grendel case, beat the velocity in the same barrel length, and have nearly identical trajectory out to 1,000 from 20” rifles… when I hunt with my 10.5 SPC, there’s nothing “optimized” about that powder burn - it’s just pushing the bullet fast enough to do what I need of it. The same as shooting my 15” 6 creed… not about efficiency or optimization at all. Adding barrel and shooting my 18” 6.8 SPC is considerably faster than my 10.5”, and my 24” was even faster still. Equally, cutting 6.5 Grendel down didn’t suddenly fall off of a cliff below 24” - 20 inch, 16, 12, 9… they all shoot well, and don’t “need” extra barrel length to perform.

More of the same “we read a couple Wikipedia pages, and wrote a long blog post to and copy/pasted it here to disguise our advertising without sponsorship.”