6.5 or 6.8

[misfire270]

I am building a new upper and am down to barrel choice and was thinking something different then 223 So if you had to choose which would be best choice for cost.,accuracy and hunting? Thanks for any input

 

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

6.5 grendal or 264 LBC hands down. The issue is getting a barrel, I am leaning twards the 18" barrel on midway right now. But I have a line on another 6.5 based on a 223.

Products and Services - Illirian Engineering & Design

 

[threejones]

The 6.8 is designed for use with a 16in barrel, where as the 6.5 needs a bit more tube to really shine. Both are neck and neck, energy wise, until around 200+yds, after that the 6.5 takes over and runs. Both are superior to the 5.56 in the AR platform ( unless you factor in recoil, they both buck a bit, especially the 6.5), it just kinda depends on what you want out of it. One of each is really the best option!

 

[misfire270]

both would be great and eventually i will but now am leaning toward 6.5 i already love the 260 and 6.5magnum so it will just be a welcome add. to my collection then i will work on the 6,8. thanks for the input

 

[blksno]

I think both have their place, and the location I hunt and the method we hunt...the 6.8 has no business being mentioned.

If you want to stay inside 200, deliver energy and stay with shorter, lighter rifle. The 6.8 would be an excellent choice. I personally feel this is a good rifle for those that hunt heavy cover or from a box where shots are going to be of a known or predictable distance.

Where and how we hunt, seems to be more in line with "Long Range Hunting"
We spot/stalk on the open prairie where shots can range from 50-500 (or much more) on game ranging from pdogs to elk.

If those are your only two caliber choices, then I would suggest a 6.5 version of something, weather it be a Grendel, WSSM or other variation.
The ballistics and velocity just can't be argued (depending on distance obviously)

 

[jasonprox700]

6.5. If you look at energy and ballistics, they are both pretty much equal, from muzzle on out to 200, then the 6.5 runs away from the 6.8, and this is if you are using same length barrels. Agreed, the 6.5 does better with a longer barrel. Also, with the 6.5, you can run heavier bullets, easier. With the 6.8, you have to use 6.8 specific bullets so you are very limited in selection.

 

[chipper44]

I'd go with the 6.5 Grendal. Had I known about this great cartridge it would have saved me a lot of money. No need for stocking up on 556 and 308 could have just went with one. To late to change now.

 

[Korhil78]

I would go with the 6.5 Grendel myself. I have one and love it. Here is a link to a pic of my gun and few kill shots.

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f17/6-5-grendel-ar-81801/

 

[Sharpshooter]

If you look at the available loading data on the 68 SPC II cartridge the 6.5 Grendel has NOTHING on the 6.8 out to 500 yards. After 500 yards then the Grendel has the edge. The problem is that the 6.8 does what it does efficiently with a 16 inch barrel and the Grendel does what it does with a 20 inch barrel. It is my opinion and and nothing more than that at all. Based on that fact and the fact I have never shot and killed anything over 500 yards I think the 6.8 SPC is really an excellent choice in an AR hunting round. It gives you 80% of the .308 Winchester in an AR15 form factor and is a huge increase in energy over the 5.56mm . There is not much to not like about the 6.8 SPC. I am not saying the Grendel is a bad round but the 6.8 was specifically designed to work out of a 16 inch barrel and I dont think that is a bad thing YMMV.

 

[jtkratzer]

Any reason to stray from the .260?

 

[Sharpshooter]

Considering the discussion was focussed around a cartridge that fits in a standard AR15 form factor then the 260 Remington is disqualified on that criteria alone. I have nothing against the AR10 platform and if you are talking about taking one into the field as a hunting rifle then the 260 Remington is an excellent choice worthy of consideration. However within the confines of the question ask. 6.5 or 6.8 the opinions offered I think are good ones for both sides. I still stand by my argument for the 6.8 SPC II though and the 16 inch barrel .

 

[Perry]

6mmAR Turbo

 

[bshaw]

Two years ago I was at the same point that you are. After months of research I went with the 6.8, built one with a 20" Shilen barrel and have not been disappointed.

The reason I chose the 6.8 over the 6.5 is terminal ballistics, availability of components and ammo selection. The 6.8 ammo selection goes from 85g to 140gr bullets. There are, IMO, more suppliers of barrels, bolts and magazines for the 6.8.

Below are links for ammo suppliers, components and you might want to check out the 6.8 forum for more info on this round.

What ever you decide I don't think you will be disappointed both are devastating rounds for a variety of hunting scenarios using the AR platform.

6.8mm SPC Ammunition and brass rifle cases from Silver State Armory, 5.56mm ammo, .223 Remington, 7.62mmx51mm ammo, .308 Winchester, 308 WIN, 243 REM, 260 REM, 270 WIN, 300 WIN AMG, 300 BLK AAC, Bullets for sale

Innovative Tactical Systems LLC, Made in USA, AR 15 uppers, piston operated tactical upper, 5.56, 6.8spc, custom precision barrels

Home of the 6.8 SPC - 68forums.com