6.5 Grendel vs 308 Win

[Jeron Kahyar]

Originally Posted by AndrewM

If using these parameters it is the winner but it takes more recoil to get there. That's why people like the CM. You get similar performance for less recoil. For the recoil shy the CM would be the clear winner.

This is true, the lighter slower bullet will produce less free recoil energy.

The 270 Win load will produce ~16.39 ft/lbs of free recoil from a 8.5lbs rifle. While the 6.5 Creedmore is producing ~12.6 ft/lbs of free recoil energy from a 8.5lbs rifle.*

If you go with the upper limit of most shooters recoil tolerance to be 20ft/lbs** that would put either within most people's tolerance. But if you are recoil sensitive the choice would be easy. Also if you are recoil sensitive this entire thread is rendered moot as you were never entertaining the idea of a magnum....

*Recoil energy calculated from http://www.shooterscalculator.com/recoil-calculator.php

**"The majority of authorities seem to agree that recoil of over 20 ft. lbs. is likely to cause the average shooter to develop a flinch, which is ruinous to accuracy." (https://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_recoil.htm)

[41thunder]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Wrong, it’s about ballistics, they are capable of retaining more energy. This is why we are arguing.

When bc and FPS are being compared I would agree we are talking ballistics
Once sd and FPS are being compared I believe we are talking terminal performance
It’s a much more difficult to predict terminal performance based off of a handful of data

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by 41thunder

When bc and FPS are being compared I would agree we are talking ballistics
Once sd and FPS are being compared I believe we are talking terminal performance
It’s a much more difficult to predict terminal performance based off of a handful of data

It’s pretty clear when the manufacturer lists the bullets performance range right on the box!

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by 41thunder

Sorry I’m not on grinder. Not looking for a date

Ya, riiiight......


Call you out and you deflect, call me out and I’ll show up. That’s about all we need to put this to rest marky.

[41thunder]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

It’s pretty clear when the manufacturer lists the bullets performance range right on the box!

Oh for sure. I agree. But eld m’s are not recommended for hunting, yet they are used and they work. Can you accurately predict their performance when they are not being used for their intended purposes?

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by 41thunder

Oh for sure. I agree. But eld m’s are not recommended for hunting, yet they are used and they work. Can you accurately predict their performance when they are not being used for their intended purposes?

I don’t use them, I’ve never used them to post any of my data so it doesn’t apply to anything I’ve said. Eldx, ABLR, TTSX, Ballistic Tips, all bullets I’ve used in my comparisons, I can speak on those.

Let’s not take what I say out of context by comparing it to something someone else has said, this is how you get confused.

[41thunder]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Ya, riiiight......


Call you out and you deflect, call me out and I’ll show up. That’s about all we need to put this to rest marky.

Deflect? I’m not used to other dudes wanting my pic? You looking for trophy/animal pics?

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by 41thunder

Deflect? I’m not used to other dudes wanting my pic? You looking for trophy/animal pics?

No, you said you want to know who I am, I said no problem there’s all kinds of pics of me on here, I want to see who you are. You accused me of hiding behind a keyboard..... You’re the one hiding.

[Nyksta]

Originally Posted by AndrewM

Absolutely. Heavier stock, better recoil pad, install a break. But you can also do that to the CM which would still make it better for the recoil shy.
A jetta and a Ferrari get you to the same place. One may get you there quicker but doesn't mean it is required.

Interesting the correlation between creedmoor and a jetta. VW efficiency performance numbers were also found to be full of BS. Its just another car that isnt better than anything else.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Nyksta

Interesting the correlation between creedmoor and a jetta. VW efficiency performance numbers were also found to be full of BS. Its just another car that isnt better than anything else.

Lol!

Engineers can lie until it’s proven different. So far I haven’t seen anyone prove the laws of physics wrong. Hahahahaha!

[AndrewM]

Originally Posted by Nyksta

Interesting the correlation between creedmoor and a jetta. VW efficiency performance numbers were also found to be full of BS. Its just another car that isnt better than anything else.

lol I didn't even think of that when I posted Jetta.

[Norwest Alta]

Originally Posted by Nyksta

Interesting the correlation between creedmoor and a jetta. VW efficiency performance numbers were also found to be full of BS. Its just another car that isnt better than anything else.

Haha imagine that. Example of how marrketing works perhaps?

[41thunder]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I don’t use them, I’ve never used them to post any of my data so it doesn’t apply to anything I’ve said. Eldx, ABLR, TTSX, Ballistic Tips, all bullets I’ve used in my comparisons, I can speak on those.

Let’s not take what I say out of context by comparing it to something someone else has said, this is how you get confused.

I’m referring to the original original post
Before this all went sideways

[Stinky Coyote]

Originally Posted by Nyksta

Interesting the correlation between creedmoor and a jetta. VW efficiency performance numbers were also found to be full of BS. Its just another car that isnt better than anything else.

It was emissions guys. The efficiency was there, they just lied about the emissions. Those diesels go 50,000 km on 48 tanks of fuel, not a very big tank. Sale friend would run one for 3 years at a time and turn them in at 150k and eat another, and he said 48 tanks per 50,000 k...maybe 55 litre tank? Can’t remember the tank size.

This is so sidetracked now.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by 41thunder

I’m referring to the original original post
Before this all went sideways

Exactly, you’re arguing with me over something I never said, it was something someone else had said...... as usual.

I know, why start getting the facts straight now right?

At least you’re not alone.

[Stinky Coyote]

Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote

123 gr vs 168 gr
2580 fps vs 2700 (factory hornady ammo)

6.5 G = 52.7% less recoil
6.5 G = 26.8% less bullet weight
6.5 G = 4.4% less velocity
Same penetration, .252/.253 sd’s

Nearly same impact velocity range distances all the way out.

Almost identical to the difference between 6.5 cm and 300wm.

Not trying to be an azz here, just trying to portray more accurate perspectives to help explain the apparent marketing and hype etc. When SOCOM adopts something to replace the 308, there’s a lot more too it than marketing and hype. Just trying to show what that can mean to hunters. Use it right, like anything else, and it ain’t no thing but a chicken wing.

Here, let’s start again. Andrew so far has made the best rebuttal or offering of perspective imo. It’s really hard to quantify the energy efficiency...it’s really low imo and so many conflicting reports suggesting the performance aspect on game of energy is a lottery at best. That’s why I omit it for comparing things. The more important factors are mentioned above.

[AndrewM]

Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote

Here, let’s start again. Andrew so far has made the best rebuttal or offering of perspective imo. It’s really hard to quantify the energy efficiency...it’s really low imo and so many conflicting reports suggesting the performance aspect on game of energy is a lottery at best. That’s why I omit it for comparing things. The more important factors are mentioned above.

I don't think anyone wants to continue talking in circles. I already proved to you penetration wasn't the same nor is energy nor is momentum yet you choose to focus on recoil, SD and velocity. Can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
Using your philosophy you better never drop a 10lb piece of rebar as that sucker is going straight through your foot as the SD on it is insane. Don't ever balance it on your finger either or it may cut it completely off.

[Stinky Coyote]

Originally Posted by AndrewM

I don't think anyone wants to continue talking in circles. I already proved to you penetration wasn't the same nor is energy nor is momentum yet you choose to focus on recoil, SD and velocity. Can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
Using your philosophy you better never drop a 10lb piece of rebar as that sucker is going straight through your foot as the SD on it is insane. Don't ever balance it on your finger either or it may cut it completely off.

Is that ballistics? I agreed with you and haven’t said energy wasn’t present as it is and must be. Can you explain the on game performance difference between what’s posted above pls? Show that 35-40% extra energy and what it does? You’re saying that the bullet goes deeper in the 308 even if sd remains or alters the same for both? Or just confirming what we already know in that the hole might be a bit bigger and some additional damage around the hole?

Let’s understand from you how 52% more recoil energy, 35-40% more terminal energy...equals deeper penetration, or more dead?

Will like to hear you explain the lessons learned from Africa stuff, big bores getting to a point of not being able to penetrate deep enough even though 8000 ft/lbs or more

[41thunder]

Sd isn’t a very good measure of bullet penetration
There’s way more variables than just that

https://youtu.be/wd7pImWDclg

https://youtu.be/mfcqP3VGKyI

https://youtu.be/8Ha6eo6LBmI

[Kurt505]

[AndrewM]

Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote

Is that ballistics? I agreed with you and haven’t said energy wasn’t present as it is and must be. Can you explain the on game performance difference between what’s posted above pls? Show that 35-40% extra energy and what it does? You’re saying that the bullet goes deeper in the 308 even if sd remains or alters the same for both? Or just confirming what we already know in that the hole might be a bit bigger and some additional damage around the hole?

Let’s understand from you how 52% more recoil energy, 35-40% more terminal energy...equals deeper penetration, or more dead?

Will like to hear you explain the lessons learned from Africa stuff, big bores getting to a point of not being able to penetrate deep enough even though 8000 ft/lbs or more

Maybe rather than posting hypothetical information and ideas you should spend some time reading. For dangerous game a .375 caliber is the minimum prescribed by law in most African countries. Also many countries have a minimum energy amount such as Zimbabwe with 5300J for dangerous game.
As I stated before. Also read about why FMJ bullets were required for war yet you cannot use them for hunting. I would bet they will penetrate much further than any hunting round you can find but I can also guarantee that you will see that they don't do much damage and are intended to wound the target rather than kill.

[Nyksta]

Originally Posted by 41thunder

Sd isn’t a very good measure of bullet penetration
There’s way more variables than just that

https://youtu.be/wd7pImWDclg

https://youtu.be/mfcqP3VGKyI

https://youtu.be/8Ha6eo6LBmI

Those are cool videos. Very cool to see the differences when fur and bone are added.

[AndrewM]

Assuming your bullet doubles in diameter once deformed.
Wound Channel = pi*(r*2)^2*L = pi*D^2*L
pi and L are constant and assume it goes through the animal.
Works out to a 35% larger wound channel for a 308 vs a 6.5. Means more energy transfer to the animal and more damage due to the bullet.

[AndrewM]

Originally Posted by Nyksta

Those are cool videos. Very cool to see the differences when fur and bone are added.

Shows you just how much more damage happens when the bullet expands!

[41thunder]

The game kings expanded a lot
Makes sense why they didn’t penetrate
It’s very predictable til it hits hide or bone

[Nyksta]

Originally Posted by 41thunder

The game kings expanded a lot
Makes sense why they didn’t penetrate
It’s very predictable til it hits hide or bone

Yea. Gel tests are convenient to slow bullets down and preserve the bullet. But real animal bodies have so many more layers and different densities along the way that it is a lot more work for the bullet. Mass gets ripped off and energy is soaked up in a shorter distance.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Norwest Alta

Curious to what criteria needs to be met to designate a chambering inefficient? What makes one more efficient then the other?

apparently it's a 30 deg shoulder.. according to Kurt

[Jeron Kahyar]

Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote

Here, let’s start again. Andrew so far has made the best rebuttal or offering of perspective imo. It’s really hard to quantify the energy efficiency...it’s really low imo and so many conflicting reports suggesting the performance aspect on game of energy is a lottery at best. That’s why I omit it for comparing things. The more important factors are mentioned above.

If you want energy number for use on game they already exist elsewhere. How about we use them?

/**/

It is illegal to take, kill or injure a deer using:

1. Any smooth bore gun;
2. For Roe deer and larger deer: a rifl e having a calibre less than .240 inches or a muzzle energy of less than 1700 ft lbs (both criteria apply)

(http://www.thedeerinitiative.co.uk/u.../guides/89.pdf)

/**/

This is the legal minimum for the UK. This way we don't need to posture about what would be required. Just use the published minimum that surely has had extensive research done to arrive at. Say we just use 1700 ft/lbs as a minimum?


*Edit*
Or we could use the Swedish data.

Only rifles can be used for certain game, including moose, red deer and bear. For ammunition the following requirements apply. Bullets which weigh at least 10 grams (154 grains) must have an impact energy of at least 2.000 joules at 100 metres from the muzzle. Bullets, which weigh between 9 and 10 grams (139-154 grains) must have an impact energy of at least 2.700 joules 100 metres from the muzzle. Such ammunition is classified as Class 1

2000 joules = 1475 ft/lbs
2700 joules = 2058 ft/lbs

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Salavee

apparently it's a 30 deg shoulder.. according to Kurt

See there you go again, just gotta pick it, lol.

Like I said, you’re doing a fine job of making yourself look not too smart.

Maybe quote me on something else I didn’t say, it seems to make your strongest arguements

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by AndrewM

Maybe rather than posting hypothetical information and ideas you should spend some time reading. For dangerous game a .375 caliber is the minimum prescribed by law in most African countries. Also many countries have a minimum energy amount such as Zimbabwe with 5300J for dangerous game.
As I stated before. Also read about why FMJ bullets were required for war yet you cannot use them for hunting. I would bet they will penetrate much further than any hunting round you can find but I can also guarantee that you will see that they don't do much damage and are intended to wound the target rather than kill.

It's a bit more detailed than that as to why FMJ bullets are used and how, in Africa.
However, in a nutshell, FMJ's are more often than not used for dangerous game to break shoulders and other heavy bone and to penetrate skulls and horn bosses which are several inches thick as on the cape buffalo and hippo for example.
However on thin skinned game there is a difference, yes, but we should not be comparing and including African game in with North American game cartridges for several reasons, the main one being that we in Alberta especially for big game need to use expanding bullets.
Cat