Who cares? Nobody put up the money and effort to get the previous 6 Grendel cartridges SAAMI standardized. Hornady did, and now it's an open standard with other companies making guns, dies, and in the future, ammo and cases for it, there's literally nothing about that situation to complain about if you liked the previous wildcats.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
6mm ARC availability
- Thread starter COLT45SA
- Start date
Who cares? Nobody put up the money and effort to get the previous 6 Grendel cartridges SAAMI standardized. Hornady did, and now it's an open standard with other companies making guns, dies, and in the future, ammo and cases for it, there's literally nothing about that situation to complain about if you liked the previous wildcats.
serious question..if they used a rebated case with a smaller face, they could safely go to higher pressure ??
No, force equals pressure acting over area, the area that matters for bolt thrust is the cross sectional area of the pressure vessel (inside of the case) in line with the bolt. Using a rebated case head, you'd be putting the same force through the smaller head, leading to higher stresses in the brass. Maybe having more meat on the bolt could make the bolt a little stronger, but the bolt thrust would not be reduced and you might be inviting brass life issues.
^^^This^^^No, force equals pressure acting over area, the area that matters for bolt thrust is the cross sectional area of the pressure vessel (inside of the case) in line with the bolt. Using a rebated case head, you'd be putting the same force through the smaller head, leading to higher stresses in the brass. Maybe having more meat on the bolt could make the bolt a little stronger, but the bolt thrust would not be reduced and you might be inviting brass life issues.
The formula in the link I posted earlier uses the area of the case id.
CJ6
Silver $$ Contributor
It tells me that Hornady takes others ideas , makes a small change , and because they have the MONEY, they make a boatload of money off them. BTW this is not just Hornady that does this.Who cares? Nobody put up the money and effort to get the previous 6 Grendel cartridges SAAMI standardized. Hornady did, and now it's an open standard with other companies making guns, dies, and in the future, ammo and cases for it, there's literally nothing about that situation to complain about if you liked the previous wildcats.
It tells me that Hornady takes others ideas , makes a small change , and because they have the MONEY, they make a boatload of money off them. BTW this is not just Hornady that does this.
Firstly, all of human technological development is based on the earlier ideas of others. Secondly, necking the existing 6.5 Grendel case down, or moving the shoulder forward a little and putting a fast twist on 6mm PPC are not exactly Eureka level ideas, they are pretty basic moves that lots of folks have done. But that development doesn't mean a whole lot until sometime bothers to put in the effort and money to standardize the variant, get other manufacturers on board, create factory loads and pressure tested load data so that the masses have access. Good ideas are farts in the wind, implementation is what matters.
6mm ARC is standardized now. Hornady gets the jump because they did the legwork to get it standardized, but anyone can use the SAAMI standard now. So all the companies out there who want to "make a boatload" are free to leverage Hornady's efforts to do it.
Last edited:
Post # 40 was satirical................
Ah, apologies, apparently it was a bit too subtle for me. I've read endless posts from folks making the exact same statements seriously about 6mm ARC, 6.5 Creedbro, PRCs, etc.
I would like to see a complete list of rounds that have been "ripped off" of old wildcatters, that you can NOW go to the store and buy, "in theory". .22-250, .22H, .257 Roberts, .243, 7-.08, .260, .280, every rimmed magnum other than the .300 H&H, and on and on and on............................................................................................ I am sure that I left dozens off of the list from pre 1990.
They (Hornady) acknowledged the design concept origins. They also in no way prevented those original individuals from profiting from their own work. All those individuals had to do was get SAAMI to accept their design standards, partner with firearm, ammunition, powder developers and manufacturers as well as distribution companies. Then get the U.S. Government to purchase it.My point with Hornady is that they took a round that a substantial number of individuals worked with for several years to produce an effective round for the AR platform, bumped the shoulder back 0.030" and attempted to take credit for a new wonderful round.
If those individuals had made the effort to do so they could have named the cartridge as they saw fit, they could have benefitted from the profits or suffered the consequences of the failure. The jury is still out, maybe Hornady will lose money on this one.
The .030" was a safety consideration and therefore required a different designation, (name) because it was different.
The list of companies and individuals that profit from my indulgence in firearms is very long. I am grateful for all of their contributions. Bench rest shooters and wildcatters provide research into new areas and the best new concepts many times have come from their work. Many times only use NERDS remember them.
Then there's times like when David Marshal Williams got huge credit for designing the M1 Carbine when in reality he was a cranky person who no one wanted to work with. So Winchester paid him to use his gas piston, removed him from the team and had other guys really design the rifle. However, William C. Roeder, Fred Humeston, Cliff Warner, Edwin Pugsley and several others did 99.999% of the design work and few know of their contribution to the war effort.
A few years ago now and just prior to the 300 blackout, the USAMU started playing with a "new" cartridge designed to make major power factor reliably from an ar15 based platform. They dominated and now there are very few uspsa 3 gun matches designed for and or recognizing power factor in the rifle portion of their matches. It was a 6.5 Grendel necked up to 30 cal, aka 30 Major. Hornady briefly got involved and marketed this new round by what they hailed as their own called a 30 Action Shooting. It was exactly a necked up Grendel.It tells me that Hornady takes others ideas , makes a small change , and because they have the MONEY, they make a boatload of money off them. BTW this is not just Hornady that does this.
They bowed out quickly when big green started marketing the 30 aac.
If anyone has ever wondered why I called my version of this cartridge a 30 Major, there you have it, along with the fact that, at the time, Alexander Arms still had proprietary protection of the name Grendel as it pertains to a cartridge.
I saw ads for the 30 Action Shooting round online and in a magazine but never could get my hands on a box. I believe that it never went into production. But yes, Hornady doesn't shy away from an opportunity to benefit from the work of others if they think they can.
Fwiw, Robert Whitley is an attorney that may well have been first in necking a Grendel to 6mm. He called it a 6mmAR. I do believe he had some protection of it as well. That said, he also later marketed a 30 cal Grendel. He went into great detail as to how to form cases etc. All of which implied it was yet another copy of a 30 Major. He called it a 30AR. I was never able to get him to provide a print or anything that would distinguish it from a 30 Major. He did however, become defensive at my request for such and claimed it was his design.
Bottom line, it happens and there are very few golden opportunities to make much money from a rifle cartridge. But I do believe he may well have played a role in Hornady making very slight changes to get around him, with no real apparent benefit to the contrary.
We can all see this type of thing as we choose but I don't see anything right about a company profiting from someone else's work. That's all.
Eighteen years ago I wrote a book for the graphics industry, I copyright protected it. The first 6 weeks after it was published it was translated into Chinese and over a million copies made in China. Yes I could do something about it but it would cost as much as I made on that 1 book and 4 others that followed, to win something I couldn't enforce. Life's a bitch!A few years ago now and just prior to the 300 blackout, the USAMU started playing with a "new" cartridge designed to make major power factor reliably from an ar15 based platform. They dominated and now there are very few uspsa 3 gun matches designed for and or recognizing power factor in the rifle portion of their matches. It was a 6.5 Grendel necked up to 30 cal, aka 30 Major. Hornady briefly got involved and marketed this new round by what they hailed as their own called a 30 Action Shooting. It was exactly a necked up Grendel.
They bowed out quickly when big green started marketing the 30 aac.
If anyone has ever wondered why I called my version of this cartridge a 30 Major, there you have it, along with the fact that, at the time, Alexander Arms still had proprietary protection of the name Grendel as it pertains to a cartridge.
I saw ads for the 30 Action Shooting round online and in a magazine but never could get my hands on a box. I believe that it never went into production. But yes, Hornady doesn't shy away from an opportunity to benefit from the work of others if they think they can.
Fwiw, Robert Whitley is an attorney that may well have been first in necking a Grendel to 6mm. He called it a 6mmAR. I do believe he had some protection of it as well. That said, he also later marketed a 30 cal Grendel. He went into great detail as to how to form cases etc. All of which implied it was yet another copy of a 30 Major. He called it a 30AR. I was never able to get him to provide a print or anything that would distinguish it from a 30 Major. He did however, become defensive at my request for such and claimed it was his design.
Bottom line, it happens and there are very few golden opportunities to make much money from a rifle cartridge. But I do believe he may well have played a role in Hornady making very slight changes to get around him, with no real apparent benefit to the contrary.
We can all see this type of thing as we choose but I don't see anything right about a company profiting from someone else's work. That's all.
Last edited:
what load do you use to get 2750fps witht he 109gr bullet and 16"barrel?..
My ballistic calculator pops out for the 6MM ARC at 1,000 yards in a 90 degree 10 MPH wind with a 108 grain ELD at 2750 FPS. 1,000 yard drop 343.54 inches, wind drift 83.94". Comparing to drop of 391.66 and wind of 101.99 for the 308.
...
True, but the extra meat on the lugs will prevent or delay lug failures. The failures on my and on my friend's lugs were stress fractures on the joint between the lugs and bolt bodyNo, force equals pressure acting over area, the area that matters for bolt thrust is the cross sectional area of the pressure vessel (inside of the case) in line with the bolt. Using a rebated case head, you'd be putting the same force through the smaller head, leading to higher stresses in the brass. Maybe having more meat on the bolt could make the bolt a little stronger, but the bolt thrust would not be reduced and you might be inviting brass life issues.
That's kinda my point and why I didn't patent it. My only complaint is that it's still capitalizing on the work of others. We have to decide if legal equates to ethical, individually. I have my belief and for non related good reason to feel strongly that legal has zero relevance to ethics and the difference can virtually always be traced to profit. Just my 2 cents and if I cared enough about protecting my work, by all means, I would've protected it. It was a conscience decision but that in no way discredits prior work, protected or not.Eighteen years ago I wrote a book for the graphics industry, I copyright protected it. The first 6 weeks after it was published it was translated into Chinese and over a million copies made in China. Yes I could do something about it but it would cost as much as I made on that 1 book and 4 others that followed, to win something I couldn't enforce. Life's a bitch!
Are you saying that the ar15 platform is inadequate?True, but the extra meat on the lugs will prevent or delay lug failures. The failures on my and on my friend's lugs were stress fractures on the joint between the lugs and bolt body
I only ask because I get harped on for even insinuating such.
I ran the Hornady specks in my calculator. For my rifle I ran my clocked speeds and measured drops in my 16" barrel and they closely matched Hornady velocities at the muzzle and the calculated drops were very close to my measured dropsvand Hornadys table.what load do you use to get 2750fps witht he 109gr bullet and 16"barrel?
I guess it depends on the meaning of "inadequate". Based on Whitley's loads, yes, the grendel bolts are inadequate. One must reduce the load to where the muzzle velocity is around 2650 or less from a 26" barrel with a 107 class bullet. We will see if the bolt lugs will stand up to this.Are you saying that the ar15 platform is inadequate?
I only ask because I get harped on for even insinuating such.
what load did you use?I ran the Hornady specks in my calculator. For my rifle I ran my clocked speeds and measured drops in my 16" barrel and they closely matched Hornady velocities at the muzzle and the calculated drops were very close to my measured dropsvand Hornadys table.
Straight out of Hornadays data if memory servers LeverEvolution about 30 grains with 105.I guess it depends on the meaning of "inadequate". Based on Whitley's loads, yes, the grendel bolts are inadequate. One must reduce the load to where the muzzle velocity is around 2650 or less from a 26" barrel with a 107 class bullet. We will see if the bolt lugs will stand up to this.
what load did you use?
I guess it depends on the meaning of "inadequate". Based on Whitley's loads, yes, the grendel bolts are inadequate. One must reduce the load to where the muzzle velocity is around 2650 or less from a 26" barrel with a 107 class bullet. We will see if the bolt lugs will stand up to this.
what load did you use?
According to who and what are the details of that load? Someone gave you bad info if you're taking about the 6ARC. Hornady's gas gun loads are well over this velocity at the 52ksi limit.
I'm getting ~2,685fps out of factory 108gr ELD and ~2,705 fps from factory 105gr bthp chrono'd from my 21" barrel.With the same rifle, 29.2gr of LVR ( .5gr under gas gun max) under a 105gr Matchburner chrono's a little over 2,700 fps, and I've trued all of these out to 1k.
I've also worked up good loads with 95gr SSTs @ 2,820 fps, and 85gr SGKs @ 2,970 fps, both loads under book maxes for gas guns. I've gotten 112gr Match Burners up a little above 2,600 fps shooting a spread, but haven't worked out a load with those yet, the cartridge realistically does better with the 100gr -109gr range than the super heavies.
Last edited:
Based on experience, I lean toward @243Mendoza and his position regarding pressures. I'm not going to doubt you either but I do think you are very near where fatigue may show up as broken bolt lugs,, eventually.According to who and what are the details of that load? Someone gave you bad info if you're taking about the 6ARC. Hornady's gas gun loads are well over this velocity at the 52ksi limit.
I'm getting ~2,685fps out of factory 108gr ELD and ~2,705 fps from factory 105gr bthp chrono'd from my 21" barrel.With the same rifle, 29.2gr of LVR ( .5gr under gas gun max) under a 105gr Matchburner chrono's a little over 2,700 fps, and I've trued all of these out to 1k.
I've also worked up good loads with 95gr SSTs @ 2,820 fps, and 85gr SGKs @ 2,970 fps, both loads under book maxes for gas guns. I've gotten 112gr Match Burners up a little above 2,600 fps shooting a spread, but haven't worked out a load with those yet, the cartridge realistically does better with the 100gr -109gr range than the super heavies.
I hope not but based on pressures and my experience with different Grendel versions in both bolt guns and in ar's, you are operating at fringe pressure levels for a reliable ar15 platform rifle, at your stated velocities. It might hold up for a while and it might hold up forever but I'm only stating my experience, not absolutes.
You are clearly a fan of the cartridge and I don't fault or credit that but you do take promoting it pretty serious, for whatever reason. It might be the best thing since sliced bread but is virtually a twin to both a 6ppc and a 6 Grendel, with no significant advantages over either. So, I don't see the big deal. Now, when Lapua starts making good brass for it, it might have something going for it. That being an already formed case that can emulate a ppc or 6 Grendel with less work. Until then, the only thing it has over those is factory ammo, a platform that can't stand up to its ideal pressures and very low quality brass options. Saami approval might open doors to fix both but I think makers are reluctant to publish bolt and gas gun data. I don't think anyone has said it's a bad round. He'll, it can't be. It falls right between and very close to two very good cartridges. Brass and bolts hold it back, for now, imo.
Otherwise, it's been done and has already been proven to be an excellent cartridge.
There are better bolts for ar15s that help but I've not seen one that will hold up to modest ppc br loads yet, over the long haul.
One more thing that irks me a little is how Hornady promotes speeds without clearly stating bbl lengths.
Fwiw.
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.