Thursday, October 08, 2009

Things I want...

I need to pick up a 6.8 SPC barrel and bolt from Bison Armory.

Thanks to that MGI upper, that's all I need to swap calibers on the gun. Frank has spoken well of the performance of the 6.8 on critters, and I've still got a 6.8 mag and a few hundred rounds of ammo lying around here someplace; that should take care of any rationalizing I need to do for the purchase.


Homer said...

Please let us know how it shoots, with both the 5.56 and 6.8 barrels. I kinda blew off the MGI quick change thing as a neat novelty, but on further reflection, it definitely has possibilities.

Tam said...

The best part about it is that it doesn't need proprietary barrels like the LMT does; any old AR barrel will work fine.

Jim said...

Is it okay to be amused here in the 21st Century that my younger friends are getting gaga over a hot new assault round based on the thutty-tuhtty Winchester? :)

Tam said...

It's over half a decade old now; it's hardly magazine cover material anymore. ;)

The AR itself is unusual for me; it's one of the few guns I enjoy that doesn't qualify for social security. I took the Awerbuck course with a Colt 1911 that was two years older than I was.

Paul said...

I've been wondering just what the 6.8 is. If it is same same as the 30-30 why not get a 7.62x39 barrel? Same specs and a lot more cheap ammo. Just saying, don't have a dog in this one, yet.

Tam said...

"I've been wondering just what the 6.8 is. If it is same same as the 30-30 why not get a 7.62x39 barrel?"

It's not the same as a .30-30; it's based on the .30 Remington cartridge case, which was Remington's rimless answer to the .30-30 that was able to function in swoopy new autoloaders like the Browning-designed Model 8.

As to why not go with a 7.62x39? The 6.8 has a lot better ballistics than the 7.62x39, and the heavily-tapered Russkie round isn't very inherently feed-reliable in the AR's straight magwell.

Jim said...

I took a small liberty with truth, Paul. The 6.8 (about .277) is based on a necked down .30 Remington which is a rimless .30-30. Remington brought it out in 1905.

NMM1AFan said...

Does the 6.8 need an enlarged ejection port?


Weer'd Beard said...

Not being an AR-shooter I'll risk looking the fool, but the case for 6.8x43spc is shorter than the 5.56x45 case, so I don't see why that would be needed. It's also not a lot fatter at the body.

WV: "dedlysoc" Skynet is waking up!

SayUncle said...

Which one you want?


bedlamite said...

NMM1AFan said...

Does the 6.8 need an enlarged ejection port?

No, the only parts that are different from 5.56 on the 6.8 are the barrel, bolt, and magazines. M4 feed ramps are recommended, as the larger diameter round sits lower and some hollowpoints will catch on the receiver otherwise. You also want to avoid the SAAMI chamber (Leade is too short and increases pressure substantially, so most factory ammo is not what it should be, thanks for screwing that up Remington), get a spec2 or DMR chamber and get ammo from Silver State Armory.

Tam said...

"Which one you want?"

I'm looking at getting a 16" w/a Phantom. Maybe in Flat Dark Earth (It's the new black!) so I don't get it confused with the SS .300 Whisper barrel I'm looking at...

Anonymous said...

Whatever happened to the 6.5 Grendal? From what I've been able to read about it, it had better, harder, flatter (etc) specs then the 6.8SPC. So why aren't more people experimenting/shooting it?

B Woodman

Tam said...

1) For best performance, a slightly-larger-than-standard ejection port was required.

2) Alexander Arms was a bunch of tools when it came to licensing; if you want to make a barrel/upper in "6.5 Grendel©®™" you need to give AA money for each one you make.

3) 6.8 is made by Remington and Hornady. 6.5 is made by Wolf. Do the math. (Hint: Rhymes with "Bariff" and "Skimport Fan".)

4) 6.5 does indeed have marginally better ballistics in many engagement envelopes, but its fans are such a bunch of goddam furries, trolling the 'nets for any mention of "6.8SPC" so they can start a caliber war, that I wouldn't be caught dead with a 6.5 upper even if it was a frickin' death ray. ;)

Anonymous said...

Sorry. Didn't mean to push your buttons.

So, if I understand what you're saying, Alex Arms is doing the same as early Apple computer & Sony BetaMax, trying to keep the market all to themselves. And we see what happened to those two company's superior products. Apple HAS managed to come back, but it took a LONG time. Just think what Apple could have done against IBM, Windows & Bill Gates if they'd allowed open third party. And Betamax totally disappeared against VHS vcrs, even though BetaMax was much better.

Oh, well, the capitalist free market will decide. And expect more such questions as mine from people who hear a little here and there, but don't keep up with the latest & greatest.

B Woodman
always seeking to become more educated

theirritablearchitect said...


Don't have a dog in this fight either.

6.8, seems like an excellent idea. We'll see if it ever really catches on.

6.5? Perfect example of a manufacturer screwing himself for the sake of pride.

Oh, and Tam, post more pics of those wonderful toys!

Ed Rasimus said...

I did a piece on ARs in ThunderTales about two weeks ago:

The essential was that quite subtly the AR platform has replaced the classic walnut and blue steel bolt action hunting rifle. Lightweight, modular, comfortable and inexpensive to shoot and increasingly in hunter-sized calibers.

I think you'll be very happy with a 6.8 upper and if you take it out for deer, I'd probably put some nice tactical glass on it in something like 2-7x. What I'm waiting for is some reports on performance of that .338 Federal on elk.

My rule is you can't have too many ARs. Have fun!

Tam said...

B. Woodman,

Sorry. Didn't mean to push your buttons.

Huh? Hey, I have no buttons to be pushed here. I just bought the one that offered more benefits to me, not the one I thought was best. ;)

Kristopher said...

Made the same decision a few years ago, when I converted to 6.8.

6.5 Grendel is a better round, but AA can go f*ck themselves.

I expect to always be able to get ammo somewhere ... might not be the case in the future for the 6.5 round.

That and I can reload with .270 bullets cheaply.

aczarnowski said...

I built a 6.5G because, at the time, Wolf brass was available and running pretty close to brass cased 5.56. It was the blade cost that tipped it for me. I could deal with buying a highfalutin blade holder from a single manufacturer. Especially since the handle is reusable.

I said it over at FarmerFrank's though, I think that situation is changing. 6.8SPC in newer chambered barrels is on the ballistic heals of 6.5G at working distances. Add that 6.5G mags are a PITA like 7.62x39 in an AR are a PITA and I would go 6.8SPC if I did it again right now.

Timmeehh said...

Anyone see a future for 6.5MPC?
It only requires a barrel change, so it's an even easier conversion than 6.8SPC.

mcthag said...

Before I settled on 6.8 I looked into 6.5 MPC and it was "6.5 what?" when I was looking for barrels.

I think that it has the same proprietary issues as Grendel.

Second on what Tam said about 6.5 supporters!

reflectoscope said...

Tam: Death rays.


Ed Foster said...

Oh Shit! Bolt and Barrel in the mail tomorrow, I swear! It completely slipped my mind. Serves you right for not chivvying me. Save me some time and e-mail me your address again. Ed.

Rabbit said...

I've got a bare EA lower that I plan to build into a nice light 6.8 before long. Even though I'm crazy about 6.5 (albeit of the Swede variety) I figured out a long time ago that the 6.8 was going to be the one that came to stay. It'll make a nice little piggie/brush gun. I want to hear how this MGI works out with yours.


tomcatshanger said...

The new spec barrels are making me think that 6.8 is going to be my next AR-15 caliber.

The OEM spec didn't impress me all that much, but the new developments are slick.

Ed Foster said...

tomcatshanger, stick with Roy Piontek's barrels from E.R. Shaw and you will be very happy. I don't think he would appreciate my telling you why, but his chamber/freebore/rifling lead combination is pretty hard to match, much less beat.

Watch for extractor failure on the bolts out there, as lots of folks are just cutting a bigger slot in a 5.56 unit.

Continental made some big changes in radii and heat treatment, and they run good. I'll be doing something else in the near future to boot it up big enough for the Kalashnikov rim, so all you .458 SOCOM pill squeezers can have fun too (same rim on both cartridges, just a way wider body on the SOCOM).

For reference, don't waste your time shooting the SOCOM without Mack Qwinn's miracle buffer. Yeah, it's $120 bucks, but it's the single most important accessory you will ever use.

I saw an after action report that came in from Iraq concerning two private contractors shooting .50 Grendels at a bomb laden pickup truck. Both firing full auto at the windshield. One got hits all over the cab, the guy with Mack's recoil killing buffer put them all through the base of the windshield, right in front of the driver. Ex-driver.

The L.A. County SWAT team is shooting full magazines into 4 inch groups at 50 yards on full auto.

And nobody can copy it. He's got patents on that hammer blow cancels hammer blow concept that stretch from here to lawyer heaven. I shoot one on my 6.8SPC and it's feaking amazing. I'm not bad at this design thing, but I take my hat off to the master.

P.S., you know that quick change preheadspaced barrel conversion F.N.'s peddling all over the world for the Ma Deuce? The ultimate in "Oh Shit, why didn't I think of that?". Mack. A serious dood, to say the least.