[Yamaraja]

While the history of the 6.8 is awesome and reviewing it is great. It does not push the 6.8 forward.
The Grendel has rode the 6.5 craze in this country.
However it also gets it performance from SAAMI specs.
Without a consistent spec for a SAAMI SPC II or a NATO designated 6.8 our beloved cartridge will never reach the level of use the Grendel has attained. Or 350 Legend or any of the other newer AR15 calibers.
No Ruger, Howa ect bolt guns. Being dropped by DPMS, PSA etc while companies are moving forward with the others mentioned.
SAAMI isn't even going to look at SPCII even if a big player wanted go that route. There are to many non standard renditions after all this time.
The Grendel Facebook group has over 7k+ members, 6.8 SPC has 2k+.
SPCII ammo would help. So we aren't the "gotta be a handloader for the best performance" cartridge.
The 6.8 could use a shot in the arm (pun intended).
Whats next is something worth talking about.

 

[constructor]

A lot of this stuff is Greek to me as I don't reload. How does all this effect off the shelf ammo? I pretty much shoot whatever I can get my hands on at a good price. Everything I have is 110-115gr. Maybe someday I will reload to get max performance and because of that I keep all my brass and buy bullets when on sale.

You will get a bunch of opinions. It will not effect the off the shelf ammo at all. The changes made were for the better, when you get ready to reload the option is there to load with heavier charges and get more velocity than factory ammo if you choose to.

 

[constructor]

While the history of the 6.8 is awesome and reviewing it is great. It does not push the 6.8 forward.
The Grendel has rode the 6.5 craze in this country.
However it also gets it performance from SAAMI specs.
Without a consistent spec for a SAAMI SPC II or a NATO designated 6.8 our beloved cartridge will never reach the level of use the Grendel has attained. Or 350 Legend or any of the other newer AR15 calibers.
No Ruger, Howa ect bolt guns. Being dropped by DPMS, PSA etc while companies are moving forward with the others mentioned.
SAAMI isn't even going to look at SPCII even if a big player wanted go that route. There are to many non standard renditions after all this time.
The Grendel Facebook group has over 7k+ members, 6.8 SPC has 2k+.
SPCII ammo would help. So we aren't the "gotta be a handloader for the best performance" cartridge.
The 6.8 could use a shot in the arm (pun intended).
Whats next is something worth talking about.

So you think your ammo company is the savior for the 6.8? That's pretty FN funny right there I don't care who you are.
You know the 5.56 or 7.62x51 were never SAAMI approved right? They are big because they are military cartridges.

 

[Ratdog68]

I don't even know, so it's why I'm asking, are .38+P, .38+P+, 9mm+P (etc.) SAAMI too? Or are they simply good offerings for an educated consumer who KNOWS his weapon and its capabilities, and is making an informed decision/ammo purchase?

 

[greentick]

I came on just after that fracas. I was initially looking at a 308AR which led to 6.5G (and AR15vs large frame AR education) which led to reading into the 6.5 v 6.8 after which I ended up, somehow, at AR15performance buying a complete upper. I ended up here after that/around the same time looking for reloading data. I still ended up building a 308AR after that(my first ground-up build), with a BHW bbl that was defective and very educational (silver lining, I blamed myself and so there was an inordinate amount of troubleshooting). That got fixed, verified, and sold (and has had a successful life according to it's new owner). My oldest boy will be taking one of my 6.8s on his first hog hunt in a couple weeks.

 

[constructor]

Robert, you weren't around for the first 5-6 years of this forum so you may not know. Cold started this forum to cut down on the arguing on arfcom and give the 6.8 a place to be discussed without interference from the Grendel crowd.
In the beginning there were 4-5 of us who believed in the reason behind the 6.8. Holland, Murray and Lawton wanted a new cartridge that would help save the lives of American warfighters. Their testing showed the 6.8 could propel bullets to 2800fps, now I'm getting older but I believe that was using the Hornady 115gr but I can't recall what the length of the barrel was. What I do know was all of the original test barrels were Douglass 4 groove barrels. MSTN and PRI had a big hand in all early development.
As soon as SAAMI got a hand on it they screwed it up. SAAMI not us, SAAMI. Now SAAMI specs clearly show the bore area but how many people do you think actually calculated the bore area? All of the barrels people started pumping out with 6 groove and 50:50 ratio did not meet the bore area specs. By time I got involved it was late 2005 early 2006 and talk on the forums was ammo could not be produced that achieved the velocities Holland, Murray and Lawton reported.
Okay so those of us here thought that was a speed bump to the military. We thought if we could improve the specs of chambers and barrels we could show the 6.8 could perform like The OG3 said it could because they had already done it.
We started working on it, the original crowd here along with Art of SSA discussed everything because it was for a good cause. We all thought the original SPCII was the answer and it would have been if someone had not transposed the number on the PTG reamer drawing and the tolerances of the PTG reamers had been set up a different way and in general been better. I still have no idea who designed the SPCII or who transposed the number but if I had to bet Kiff had something to do with it.
The goal was still the same, prove to the military that the 6.8 was as good as the OG3 said it was. We were out to show everyone when barrels were produced with the right specs the 6.8 could do it.
In 2008 we could push 115gr Hornadys(now discontinued) to 2800fps out of a 16" barrel made with decent specs and using the correct powder(H335/Wc844) Did you know H335 powder was one of very few that the military has approved for use in military ammo? Flash reducer had something to do with it along with even after the barrels are worn the velocities stayed within their allowance. It's an old article I read years ago and don't recall much but H335 still works today and will still produce top velocity in the 6.8.
Sometime late 2008 Art of SSA was traveling the world selling the 6.8, he was sitting in an airport somewhere talking to me on the phone, he had given up on selling the 6.8 to the US military. As I hear it he had a big hand in selling it to Jordan, unfortunately after selling the idea of the 6.8 and LWRC rifles to Jordan they cut him out of the deal and wanted Federal to produce the ammo. Yeah I hear a bunch of people say they were involved in talking to people that adopted the 6.8 but back then I was talking to Art several times a week and he had a lot of knowledge about what was going on that no one else had for years until that info had time to circulate around the forums. All of a sudden everyone had a hand in it. Shortly after, Art sold SSA to Nosler who screwed the 6.8 further.
Somewhere on this forum today I replied to Nincomps post about the SPCII reamer, the dimensions and tolerances as PTG grinds the reamers. You think you have an issue with my reamer design, you may want to take a close look at the PTG reamer design and read closely, try to understand what the tolerances of that reamer drawing can do.

 

[Yamaraja]

So you think your ammo company is the savior for the 6.8? That's pretty FN funny right there I don't care who you are.
You know the 5.56 or 7.62x51 were never SAAMI approved right? They are big because they are military cartridges.

I'm not going to argue with you.
Comments like that are what you do to anyone that debates you.
There's no way we are big enough to save anything, nor want to be.
5.56 and 7.62x51 are NATO designations. What the heck does that have to do with SAAMI?
I said a NATO designation the equivalent of SPC II.
That could at this point only come if a foreign military applied for it, ours isn't going to.
Which I hope for as S&B does get military orders for 6.8. I piggyback on those to get my brass orders filled when they happen.
That could bring a higher speed and pressure standard like .223 to 5.56. Such as Western Powders 58,500 PSI top rating.

I do what I can. Better bullets, mags to load long, loaded ammo. I'm trying to do my part to keep the 6.8 alive.
I'm doing what I can, I have no aspirations of grandeur.
Savior of the 6.8? I think there's already a big ego here with that title, he can keep it.
How many good people have been driven away from the 6.8 could be a good question as well.
I try to support the 6.8 the best I can. Thats all. I pay my vendor dues to do so. Support the 6.8 which is my favorite cartridge. The little engine that could. The cartridge that survived on its merit. No big name push, no big name marketing.

 

[constructor]

My opinion, always if you don't want to hear it don't read it.
The 6.8 is what the 6.8 is, a damn fine deer and hog round that can be shot out of an AR15. I don't really get the bolt action 6.8 because they are SA bolt guns, they are able shoot a 308 or whatever. Even if a 6.8 they are still as heavy as a would be if it was a 308. I understand guys who have a AR15 in 6.8 wanting a common caliber bolt gun but not Savage or Rem offering a 6.8 bolt gun if they don't offer a 6.8 AR15.

Next the 6.8 does not belong to anyone/any company. Remington screwed it up then abandoned it 17 years ago and no one is advertising it so no magazines are posting big stories or ads hyping it up.
SAAMI will never approve the 6.8 with any other specs for the same reason they didn't approve a 5.56 or 7.62x51.

Now if someone wants to get another version of the 6.8 approved I'll say the same thing I said to mark Kexel, get a bunch of brass produced, ammo produced, do the testing and submit it to SAAMI. He says he is a contributing member to SAAMI so there is your in. It seems he said he would submit the 6.8 GPC to SAAMI and it should be approved within a year about 7 years ago. Was it submitted to SAAMI, don't know but I doubt it. What does the other voice in y mind say? If I was a jackass I'd say "hey, I have this new cartridge that will be SAAMI approved in a year you should buy it."

The 6.8 is holding it's own, I sell a crap load of barrels to Texas and Florida and if I wanted to sell to California there would be a bunch going there too.
Cherry pick statistics much?
6.5 Grendel Forum : : For the 6.5 Grendel Aficionado Statistics
Threads 24,444 Posts 288,959 Members 13,247

6.8 SPC ForumsSince 2007
A forum community dedicated to 6.8 SPC firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
835.7Kposts
39.3Kmembers


I dropped all of the Grendel based cartridge because it is near impossible to get good bolts and extractors. Yes I still read posts on arfcom and the Grendel forum about bolts breaking and the dreaded Grendel belted magnum brass, yes they are still spinning the web.

 

[Yamaraja]

Robert, you weren't around for the first 5-6 years of this forum so you may not know. Cold started this forum to cut down on the arguing on arfcom and give the 6.8 a place to be discussed without interference from the Grendel crowd.
In the beginning there were 4-5 of us who believed in the reason behind the 6.8. Holland, Murray and Lawton wanted a new cartridge that would help save the lives of American warfighters. Their testing showed the 6.8 could propel bullets to 2800fps, now I'm getting older but I believe that was using the Hornady 115gr but I can't recall what the length of the barrel was. What I do know was all of the original test barrels were Douglass 4 groove barrels. MSTN and PRI had a big hand in all early development.
As soon as SAAMI got a hand on it they screwed it up. SAAMI not us, SAAMI. Now SAAMI specs clearly show the bore area but how many people do you think actually calculated the bore area? All of the barrels people started pumping out with 6 groove and 50:50 ratio did not meet the bore area specs. By time I got involved it was late 2005 early 2006 and talk on the forums was ammo could not be produced that achieved the velocities Holland, Murray and Lawton reported.
Okay so those of us here thought that was a speed bump to the military. We thought if we could improve the specs of chambers and barrels we could show the 6.8 could perform like The OG3 said it could because they had already done it.
We started working on it, the original crowd here along with Art of SSA discussed everything because it was for a good cause. We all thought the original SPCII was the answer and it would have been if someone had not transposed the number on the PTG reamer drawing and the tolerances of the PTG reamers had been set up a different way and in general been better. I still have no idea who designed the SPCII or who transposed the number but if I had to bet Kiff had something to do with it.
The goal was still the same, prove to the military that the 6.8 was as good as the OG3 said it was. We were out to show everyone when barrels were produced with the right specs the 6.8 could do it.
In 2008 we could push 115gr Hornadys(now discontinued) to 2800fps out of a 16" barrel made with decent specs and using the correct powder(H335/Wc844) Did you know H335 powder was one of very few that the military has approved for use in military ammo? Flash reducer had something to do with it along with even after the barrels are worn the velocities stayed within their allowance. It's an old article I read years ago and don't recall much but H335 still works today and will still produce top velocity in the 6.8.
Sometime late 2008 Art of SSA was traveling the world selling the 6.8, he was sitting in an airport somewhere talking to me on the phone, he had given up on selling the 6.8 to the US military. As I hear it he had a big hand in selling it to Jordan, unfortunately after selling the idea of the 6.8 and LWRC rifles to Jordan they cut him out of the deal and wanted Federal to produce the ammo. Yeah I hear a bunch of people say they were involved in talking to people that adopted the 6.8 but back then I was talking to Art several times a week and he had a lot of knowledge about what was going on that no one else had for years until that info had time to circulate around the forums. All of a sudden everyone had a hand in it. Shortly after, Art sold SSA to Nosler who screwed the 6.8 further.
Somewhere on this forum today I replied to Nincomps post about the SPCII reamer, the dimensions and tolerances as PTG grinds the reamers. You think you have an issue with my reamer design, you may want to take a close look at the PTG reamer design and read closely, try to understand what the tolerances of that reamer drawing can do.

I've heard and read all that many times.
I think some the team at Remington intentionally sabotaged the 6.8 drawings. Wasn't that about the same time the 30 Remington was on the drawing board? I've always thought by all I read on here back in the day that the 30 Rem team wanted their cartridge to be the darling of the AR15 alternate caliber. They would have been in perfect position to screw up the initial SAAMI submission.

 

[Yamaraja]

My opinion, always if you don't want to hear it don't read it.
The 6.8 is what the 6.8 is, a damn fine deer and hog round that can be shot out of an AR15. I don't really get the bolt action 6.8 because they are SA bolt guns, they are able shoot a 308 or whatever. Even if a 6.8 they are still as heavy as a would be if it was a 308. I understand guys who have a AR15 in 6.8 wanting a common caliber bolt gun but not Savage or Rem offering a 6.8 bolt gun if they don't offer a 6.8 AR15.

Next the 6.8 does not belong to anyone/any company. Remington screwed it up then abandoned it 17 years ago and no one is advertising it so no magazines are posting big stories or ads hyping it up.
SAAMI will never approve the 6.8 with any other specs for the same reason they didn't approve a 5.56 or 7.62x51.

Now if someone wants to get another version of the 6.8 approved I'll say the same thing I said to mark Kexel, get a bunch of brass produced, ammo produced, do the testing and submit it to SAAMI. He says he is a contributing member to SAAMI so there is your in. It seems he said he would submit the 6.8 GPC to SAAMI and it should be approved within a year about 7 years ago. Was it submitted to SAAMI, don't know but I doubt it. What does the other voice in y mind say? If I was a jackass I'd say "hey, I have this new cartridge that will be SAAMI approved in a year you should buy it."

The 6.8 is holding it's own, I sell a crap load of barrels to Texas and Florida and if I wanted to sell to California there would be a bunch going there too.
Cherry pick statistics much?
6.5 Grendel Forum : : For the 6.5 Grendel Aficionado Statistics
Threads 24,444 Posts 288,959 Members 13,247

6.8 SPC ForumsSince 2007
A forum community dedicated to 6.8 SPC firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
835.7Kposts
39.3Kmembers


I dropped all of the Grendel based cartridge because it is near impossible to get good bolts and extractors. Yes I still read posts on arfcom and the Grendel forum about bolts breaking and the dreaded Grendel belted magnum brass, yes they are still spinning the web.

You still just want to argue.
With unfounded accusations.
I post my Grendel ammo on their Facebook just like I do the 6.8 one. The top of the page shows the numbers for both groups.
Many of the Facebook group users dont even go to either forum. As they have commented in both.
The Grendel forum is its own club. They turn a lot of people off. No surprise with their numbers.

I dont pay much attention to forum member numbers. They show total members than have ever joined. How many are active members would be much better info.

I still dont see why you are using NATO designations in the same sentence as SAAMI.
NATO wouldnt call it a 6.8 SPC anything.

 

[Yamaraja]

Robert, you weren't around for the first 5-6 years of this forum so you may not know. Cold started this forum to cut down on the arguing on arfcom and give the 6.8 a place to be discussed without interference from the Grendel crowd.
In the beginning there were 4-5 of us who believed in the reason behind the 6.8. Holland, Murray and Lawton wanted a new cartridge that would help save the lives of American warfighters. Their testing showed the 6.8 could propel bullets to 2800fps, now I'm getting older but I believe that was using the Hornady 115gr but I can't recall what the length of the barrel was. What I do know was all of the original test barrels were Douglass 4 groove barrels. MSTN and PRI had a big hand in all early development.
As soon as SAAMI got a hand on it they screwed it up. SAAMI not us, SAAMI. Now SAAMI specs clearly show the bore area but how many people do you think actually calculated the bore area? All of the barrels people started pumping out with 6 groove and 50:50 ratio did not meet the bore area specs. By time I got involved it was late 2005 early 2006 and talk on the forums was ammo could not be produced that achieved the velocities Holland, Murray and Lawton reported.
Okay so those of us here thought that was a speed bump to the military. We thought if we could improve the specs of chambers and barrels we could show the 6.8 could perform like The OG3 said it could because they had already done it.
We started working on it, the original crowd here along with Art of SSA discussed everything because it was for a good cause. We all thought the original SPCII was the answer and it would have been if someone had not transposed the number on the PTG reamer drawing and the tolerances of the PTG reamers had been set up a different way and in general been better. I still have no idea who designed the SPCII or who transposed the number but if I had to bet Kiff had something to do with it.
The goal was still the same, prove to the military that the 6.8 was as good as the OG3 said it was. We were out to show everyone when barrels were produced with the right specs the 6.8 could do it.
In 2008 we could push 115gr Hornadys(now discontinued) to 2800fps out of a 16" barrel made with decent specs and using the correct powder(H335/Wc844) Did you know H335 powder was one of very few that the military has approved for use in military ammo? Flash reducer had something to do with it along with even after the barrels are worn the velocities stayed within their allowance. It's an old article I read years ago and don't recall much but H335 still works today and will still produce top velocity in the 6.8.
Sometime late 2008 Art of SSA was traveling the world selling the 6.8, he was sitting in an airport somewhere talking to me on the phone, he had given up on selling the 6.8 to the US military. As I hear it he had a big hand in selling it to Jordan, unfortunately after selling the idea of the 6.8 and LWRC rifles to Jordan they cut him out of the deal and wanted Federal to produce the ammo. Yeah I hear a bunch of people say they were involved in talking to people that adopted the 6.8 but back then I was talking to Art several times a week and he had a lot of knowledge about what was going on that no one else had for years until that info had time to circulate around the forums. All of a sudden everyone had a hand in it. Shortly after, Art sold SSA to Nosler who screwed the 6.8 further.
Somewhere on this forum today I replied to Nincomps post about the SPCII reamer, the dimensions and tolerances as PTG grinds the reamers. You think you have an issue with my reamer design, you may want to take a close look at the PTG reamer design and read closely, try to understand what the tolerances of that reamer drawing can do.

Harrison
I love everything you did with your chamber design save the narrow freebore. Which I still believe was a change more recently. You know those 90 grain pulls that were around? Remember when I called you after trying to shoot them in my 12.5 inch ARP barrel a couple years ago? They shot in the other barrels I had from you just fine. But in that 12.5 the projectiles got stuck in what I know now was the freebore. Load a round, try to remove it without firing and it would be stuck in the freebore. So stuck that you had to mortar it to remove it. Which would leave the bullet stuck that had to be popped out with a dowel. They also showed huge pressure signs. Others have found bullets up to .2778 in diameter out there. Others could show up. Its a SAAMI PROJECTILE spec for gods sake. I'm not going to make them that big, other may.

You are the godfather of the 6.8SPC. Trust me nobody else wants that title.
Thank you again for everything you have done for the cartridge.

 

[constructor]

While the history of the 6.8 is awesome and reviewing it is great. It does not push the 6.8 forward.
The Grendel has rode the 6.5 craze in this country.
However it also gets it performance from SAAMI specs.
Without a consistent spec for a SAAMI SPC II or a NATO designated 6.8 our beloved cartridge will never reach the level of use the Grendel has attained. Or 350 Legend or any of the other newer AR15 calibers.
No Ruger, Howa ect bolt guns. Being dropped by DPMS, PSA etc while companies are moving forward with the others mentioned.
SAAMI isn't even going to look at SPCII even if a big player wanted go that route. There are to many non standard renditions after all this time.
The Grendel Facebook group has over 7k+ members, 6.8 SPC has 2k+.
SPCII ammo would help. So we aren't the "gotta be a handloader for the best performance" cartridge.
The 6.8 could use a shot in the arm (pun intended).
Whats next is something worth talking about.

It seems to me you are cherry picking statistics in order to make a point and think everyone here is going to believe you?
Cherry pick statistics much?
6.5 Grendel Forum : : For the 6.5 Grendel Aficionado Statistics
Threads 24,444 Posts 288,959 Members 13,247
6.8 SPC ForumsSince 2007
A forum community dedicated to 6.8 SPC firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
835.7Kposts
39.3Kmembers
You are not near as smart as I thought you were, I thought you knew the history and understood why we did the things we did but you don't understand any of it even the SPCII reamer design. For future reference don't make solid copper bullets larger than the bore of any caliber. If you don't understand why try to copy what the big bullet companies are doing in regard to diameters.
Tim with Kotonics. Zac Smith, ART with SSA, (ETA Cold by starting this forum) LWRC, Randall with AR15 barrels, Noveske, the people that are on this forum now, the people that were on this forum in the beginning backing the 6.8 and it took everyone on the internet to figure out what the problems were and why, those were the ones that saved the 6.8. It was moments away from death back around 2005-6 at the moment there are at least 5 times as many 6.8 products on the market than there was. When I got into it there was 3 places to buy barrels, 1 selling uppers and maybe 2 selling rifles.
People like you telling everyone now the 6.8 is dying and cherry picking stats to show members here to try to make them believe it isn't backing or helping the 6.8.
You say you don't want to argue yet here you are, well guess what, I'll argue with you until they ban me I'll be here every day.

 

[Yamaraja]

It seems to me you are cherry picking statistics in order to make a point and think everyone here is going to believe you?
Cherry pick statistics much?
6.5 Grendel Forum : : For the 6.5 Grendel Aficionado Statistics
Threads 24,444 Posts 288,959 Members 13,247
6.8 SPC ForumsSince 2007
A forum community dedicated to 6.8 SPC firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
835.7Kposts
39.3Kmembers
You are not near as smart as I thought you were, I thought you knew the history and understood why we did the things we did but you don't understand any of it even the SPCII reamer design. For future reference don't make solid copper bullets larger than the bore of any caliber. If you don't understand why try to copy what the big bullet companies are doing in regard to diameters.
Tim with Kotonics. Zac Smith, ART with SSA, LWRC, Randall with AR15 barrels, Noveske, the people that are on this forum now, the people that were on this forum in the beginning backing the 6.8 and it took everyone on the internet to figure out what the problems were and why, those were the ones that saved the 6.8. It was moments away from death back around 2005-6 at the moment there are at least 5 times as many 6.8 products on the market than there was. When I got into it there was 3 places to buy barrels, 1 selling uppers and maybe 2 selling rifles.
People like you telling everyone now the 6.8 is dying and cherry picking stats to show members here to try to make them believe it isn't backing or helping the 6.8.
You say you don't want to argue yet here you are, well guess what, I'll argue with you until they ban me I'll be here every day.

WOW
Never said the 6.8 was dying. Said the other are growing and I want the 6.8 to.
Only point I was trying to make is cartridges are growing and I want the 6.8 to.
Thats why I developed CBB, its surely not for money. You know that. The wife even asks me why I do it. Labor of love honey, labor of love.

I also said the Grendel was riding the 6.5 wave. Nice little cartridge. Those guys don't like you much though.
Lotta bad blood it seems.
But man are those guys good at hyping it, saw one comparing it to the .243 earlier lol.

You can keep putting me down. Thing is my dear Harrison I've seen you do it so many times it well, is expected.
Remember man, I've been the one supporting you and having your back thru alot of those for what, 8 years or more now.
Bunch of it on ARFCOM.
But man question something you did one time and well here we are.

Thanks again for all you have done for the 6.8 and its community.
I hope you are here everyday to help with anyone's technical question's.

 

[constructor]

Robert,
I started this thread to show members where the bullets would touch the land in my barrels. If you notice I didn't say anything about your bullets and this thread had nothing to do with you. What was the second statement you made in this thread? My tapered freebore caused the issue right, that is what you said. Earlier I told you too take a close look at the SPCII reamer drawings that PTG has put out. If you didn't notice I'll explain it to you. The spcII reamer made by PTG can be smaller than my chamber at every diameter. Do you get it now? PTGs drawing has a tolerance of .001"+or -.
No bullet company in the country makes bullets larger than the bore diameter in any caliber and 95% of those are cup and core which could be swaged down but they still don't do it. They don't do it because it causes more copper fouling, more pressure, deforms the bullets more. Solid copper bullets will be worse because a solid copper bullet without a lead core is harder and will not swage down as easy. I seriously thought you knew, I mean you talk to everyone and know everyone it seems, how could you not pickup on that? Krieger even has a warning not to use small bore blanks with longer/heavier bullets, that is the same as a larger bullet in a normal bore. The weird liberal thing about you I have noticed is you seem to think you can say whatever you want about me but I shouldn't say anything back.
I'm not sure if I told you or just the mods but the day you posted in the thread about the guy popping primers using your ammo only and my barrel I received 4-5 phone calls so I went to check the thread. You said you knew the issue but you weren't going to say it. Well you knew it because I told you about a half second after you told me your bullets were .278" in diameter on the phone a week earlier. I read the post but didn't say anything, I wanted to see what your next move was. I received the message loud and clear.
Okay so now for a few years here you have been loading or trying to load to SPCII Specs which there are none but you are loading faster than Hornadys load which many consider a base line. SPCII all the way right? Until it suits you to say oh the SAAMI 6.8 SPC spec says the bullets can be .278" in diameter.
I've said it before, Maker screwed up, It doesn't matter if his machines were on auto pilot and he didn't catch the diameter to change the offsets or he really believes he can make solid copper bullets .001" larger than the bore diameter. Now you have said that you have adjusted your bullet diameter to compensate for my undersized freebore ( better check that SPCII drawing)
Thank you, not that I care.
A few days later the guy that started the thread says "hey, I tested some more and the only ones blowing primers are the ones with the other kind of brass" huh? dang I thought you said it was the undersized freebore? You see this isn't about the bullets and the freebore anymore this is me and you.
his post just in case you don't think that is what he said. , Ya think you got new bullets and got them loaded by Druid Hlls who shipped them to you and you shipped to him in 2 weeks?
"For those that were following my first thread about blowing primers from factory loaded 105 gn CBB's.
Review
I ordered 2 boxes of the 105 gn factory loaded ammo in January and finally got to go shooting to sight them.
While shooting i had 2 of the 11 rounds i fired blow out primers. I am using a Rock River complete upper with a ARP 18in barrel.
Update.
Two weeks ago ordered 2 more boxes of the same ammo and received them last week so i went shooting again. I shot 6 rounds of the first order of ammo and 2 of the rounds fired blew primers. I then shot 10 rounds of the second order and all fired perfectly.
The only difference between the first and second order of the ammo that i could see was the brass. First order has 2 stars stamped in the case and the second is Hornady brass. I do not reload and i don't know if that could affect anything.
From my understanding/reading CBB has done some adjusting to the loads. It seems to have worked. All rounds, first and second order were very accurate.
I am ready for deer season to see how these bullets preform"

We are both wearing out our welcome and no one is learning anything or wants to read this shit. You stay out of any thread I start and I'll do the same for you.

 

[tbready]

After this fiasco none of my bullets will be touching any of your lands from here on out buddy.

 

[Yamaraja]

Robert,
I started this thread to show members where the bullets would touch the land in my barrels. If you notice I didn't say anything about your bullets and this thread had nothing to do with you. What was the second statement you made in this thread? My tapered freebore caused the issue right, that is what you said. Earlier I told you too take a close look at the SPCII reamer drawings that PTG has put out. If you didn't notice I'll explain it to you. The spcII reamer made by PTG can be smaller than my chamber at every diameter. Do you get it now? PTGs drawing has a tolerance of .001"+or -.
No bullet company in the country makes bullets larger than the bore diameter in any caliber and 95% of those are cup and core which could be swaged down but they still don't do it. They don't do it because it causes more copper fouling, more pressure, deforms the bullets more. Solid copper bullets will be worse because a solid copper bullet without a lead core is harder and will not swage down as easy. I seriously thought you knew, I mean you talk to everyone and know everyone it seems, how could you not pickup on that? Krieger even has a warning not to use small bore blanks with longer/heavier bullets, that is the same as a larger bullet in a normal bore. The weird liberal thing about you I have noticed is you seem to think you can say whatever you want about me but I shouldn't say anything back.
I'm not sure if I told you or just the mods but the day you posted in the thread about the guy popping primers using your ammo only and my barrel I received 4-5 phone calls so I went to check the thread. You said you knew the issue but you weren't going to say it. Well you knew it because I told you about a half second after you told me your bullets were .278" in diameter on the phone a week earlier. I read the post but didn't say anything, I wanted to see what your next move was. I received the message loud and clear.
Okay so now for a few years here you have been loading or trying to load to SPCII Specs which there are none but you are loading faster than Hornadys load which many consider a base line. SPCII all the way right? Until it suits you to say oh the SAAMI 6.8 SPC spec says the bullets can be .278" in diameter.
I've said it before, Maker screwed up, It doesn't matter if his machines were on auto pilot and he didn't catch the diameter to change the offsets or he really believes he can make solid copper bullets .001" larger than the bore diameter. Now you have said that you have adjusted your bullet diameter to compensate for my undersized freebore ( better check that SPCII drawing)
Thank you, not that I care.
A few days later the guy that started the thread says "hey, I tested some more and the only ones blowing primers are the ones with the other kind of brass" huh? dang I thought you said it was the undersized freebore? You see this isn't about the bullets and the freebore anymore this is me and you.
his post just in case you don't think that is what he said. , Ya think you got new bullets and got them loaded by Druid Hlls who shipped them to you and you shipped to him in 2 weeks?
"For those that were following my first thread about blowing primers from factory loaded 105 gn CBB's.
Review
I ordered 2 boxes of the 105 gn factory loaded ammo in January and finally got to go shooting to sight them.
While shooting i had 2 of the 11 rounds i fired blow out primers. I am using a Rock River complete upper with a ARP 18in barrel.
Update.
Two weeks ago ordered 2 more boxes of the same ammo and received them last week so i went shooting again. I shot 6 rounds of the first order of ammo and 2 of the rounds fired blew primers. I then shot 10 rounds of the second order and all fired perfectly.
The only difference between the first and second order of the ammo that i could see was the brass. First order has 2 stars stamped in the case and the second is Hornady brass. I do not reload and i don't know if that could affect anything.
From my understanding/reading CBB has done some adjusting to the loads. It seems to have worked. All rounds, first and second order were very accurate.
I am ready for deer season to see how these bullets preform"

We are both wearing out our welcome and no one is learning anything or wants to read this shit. You stay out of any thread I start and I'll do the same for you.

You seem to have missed the whole point about bullets. It has nothing to do with the 6.8 or SPCII. Nothing to do with PTGs reamer. It's a standardized spec for all .277 caliber bullets. In every cartridge, .275 to .278. In the 6 Creed it's. 2434 -.003. 6.5 Creed .2644 -.003. So in the 6mm it's standardized a projectile can be between .2434 and .2404. A 6.5 .2644 and .2614. I checked most all of them. Grendel is .2643 at the top though, gutless little thing lol
All the 7mm's are .2845 -.003
The 7.62x39 is also .311 but -.002 with a .310 bore. Isn't that interesting, also .001 over bore diameter.
The thing to note here is all the freebores in all the aforementioned cartridges and calibers are at minimum .0001 larger than the largest projectile specs.
6.8 specific, dosen't seem like it.
I did find an 8mm Mauser with a .323 bullet and .323 groove spec. But it's freebore is .324.
You see this all was just technical. What this forums about right.
Do I want my bullets at .2778? Which was the largest one. When I initially measured .278 my mic wasn't high enough quality. As you know the last place rounds up or down. A Mitutoyo I bought then showed it to truly be .2778
Well no of course I don't. That's why we adjusted on the spot. But, it was still in spec.
But the point is in no caliber or cartridge is the freebore smaller than the largest bullet specs. Why do you think that is?
Technically speaking of course.

Lastly when I said I knew what it was but did not want to say. It wasn't that I didn't want to say the bullets were .2778. It's that I didn't want to talk about your freebore being tighter than .277 standard spec sir. I was trying to fix it on my end before it got out. If the freebore wasn't tighter than .2781 there wouldn't have been an issue. Hell even .2778 freebore would have been ok.
The whole not wanting to say was to try to cover your ass.

 

[constructor]

You seem to have missed the whole point about bullets. It has nothing to do with the 6.8 or SPCII. Nothing to do with PTGs reamer. It's a standardized spec for all .277 caliber bullets. In every cartridge, .275 to .278. In the 6 Creed it's. 2434 -.003. 6.5 Creed .2644 -.003. So in the 6mm it's standardized a projectile can be between .2434 and .2404. A 6.5 .2644 and .2614. I checked most all of them. Grendel is .2643 at the top though, gutless little thing lol
All the 7mm's are .2845 -.003
The 7.62x39 is also .311 but -.002 with a .310 bore. Isn't that interesting, also .001 over bore diameter.
The thing to note here is all the freebores in all the aforementioned cartridges and calibers are at minimum .0001 larger than the largest projectile specs.
6.8 specific, dosen't seem like it.
I did find an 8mm Mauser with a .323 bullet and .323 groove spec. But it's freebore is .324.
You see this all was just technical. What this forums about right.
Do I want my bullets at .2778? Which was the largest one. When I initially measured .278 my mic wasn't high enough quality. As you know the last place rounds up or down. A Mitutoyo I bought then showed it to truly be .2778
Well no of course I don't. That's why we adjusted on the spot. But, it was still in spec.
But the point is in no caliber or cartridge is the freebore smaller than the largest bullet specs. Why do you think that is?
Technically speaking of course.

Lastly when I said I knew what it was but did not want to say. It wasn't that I didn't want to say the bullets were .2778. It's that I didn't want to talk about your freebore being tighter than .277 standard spec sir. I was trying to fix it on my end before it got out. If the freebore wasn't tighter than .2781 there wouldn't have been an issue. Hell even .2778 freebore would have been ok.
The whole not wanting to say was to try to cover your ass.

My freebore was not is not tighter than the .277 spec. it is .277 on the front end with a .0005+ tolerance on top of that reamers usually cut the chamber size .0005" larger than the reamer. My JGS reamers have a +.0005 tolerance and it says the numbers on the print are absolute minimum.

7.62x39 at 42000psi, sloppy chinese and Russian barrels.


your quote
"You seem to have missed the whole point about bullets. It has nothing to do with the 6.8 or SPCII. Nothing to do with PTGs reamer. It's a standardized spec for all .277 caliber bullets. In every cartridge, .275 to .278. In the 6 Creed it's. 2434 -.003. 6.5 Creed .2644 -.003. So in the 6mm it's standardized a projectile can be between .2434 and .2404. A 6.5 .2644 and .2614. I checked most all of them. Grendel is .2643 at the top though, gutless little thing lol
All the 7mm's are .2845 -.003" .

Notice anything? everyone except the 6.8 is bore diameter -.003" that means bore diameter and upto .003" smaller than bore diameter.

What you have been quoting is chamber sizes not reamer sizes. Use a reamer made .500" in diameter, how big is the hole?
It's kind of like drill bits, If you go to the local hardware store and buy a 1/2" drill bit it is sized so a 1/2" bolt will fit through the hole it leaves. Not the same as a machinist bit that cuts a hole 1/2" in diameter.

ETA- I"ve been sloppy by not answering all of your statements
" It has nothing to do with the 6.8 or SPCII. Nothing to do with PTGs reamer."
Of course not because that would fit your narrative. PTGs reamer when ground to minimum would be smaller than my freebore.

I get it, we will never agree and I'm okay with that.

 

[Nincomp]

I don't even know, so it's why I'm asking, are .38+P, .38+P+, 9mm+P (etc.) SAAMI too? Or are they simply good offerings for an educated consumer who KNOWS his weapon and its capabilities, and is making an informed decision/ammo purchase?

+P is an official SAAMI spec. I don't see anything about +P+. Interestingly, it looks like the proof cartridges for the +P version is used even for firearms not rated for +P. That goes for 9mm, 38 Special, 45 ACP, etc. If you ever get really, really bored, I have included a link to the current SAAMI document for you to look through.

https://saami.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/ANSI-SAAMI-Z299.3-CFP-and-R-Approved-2015-12-14-Posting-Copy.pdf

 

[greentick]

END OF DISCUSSION PLEASE

AGREE TO DISAGREE

YOU HAVE EACH MADE YOUR POINTS, I DON'T THINK ANYONE WHO HAS MADE ANY DECISION ON THE MATTER WILL BE SWAYED BY FURTHER ARGUMENT.

THANK YOU

 

[Ratdog68]

As gate keeper of the forum, a week ago, I attempted to bring this behind closed doors. My desire/motive was to assist in providing a private place to come to a mutually agreeable resolution. I failed in that attempt. Sorry Membership. I've tried to drop subtle hints on the open forum, that has not worked. I'm just going to let this one run its course, allow the dust to settle where it will.

For any new folks here, the history is true, SAAMI specs attained "screwed the pooch" status. For a dozen or so years, the 6.8 community has found that barrels/chambers which deviated from SAAMI specs perform above weight class when reloaded with longer COAL and working UP (powder charge/type) from SAAMI loadings to what a shooter's barrel/chamber liked. The "sweet spot" (node) has been reported to be at more than one load spec to see accuracy. Ever since barrels/chambers which have DEVIATED from SAAMI have been sold, the 6.8 community has cried in unison for NON-SAAMI factory loadings which will give us the performance we know is capable from our NON-SAAMI barrels/chambers. This is why members caution new comers to do their homework prior to making a commitment to a barrel/chamber. SAAMI, for this cartridge is NOTHING more than a baseline to find out HOW to work this caliber with success. It's a means of learning one's parameters, educating yourself on what your rig will do for you, particularly IF you reload. Those who do NOT reload have, and will be at the mercy of performance levels which an ammo manufacturer is willing to supply.

For now, I'm going to hit "pause" on my keyboard. I'm still attempting to be subtle.