Best gas piston assault rifle?

[ragtime8922]

The P90 is FA and the PS90 is semi.

Are you guys reloading, for those who are recommending the 50 Beowulf because ammo isn't cheap from AA. I wonder how many folks actually own these calibers who are making these recommendations. Reading about something in a magazine or hearing it from your brother's, girfriends, cousin who read about it in an article last year does not qualify you as an expert.

I am far from an expert and I clearly stated that I only know what I've read about the 6.5 Grendel. But the balistics don't lie. The 6.5 Grendel is superior to the 6.8 SPC at long range. It's CQB abilities are a hair less than the 6.8 but both are light years ahead of the .223. BUT it is a question of availability and cost. I've spent countless hours on the 6.5 Grendel forum and I like what I've read. I plan on owning a rifle in 6.5 Grendel as soon as a good, well tested, gas piston rifle is available.

This is from the Defense Review website:

Interestingly, the 6.5 Grendel (6.5mm)/.26 Grendel is itself reportedly garnering a fair amount of positive attention from U.S. Special Operations forces, at the moment. From everything DefenseReview has seen, it's a very impressive cartridge. The 6.5 Grendel has a superior ballistic coefficient and thus superior long-range trajectory characterstics to the 6.8x43mm SPC/6.8mm SPC, past 500 meters. The 6.5 Grendel (6.5mm)/.26 Grendel bullet should also work quite well at CQB (Close Quarters Battle) range (if not quite as well as the 6.8mm SPC), especially if designed with an air pocket towards the tip like on the Russian 5.45x39mm bullet. Hopefully, an armor-piercing/armor-penetrating (AP) version of the 6.5 Grendel featuring a tungsten or tungsten carbide core will also be developed. DefenseReview is interested to know the amount of felt recoil that the 6.5 Grendel generates. For CQB applications, weapon controllability on full-auto is of primary importance--right up there with weapon reliability. While engaged in dynamic CQB in urban environments, our operators have to be able to get hits on hostile moving targets, fast.
http://www.defensereview.com/modules...rticle&sid=600

From Wikipedia:

Proponents assert that the Grendel is an ideal middle ground between the 5.56 mm NATO and the 7.62 mm NATO, taking the best attributes of each. It has a flatter trajectory and retains greater terminal energy at extended ranges than either of these cartridges due to its higher ballistic coefficient.[2] Production rifles have consistently achieved sub–minute of arc (MOA) groups at test ranges out past 600 meters.[3] On March 6, 2006, Arne Brennan achieved a witnessed 1.198" group at 660 yards.[4] Similar accuracy was demonstrated at recent Blackwater Shootouts.[5] Competitions have begun to be won with the 6.5 Grendel although use of the round is still not common in competition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5_Grendel

Nice old thread here on the 6.8 vs. the 6.5 Grendel:
http://airbornecombatengineer.typepa...rendel_ak.html

[netw0rkpenguin]

I am far from an expert and I clearly stated that I only know what I've read about the 6.5 Grendel. But the balistics don't lie. The 6.5 Grendel is superior to the 6.8 SPC at long range. It's CQB abilities are a hair less than the 6.8 but both are light years ahead of the .223. BUT it is a question of availability and cost. I've spent countless hours on the 6.5 Grendel forum and I like what I've read. I plan on owning a rifle in 6.5 Grendel as soon as a good, well tested, gas piston rifle is available.

This is from the Defense Review website:

Interestingly, the 6.5 Grendel (6.5mm)/.26 Grendel is itself reportedly garnering a fair amount of positive attention from U.S. Special Operations forces, at the moment. From everything DefenseReview has seen, it's a very impressive cartridge. The 6.5 Grendel has a superior ballistic coefficient and thus superior long-range trajectory characterstics to the 6.8x43mm SPC/6.8mm SPC, past 500 meters. The 6.5 Grendel (6.5mm)/.26 Grendel bullet should also work quite well at CQB (Close Quarters Battle) range (if not quite as well as the 6.8mm SPC), especially if designed with an air pocket towards the tip like on the Russian 5.45x39mm bullet. Hopefully, an armor-piercing/armor-penetrating (AP) version of the 6.5 Grendel featuring a tungsten or tungsten carbide core will also be developed. DefenseReview is interested to know the amount of felt recoil that the 6.5 Grendel generates. For CQB applications, weapon controllability on full-auto is of primary importance--right up there with weapon reliability. While engaged in dynamic CQB in urban environments, our operators have to be able to get hits on hostile moving targets, fast.
http://www.defensereview.com/modules...rticle&sid=600

From Wikipedia:

Proponents assert that the Grendel is an ideal middle ground between the 5.56 mm NATO and the 7.62 mm NATO, taking the best attributes of each. It has a flatter trajectory and retains greater terminal energy at extended ranges than either of these cartridges due to its higher ballistic coefficient.[2] Production rifles have consistently achieved sub–minute of arc (MOA) groups at test ranges out past 600 meters.[3] On March 6, 2006, Arne Brennan achieved a witnessed 1.198" group at 660 yards.[4] Similar accuracy was demonstrated at recent Blackwater Shootouts.[5] Competitions have begun to be won with the 6.5 Grendel although use of the round is still not common in competition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5_Grendel

Nice old thread here on the 6.8 vs. the 6.5 Grendel:
http://airbornecombatengineer.typepa...rendel_ak.html

Speaking of flatter trajectories, I'm waiting for someone to modify an AR-10 upper to fire .243 . hint hint

[Holleta]

Excellent points!

How often do you shoot at "long range"?

What is long range to you (200, 400, 800 yds)?

What shooting range can you/will you be able to shoot long range at?

Do you really think the magnified cost per round and start up costs over the 223 or 308 are worth it to you to even consider one of the new 6mm something "wonder cartridges"??

If you want one of the 6mm based platforms that's one thing but trying to prove a point as to why a rec shooter needs one of these is pretty tough.

I am far from an expert and I clearly stated that I only know what I've read about the 6.5 Grendel. But the balistics don't lie. The 6.5 Grendel is superior to the 6.8 SPC at long range. It's CQB abilities are a hair less than the 6.8 but both are light years ahead of the .223. BUT it is a question of availability and cost. I've spent countless hours on the 6.5 Grendel forum and I like what I've read. I plan on owning a rifle in 6.5 Grendel as soon as a good, well tested, gas piston rifle is available.

This is from the Defense Review website:

Interestingly, the 6.5 Grendel (6.5mm)/.26 Grendel is itself reportedly garnering a fair amount of positive attention from U.S. Special Operations forces, at the moment. From everything DefenseReview has seen, it's a very impressive cartridge. The 6.5 Grendel has a superior ballistic coefficient and thus superior long-range trajectory characterstics to the 6.8x43mm SPC/6.8mm SPC, past 500 meters. The 6.5 Grendel (6.5mm)/.26 Grendel bullet should also work quite well at CQB (Close Quarters Battle) range (if not quite as well as the 6.8mm SPC), especially if designed with an air pocket towards the tip like on the Russian 5.45x39mm bullet. Hopefully, an armor-piercing/armor-penetrating (AP) version of the 6.5 Grendel featuring a tungsten or tungsten carbide core will also be developed. DefenseReview is interested to know the amount of felt recoil that the 6.5 Grendel generates. For CQB applications, weapon controllability on full-auto is of primary importance--right up there with weapon reliability. While engaged in dynamic CQB in urban environments, our operators have to be able to get hits on hostile moving targets, fast.
http://www.defensereview.com/modules...rticle&sid=600

From Wikipedia:

Proponents assert that the Grendel is an ideal middle ground between the 5.56 mm NATO and the 7.62 mm NATO, taking the best attributes of each. It has a flatter trajectory and retains greater terminal energy at extended ranges than either of these cartridges due to its higher ballistic coefficient.[2] Production rifles have consistently achieved sub–minute of arc (MOA) groups at test ranges out past 600 meters.[3] On March 6, 2006, Arne Brennan achieved a witnessed 1.198" group at 660 yards.[4] Similar accuracy was demonstrated at recent Blackwater Shootouts.[5] Competitions have begun to be won with the 6.5 Grendel although use of the round is still not common in competition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5_Grendel

Nice old thread here on the 6.8 vs. the 6.5 Grendel:
http://airbornecombatengineer.typepa...rendel_ak.html

[ragtime8922]

I just like what I've read about the Grendel. The truth is that once I find a good gas pison platform with easily chageable calibers I will first go with the standard .223. Why? Cheapest to shoot, mass availability. IMO, If something ever happens that makes all ammo hard to get the last 2 available rifle rounds will probably be the .223 and the .308.

[aubie515]

This is another thread that just won't end. There is nothing wrong with DI AR15s...it's just companies wanting to sell more products, so they come out with something new. We don't need to reinvent the wheel people. The gas pistons are good for suppressors, but other than that it's for a specific deomgraphic. Most people cannot even afford the ammo for their weapons, yet alone tacking on $1k for an upper. For most shooters a gas piston is not needed nor can it be justified financially. Learn how to clean your AR15 like Uncle Sam taught you and spend the money that you saved and by more ammo and mags.

The Ares kit has promise, but me personally, I cannot justify spending more money on a gas piston.

I would have probably owned a 6.5 Grendel, but AA is a PITA to deal with because Bill is a control freak. What I've been toying with is a SD upper, but with 6.5 Lapua brass being hard to get and expensive, I've decided to hold off. The ballistics on the 6.5 is awesome in a light AR rifle. It is better than my DPMS 308 and is probably half the weight. All that being said, I'd still take my DPMS over the grendel offerings.

[NineseveN]

Best rifle for what exactly? I mean, what you realistically plan on doing with the rifle makes a difference.

Aubie mentioned the FAL being heavy and large; not suitable for "room clearing". While that's debatable based on the various configurations available for the FAL, honestly you have to ask yourself the following:

How many situations can you realistically encounter that would require you to Rambo it up and clear rooms? Just because your gun was on the cover of SWAT magazine does not a high speed-low drag ninja make.

The 5.56 will work in likely 99% of civilian encounters at close range, especially given better round selection than the military is able to use (modern expanding rifle ammunition works wonders, even in the 5.56).

Once you get out to a certain range though, the 5.56 starts to lose its appeal and the tried and true .308 really starts to take shape as the better cartridge.


If all you're doing is playing weekend warrior and shooting at the range, any quality rifle will do whether it is DI or not, and the caliber doesn't really matter all that much aside from economic considerations. AR, AK, FAL, G3, M14 or whatever...it doesn't really matter much.

Personally, I prefer an 18"bbl FAL or 18"bbl M14, but I like .308 for anything over 50-75 yards and less than 800-1000 (longer than I foresee myself ever NEEDING to shoot)...closer than that and the shotgun or a pistol will generally fill that roll based on situation and circumstance for 99.9% of the realistic scenarios that I might find myself in.

[General Geoff]

I don't want no teenaged queen... I just want my M14.

[aubie515]

NineSeven,

I figured you being a member of NDE that you'd want something light for BO. BTW, I've seen you on that site...great info you provide to the members of NDE. I don't go to that site very often anymore, but I liked reading your posts.

With this thread and many like it...it all boils down to personal preference and how much you are willing to spend. For some, the tried and tested weapons are good enough...and for others, they must have the latest and greatest. I'll stick to what works and once everyone and their brother starts offering gas pistons at affordable prices, I may pick one up. In the mean time I'll stick to what I own.

[NineseveN]

NineSeven,

I figured you being a member of NDE that you'd want something light for BO.

Hehe, well yeah, sometimes I do want light, sometimes I'd rather have a bigger gun...that's why I own so many. Besides, as Administrator of NDE, people kind of expect me to have a little bit of everything. Truth be told, the reason I prefer the .308 is for use on game as well as two-legged predators. Don't get me wrong, you sure could hunt or defend against a black bear or mountain lion/whatever with a .223 if you wanted, I'd just rather avoid it and move up to a larger caliber.

Having said that, I have no hate for the AR or any other .223 platform. I like that they're light, versatile and accurate...I also like my experiences with AK's.

To be honest, for anything other than all out war or mass rioting/violent civil unrest, I'd just as soon take my 870 or Remington 7600 pump carbine in 30-06 if I had to hike my way out of trouble.

BTW, I've seen you on that site...great info you provide to the members of NDE. I don't go to that site very often anymore, but I liked reading your posts.

That's what a community is all about, ain't it? PAFOA is my second home, I like PA folks more than most others...not sure why, I just really like this state and the people overall.

With this thread and many like it...it all boils down to personal preference and how much you are willing to spend. For some, the tried and tested weapons are good enough...and for others, they must have the latest and greatest. I'll stick to what works and once everyone and their brother starts offering gas pistons at affordable prices, I may pick one up. In the mean time I'll stick to what I own.

Very sage advice and sound reasoning. I'm intrigued by the gas piston AR concept, but not enough to pay for one. I see it fixing a problem that doesn't really apply to civilian use of the platform at all and harldy manifests itself in military use if the rifles are properlay maintained.

[ragtime8922]

Nineseven, just checked out NDE. It looks awesome. I was looking for a good preparedness site. I'm such a city boy and my Dad was as anti-outdoors as one could be. The truth is, as it applys to this thread, in a SHTF situation I'd be dead before I could dirty a DI AR-15 due to my complete lack of survival skills alone. Anyway, I joined so I'll see you there.