How many manufacturers are using the SAAMI spec for the 6.8 SPC right now? None that anybody wants, since the 6.8 SAAMI spec is an unsafe drawing for that cartridge, and has resulted in at least one extreme catastrophic destruction of an AR15 with an unsuspecting customer using factory ammunition.

The lesson is that a cartridge designer can either let his idea be copied, tweaked, and modified by everybody and their brother, relegating it to permanent wildcat status like many we have seen from eccentric cartridge design enthusiasts, or….

The designer can introduce something useful for a broad consumer base, let the industry respond to it, push for major ammunition and component manufacturer support (Lapua, Hornady), while awaiting the SAAMI approval process for one, specific, well-tested design.

This latter method is what Bill Alexander has done, and history will treat him well for it, as evidenced by Satern’s announcement that they will be making actual Grendel-chambered barrels again.

If different barrel-makers were chaffed at having to cut a concentric compound throat angle, and were looking for short cuts, I can understand, given the record-level demand we’re seeing for AR15 barrels suitable for hunting medium game and recreational target shooting. I don’t blame anyone who is trying to cut production time in this market, just don’t assign responsibility for that decision with Bill Alexander. He’s back-ordered like everyone else for Grendel uppers and rifles, with no sign of things letting up.

Consumers would like to see the industry standard adhered to, and people put their egos aside and just make customers happy.

However, I find it hypocritical to paint Robert Whitley as somehow being different than AA as Robert refuses to sell anything but complete uppers and won’t allow people to buy just barrels from him. Try to a build a 6mm from a Grendel yourself and you’re stuck with the 6MM RAT; which is fine with me, I’d rather give my money to John Holliger and White Oak since they’re willing to give the customer what they want.

Didn’t the article writer bother to get Alexander Arms’ side of the story? There’s a proverb from the Bible, something to the effect of “it’s foolish to pass judgment until both sides are heard.”

I’m sure, for example, if we asked the estranged wife of a divorced man to write an open letter about him in the local paper we’d get a different story than from the man himself.

I urge more thoroughness and fairness on the part of the reporter in a news article like this that really reflects so poorly on a member of the firearms community.

The only thing protected as intellectual property is the trademarked name of the cartridge and rifle. Just like Coca Cola or Pepsi. The name, nothing else.

Editor: This is only your assertion. The issue has not yet been adjudicated definitively. In fact, Alexander Arms has taken a much more aggressive position, claiming that it’s rights include MUCH more than the cartridge name. As noted, AA has gone so far as to tell reamer makers that they cannot make tools to fit factory-loaded dimensions.

Any decent smith or machinist can reverse engineer the chambering from the cartridge, as has been done by Les Baer, CSS, and others. However, they have all chosen to use slightly different chamber designs, much like some .308 smiths use tighter chambers than others.

Editor: Yes, any decent smith can do that, and potentially face a lawsuit. Why do you think the “slight changes were made”?

The article is very misleading in that it states in bold lettering, “No More Grendels”. Nothing could be further from the truth. There may be no more Satern Grendel barrels, but truthfully, did anyone ask Satern just how many barrels they made for Grendels in the first place?

Editor: Come on… the story is about the two barrel-makers which halted 6.5 Grendel production. That is clear from the subheading on the same photo you cite.

I would think the admin here would be more than a little embarrassed by such a sensationalistic headline to what is really a very small blip.

Editor: Sensationalistic headline? The article’s headline says: “Satern Custom and Liberty Barrels Halt Grendel Barrel Production”. What’s wrong with that??

From the article, it is apparent no on [sic] called Alexander Arms, and it is doubtful anyone called Satern. How about Hornady, who makes brass and ammunition?

This site has been well informed and relatively unbiased, but this article demonstrates neither.

So, I would sure hate to see Lapua drop the case, but am afraid that these policies are the beginning of the end.

AA has severely misunderstood the cartridge market. The Grendel is a good cartridge, but it ain’t that good. There is nothing the Grendel does that can’t be done by an infinite array of other cartridges. Just change the shoulder angle by 1 degree & BANG! New cartridge! Cartridges are just too competitive of market to be pulling BS like this.

Load a 6.8 SPC long and I’ll bet less than 1% of shooters could tell the difference on the firing line.

“I recently e-mailed AA about the weight of their new G10 polymer AR freefloat tubes. I got an email back saying it was on the FAQ section of there website. I informed them that it was not and have not heard back.”

It’s in the “size” drop-down on the product page . Unfortunately it says the weight of both the large and small are one pound. I doubt that’s the true weight of either of them.

As long as Lapua keeps making 6.5G brass for my 6Turbo40º I’ll be happy.

It’s unfortunate that companies such as Alexander Arms and Venturecross Capital lose sight of their goals and the goals of the public. It all seems penny wise and pound foolish…

I recently e-mailed AA about the weight of their new G10 polymer AR freefloat tubes. I got an email back saying it was on the FAQ section of there website. I informed them that it was not and have not heard back.

How the heck can you not know your own companies website.