I am considering building a new AR, but I have been debating about the caliber. The question I have always asked myself, is how can I affordably shoot a rifle, especially calibers beyond 5.56. I’ve considered trying to improve my skills with a 308/7.62NATO, as I would like to become more proficient bench shooting at the longer ranges. At .60/rd for the NATO surplus, I’ve found 308 was not economical and have pretty much decided on bulking up or preparing to reload for 5.56, which would allow me to do more shooting.
Considering, if I start reloading, would there be other caliber options that could be more cost efficient yet have better ballistics and be more practical for shooting 300+ yards than 5.56? I have little knowledge of the costs involved with reloading 6.5/6.8 or 300AAC. I’m told purchasing .308 would be more economical than purchasing the less common calibers such as 6.8, etc… Would, this not be the case when reloading? That is, would reloading 6.8 e.g., be more economical than a .308? Or, would .308 be cheaper due to more availability of components?
I don’t consider the 6.8 or .300 long range rounds—5.56 and 6.8 with similar SD have about the same trajectory. Whereas the .300’s trajectory is closer to a 7.62X39.
.308 will be the cheapest ‘long range’ option to reload. However, the cost of a quality .308 AR is about $600-$1000 more than a quality AR-15. That additional money would go a long way toward reloading components, mags, etc. I think the 6.5 Grendel is probably the best long range AR-15 cartridge out their right now.
I went the .308 route (also have several 6.8’s and 5.56’s), but could certainly argue that a 20" 6.5 Grendel would be a more affordable Long range AR.
You can effectively shoot paper and steel with just about any rifle caliber at longer ranges. I set up an accurized .30 M1 Carbine for longer ranged shooting and I could hit silhouettes all day long at 600yrds. However, it is not something I would choose to engage someone with at that range. Not only does it have a very arced trajectory and takes a long time to get to the target, but it loses a considerable amount of velocity. Just shooting through a 1/4" sheet of plywood the projectiles would barely punch through and lay resting on top of the ground. Unless your target is sitting their with their thumb up their ass, the better cartridge will be the one that shoots the flattest and has the quickest travel time. There is a reason why most standard infantry calibers and DMRs around the world have velocities of 3000fps or greater. Increased hit probability on non-stationary targets. Brief exposure to the enemy to fire is a common tactic on the battlefield. During the Spanish-American War, our soldiers would be under fire by the Spanish’s superior 7x57mm Mausers, and when our guys returned fire, the Spanish would literally be behind cover before the .30-40 Krag bullets got there. We learned that lesson and adopted the .30-06.
As far as reloading goes, the bullet is usually the most expensive component in reloading. Larger bullets translate into more material, and thus it is more expensive. I reload .223 with Nosler 77gr OTM and roll my own cannelures for under $0.20 a shot. I’ve used this load effectively on targets at 1000yrds. On the other hand, I reload .308 using Nosler 168gr OTM for about $28 a shot. Both of these loads have similar shootability at 1000yrds, but obviously the .308 has better terminal effects at that range. As Dr. Roberts has pointed out, ALL assault rifle sized calibers lose their ability to fragement or expand at around 300yrds. The .308 has been documented to fragment and expand out to ranges of 600yrds. Once again though, if you are target shooting it really doesn’t matter.
Obviously I’m not either. Take the time to re-read what I posted instead of just jumping to a conclusion. I said its not what he wants in a long range caliber, but it can and does accurately hit targets at 750.
You’re right; with zero wind and a guy that’s put $60,000 worth of ammo through the platform and teaches people how to shoot pulling the trigger.
There are YouTube videos of folks making 600yd shots with a 22lr, maybe the op should just stick with that. After all it can and does accurately hit targets at 600.
If you accurately measure your range to target, and have a graduated optic it is pretty easy to make those shots on a stationary target. I still shoot .45-70 blackpowder on occasion and we will knock over silhouettes at 1000yrds with no problem(iron sights). Slow travel time to target, and a very arced trajectory though. Not practical for the dynamics of combat.
If you shoot off the bench and don’t mind single feeding try the 75gr Amax in a 5.56 loaded longer than mag length. The Amax is a very cheap accurate bullet and has a great BC compared to most 556 bullets. I have 7 or 8 long range wildcats but when I had time to shoot a few years ago found myself shooting the 556 more because of cost. Trying to hit lizards on the cliff face at 460yds added a little challenge to the shooting.
If you are just looking for another rifle then add a 264LBC/6.5G upper to your 556 lower. It will be cheaper than buying a complete 308AR.
The 123gr Amax would be the bullet to use…Amaxs are inexpensive then Sierra bullets are usually less than what they call “premium” hunting bullets.
Wow, my head’s spinning, so much good information that it is overwhelming. I do like the idea with sticking with one platform, such as using the 6.5 in an AR-15 and switching out uppers, which could save me money. I’m aware the AR-10 components are more expensive and specialized, such as the magazines, etc. I guess, no matter how much I spend on the rifle parts, it will never compare to the ammo costs. Perhaps, the term “long range” was not appropriate, as this is relative. Considering I live in mountainous and heavily forested Western Washington, shooting at 600yds to us is considered long range. I cannot imagine myself realistically past 600yds and that is the max my range and almost any range has available around here. Also, since my bench rifle skills are subpar, I wouldn’t want to be shooting past 600 yds, even if I had the opportunity.
I’d be interested to learn more about the ballistics of the 6.5 rounds. Outside of 5.56/308, I get very confused about all the various cartridge configurations. There are so many various configurations of 6.5/6.8 and everything in between, I get confused.
I suppose in the end, money is a limiting factor. I know I could train with the 5.56 round, but if I seriously wanted to become more proficient with a larger, more effective longer-range caliber, I think I would regret that I never trained with it. I’d rather train with the most effective caliber that I could afford to shoot. If that is 5.56, then it would have to suffice, however, I am examining other options. Since, I am plan on getting into reloading, I am hoping maybe I could afford to shoot a larger caliber that would be more effective at the 300-600yd range I plan on doing my bench shooting at.
As far as close range training, I do have an LMT MRP M4, with which I am very happy. With respect to its size and weight, I would prefer for all CQB type of training. I don’t see why I should spend extra money on a larger caliber for shooting within 100yds, where I believe my 5.56 is very effective.
6.5 Creedmore has me very interested. It follows 300 Win Mag flight path, has more down range energy than 308, and has recoil similar to 243 Winchester.
Not to mention you can get it in the AR10 platform
How would the cost compare to reloading 6.5 Creed to that of 6.8 Grendel? I am sure the ballistics of the 6.5 are far superior to the 6.5 grendel or 6.5 Rem, but I do find an advantage of it being compatible to the AR-15 platform and was thinking maybe those calibers are cheaper to reloading and purchase. I was told the 6.8 Lapua, e.g, is perhaps the one of the best calibers, but after examining the price, I figured I am not rich enough to shoot it. I heard the Creedmore is most cost-effective than Lapua and is comparable, but I still think it may be considerably expensive to shoot.
uh, yeah. I wonder what the hold over is to hit something at 700yds.
I would much rather have a 556 or 6.8 or 264 than a 300blk if I was shooting at 700. As a matter of fact I think that would be my second to last choice right in front of a AK.
The Creed will use apx 45gr Vs 28-29gr in the Grendel or 6.8 after the initial purchase of brass all else would be apx the same. So you would get about 95 more shots out of a lb of powder at $28 or what ever it is now.
