Quote Originally Posted by mustangfreek View Post
What...that’s all you got..lol
No, 3 page rebuttal

No fanboy here, I just don’t need to jump on every new thing brought out. Plenty of non mainstream cartridges that will smoke the 6mm arc and grendel...
I am not here to convince you to like my choices. The tone of your replies here says your mind is already made up. No amount of typing will change that and it certainly won't provide any validation for me.

Quote Originally Posted by BoilerUp View Post
When new calibers come out they can create an interesting and attractive option for shooters looking to fulfill the role that the new caliber serves, but if a shooter already has a caliber in that category it may not provide a compelling reason to switch. For example, shooters of the .260 Remington didn't understand the "hype" of the 6.5 Creed and if you were happy with your .260 there is really no reason to drop it and switch over to CM (at least, for most shooters). But if you were looking to do something different than .308 then CM might be a better choice over .260R. What I don't get is the religion some folks get over their choices. Options are good and new stuff is fun. All cartridge designs had design goals and constraints and we continue to learn. That's the nature of engineering. What I find amusing is that the past decade or so seems to be a ballistic renaissance of lessons that the Swedes and Swiss learned about a hundred years ago with the 6.5x55 and GP11, respectively.
My whole reason for building a 6 ARC was because it was low hanging fruit for a goal of mine. I didn't own a 1000+ yard gun. I've been wanting one for quite a long time and I was working towards that goal. I still will build or buy something nice when the opportunity arises. Then all of the sudden 6ARC came out and it was low hanging fruit. For the cost of an upper I could do it while I get the rest of my crap together. If I already had a 1000 yard gun the odds of me building a 6ARC would have been very low. That said the capabilities it brings to a standard AR platform is very interesting.

It wasn't 15 minutes from the announcement of the ARC that the Grendel boys were screaming and flooding the internet with how bad it sucked. Having never seen one, held one, or shot one, they all 'knew' it sucked. I really don't understand that mindset. It's not like this is some turf war, at least not to me.

The 6 ARC does what I want it to do. If it doesn't all I am out is maybe the cost of an upper, but really not even that. Hell, when they released load data I looked and had 16 unopened pounds of the prime powder(s) for 6 ARC. For me it was 'hell, all I need is some brass and bullets' type of thinking which largely is still true. Like I said, it was low hanging fruit to accomplish a goal of shooting beyond 1000 yards for as cheaply as I can.

All that being said there is very little on the 6 ARC that hasn't been tested extensively. Bullets? People have been shooting 6mm forever. There is a whole big selection of bullets out there. Unlike the 224Valkyrie it wasn't relying on a single bullet type to make it's claims work. Mags? People have been shooting those Grendel mags for a while now. The ARC was a new soup made from a ton of old technology that just happened to be applied into a new cartridge. When 6.5 Creed came out no one was saying 'the mags will suck' simply because it uses the same mags. Pretty much the same thing is true with the 6 ARC.

In my analysis of things I quickly turned away from the Valkyrie. That said I liked the ARC 100x more because there weren't any obvious failure points or huge 'unknowns' that I could find.