PDA

View Full Version : 300 AAC Blackout (BLK) thoughts



iakdrago
03-19-2012, 04:01 PM
Does anyone have any thoughts on the 300 AAC blackout? First hand experience? The cartridge has a lot of appeal for me, though at present ammo prices it's cost prohibitive.

Zhurdan
03-19-2012, 04:11 PM
I bought an 8" upper from Noveske recently and I'm loving it.

Recoil isn't that much more than the 5.56 10.5" I have and getting back on target was easy. My splits in the 1 thru 5 drill were up about .01-.02, so negligible.

Reloading for the 300 BLK will commence as soon as my dies get here but I have a very cheap way to prep 5.56 brass without having to buy expensive machines to do it. All total, my brass prep stuff costs about $14.00 vs. the hundreds others have been spending on trimmers and what not. (doesn't include the cordless drill as I already had that and most people will too.)

I'm going to be ordering a can for it shortly once I decide on weather to get an AAC SD6 or the new Surefire Mini762.

I've only shot supersonics thru it at this point being I don't have a can for it yet and a buddy and I were bangin' 10" steel at 300 yards, supported. Zeroed it off a lead sled at 200 for starters with an Eotech so I still have to get the hold over/under worked out in my head for varying distances.

So far, I really like it. 30 rounds of 110g heat in a tiny little package. Here's a pic. I've since put some Troy BUIS on it, but haven't taken a new picture.

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r127/Zhurdan/IMG_1685.jpg

orionz06
03-19-2012, 04:41 PM
I feel lied to about the "cheap" ammo that was supposed to be here by now. "Next year" is the drum we are continually beating as people sell uppers. If I had a need for a rifle with a range of 100 yards and it had to be whisper quiet the .300 would be the answer. If I ever get a can for a .308 I will have at least one AR upper with a .300 barrel. Otherwise I am not liking the fact that people are sold the idea that you can shoot the gun suppressed, instantly remove the fast attach AAC can, and then shoot supersonic ammo without having to compensate for height in a major way.

ETA: I have not fired a round from a .300 upper yet. I attempted to acquire 1000 rounds of affordable ammo to use a borrowed upper to shoot a F2S Consulting class in December but was unable to locate a case, even after contacting a few companies with stake in the round.

TommyG
03-19-2012, 06:37 PM
I feel lied to about the "cheap" ammo that was supposed to be here by now. "Next year" is the drum we are continually beating as people sell uppers. If I had a need for a rifle with a range of 100 yards and it had to be whisper quiet the .300 would be the answer. If I ever get a can for a .308 I will have at least one AR upper with a .300 barrel. Otherwise I am not liking the fact that people are sold the idea that you can shoot the gun suppressed, instantly remove the fast attach AAC can, and then shoot supersonic ammo without having to compensate for height in a major way.

ETA: I have not fired a round from a .300 upper yet. I attempted to acquire 1000 rounds of affordable ammo to use a borrowed upper to shoot a F2S Consulting class in December but was unable to locate a case, even after contacting a few companies with stake in the round.

I'm with you on this one. This is an appealing round for a hunting platform in AR configuration but the promised millions of rounds of affordable ammo flooding the market have yet to appear. I am really interested in it as it will only require the purchase of a barrel to switch over but I am not a reloader currently and the availability of factory ammo is a big consideration for me. I have a narrow set of expectations as to what I want the round to do and this would fit the bill just right. I grew up around the 30-30 lever action rifle and still think it is a fabulous "brush gun". Blackout is a very similar round in my favorite ergonomic package. I have almost everything for another complete rifle on hand and am thinking I need to grab a barrel and give it a try. It should not be too hard to work up a card for subsonic and supersonic based on a 100 yard zero. However, the ammo availability issue is holding me up too.

orionz06
03-19-2012, 06:39 PM
I can secede the zero issue between rounds if the supplies of ammo were here.

rob_s
03-20-2012, 06:34 AM
I have about 1600 rounds of free ammo through a free upper (which I have since returned) and a free can (which AAC subsequently told me I could keep). Most of that was subsonic suppressed, balance was supersonic unsuppressed.

I still don't "get it". I get the idea, I get the appeal, and I was initially ecstatic about the caliber. I just don't get the acceptance of the trade-offs for a perceived improvement over a round that I'm having a hard time improving over. I'm also not sure that, even over a year after the initial announcement, the idea is fully baked.

Four of us went hog hunting a few weeks ago. Two used 5.56 with Remington Core Lokt, I used .223 ASYM 70 grain TSX, one used a 300 BLK (unsure of load, something black tipped from Atlanta Arms, I believe). All four hogs died, no one any more dramatically than the others. And the Core Lokt had the most impressive wound channel on cleaning. I'm not sure what the 300 did, or was even supposed to have done, better.

For a toy, something to experiment with, etc. I can see the appeal. Otherwise I'm finding it kind of like the .40 - while everyone else says "best of both" I can't help but notice that means it's also "worst of both".

additionally, some of the things listed as benefits, like using the same mags and bolt, to me can be liabilities. AAC has said you can't chamber a 300 round in a 5.56 but there's at least one person out there that did exactly that and blew up their gun. Not having the upper anymore I'm not sure if you can chamber a 5.56 in a 300, or what the consequences would be.

jstyer
03-20-2012, 09:27 AM
How much quieter did the suppressed subsonic blackout seem to you than suppressed .223? Also, what was the barrel length of the blackout upper?

If the noise drop was significant, it would seen that that it's only valuable niche is as a replacement for a suppressed SMG in a close quarters environment. You get a pretty compact, quiet package, with low recoil, and the same manual of arms as the oh-so-loved AR platform. And I suppose that you technically would have the ability to penetrate sort armor by switch to super sonic rounds... but if you thought there was going to be a soft armor threat, why not just bring a regular AR?

TommyG
03-20-2012, 09:35 AM
Rob, that is very good food for thought for me, thanks. Having been unable to shoot it or even see someone shoot it yet, I have been thinking it would be a good bush/hunting platform based on the data (hype) that is out there. I don't think I would chase deer with 5.56 but I have plenty of other rifles that will do that job just fine. I am wanting to do some hog hunts in the coming years and thought this would be a good round/rifle for it. I have a great platform to throw the barrrel in to give it a fair shake. It sounds like I might be better served with 5.56 and some good info on the right round/load. I am a big fan of the Core Lokt for larger game so I should not be surprised that it did well. Do you know what weight it was and whether it was a factory load or home grown? Thanks again for the info.

rob_s
03-20-2012, 09:52 AM
How much quieter did the suppressed subsonic blackout seem to you than suppressed .223? Also, what was the barrel length of the blackout upper?

If the noise drop was significant, it would seen that that it's only valuable niche is as a replacement for a suppressed SMG in a close quarters environment. You get a pretty compact, quiet package, with low recoil, and the same manual of arms as the oh-so-loved AR platform. And I suppose that you technically would have the ability to penetrate sort armor by switch to super sonic rounds... but if you thought there was going to be a soft armor threat, why not just bring a regular AR?

The barrel length was 9", with the older 7.0 KAC handguard. subsonic suppressed was hearing safe with the AAC SDN-6 can. I'll post some videos. It is giggle-inducing for sure, and hearing the round whack the berm is "neat".

The question is, how does a non-expanding .30 cal projectile compare to a modern 5.56 defensive load like the TSX or Core Lokt? Because right now there is no defensive 300 subsonic load and when (if?) there is rumors are it will be >$2/round and may be LE-only. The other question I have is how does a non-expanding .30 cal subsonic projectile compare to a modern 9mm defensive load like the 147 grain Gold Dot at "CQB" distance?




Rob, that is very good food for thought for me, thanks. Having been unable to shoot it or even see someone shoot it yet, I have been thinking it would be a good bush/hunting platform based on the data (hype) that is out there. I don't think I would chase deer with 5.56 but I have plenty of other rifles that will do that job just fine. I am wanting to do some hog hunts in the coming years and thought this would be a good round/rifle for it. I have a great platform to throw the barrrel in to give it a fair shake. It sounds like I might be better served with 5.56 and some good info on the right round/load. I am a big fan of the Core Lokt for larger game so I should not be surprised that it did well. Do you know what weight it was and whether it was a factory load or home grown? Thanks again for the info.

I also think it *could* be a good brush gun. But having just taken a Practical Rifle class this last weekend, so does a lightweight bolt-action. Which I may already have or may already need for other applications.

The rounds were LE-purchase/issue so they were factory.

rob_s
03-20-2012, 09:55 AM
Mod Navy Qual at EAG Tactical Carbine Operator's Course 2010 - Subsonic Suppressed 300 BLK w/ 220 grain Remington ammo, AAC 9" upper, and 762-SDN-6 silencer

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/me%20shooting/th_67d64499.jpg (http://s134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/me%20shooting/?action=view&current=67d64499.mp4)




Alternating rounds of 220 grain Remington subsonic 300 BLK with Remington 123 grain (now discontinued) supersonic 300 BLK, AAC 9" upper, unsuppressed

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/me%20shooting/th_d4c7ab71.jpg (http://s134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/me%20shooting/?action=view&current=d4c7ab71.mp4)

jstyer
03-20-2012, 11:58 AM
The other question I have is how does a non-expanding .30 cal subsonic projectile compare to a modern 9mm defensive load like the 147 grain Gold Dot at "CQB" distance?

This is the interesting question to me as well. If the blackout is going to evolve into a useful military/law enforcement cartridge, it would seem to me that it would need to outperform a subsonic 9mm defense load by a pretty decent margin to make it worth the cost of operation and acquisition.

Sounds like a job for... DOCGKR!!! :)

vaglocker
03-20-2012, 12:08 PM
The only reason I would potentially get into this round would be for a sub 10 inch SBR that was terminally effective out to 200 yards. Would the 300 blk do this for me or not?

orionz06
03-20-2012, 12:20 PM
The only reason I would potentially get into this round would be for a sub 10 inch SBR that was terminally effective out to 200 yards. Would the 300 blk do this for me or not?

With supersonic ammo I believe it would do this quite well.

rob_s
03-20-2012, 12:42 PM
The only reason I would potentially get into this round would be for a sub 10 inch SBR that was terminally effective out to 200 yards. Would the 300 blk do this for me or not?

Silvers has been posting this all over the internets. It seems impressive but I'm still trying to find a picture of the gel block with a scale.

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/gun%20stuff/300blk300small.jpg


and at 100 yards (I believe)

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/gun%20stuff/300aacblkbarriersummary.jpg


and then this for zeroing

Drop chart from 9 inch set up for max point blank range (+- 3.5 inches- MAXPBR 229 yards)

0 -2.6
50 +1.4
100 +3.4
150 +3.0
198 0.0
200 -0.2
229 -3.4
250 -6.4
300 -15.8

DocGKR
03-20-2012, 02:14 PM
The .300 BLK is very versatile as it can do the same job as well or better than suppressed MP5's, 5.56 mm SBR's, and AK47's. External and terminal ballistics are equal to or better than the well proven 7.62x39mm. With barrier blind projectiles, .300 BLK is an ideal caliber for both Patrol and Tactical LE use, as it offers outstanding terminal performance and intermediate barrier capability in the critical 0-100m range and remains capable out to 300m or so. With the advent of barrier blind loads like the Barnes 110 gr Tac-TX and upcoming bonded loads like the Rem CLUB, the .300 BLK becomes an outstanding choice for hunting up to med game and can be used in any hunting situation that is appropriate for lighter .30-30 loads.

For a pure hunting rig, I'd likely go with a 6.8 mm, as it offers greater range, capability to go after a bit larger game, and a wider range of hunting loads, but .300 BLK has a lot going for it.

With any of the alternate AR15 calibers, have an identically configured 5.56 mm upper and do the majority of rote training using that to reduce costs (especially if you get free 5.56 mm ammo at work) and save the larger caliber for duty/hunting use.

Chuck Haggard
03-20-2012, 04:40 PM
My only reason for wanting one is to be able to deer hunt with my carbine, legally. In KS 5.56 is a no-no for deer, has to be a round .23 or bigger.

I've been wanting a 6.8 for awhile, but if the ammo situation goes as the advertising/internet claims state then the .300 would be a better bet for me.

I want a deer gun that I can fight with if need be, so basically that would be my mission. If I could legally hunt with my 5.56 carbines then I wouldn't even entertain the idea.

Chemsoldier
03-20-2012, 08:03 PM
Wasnt one of the big draws for the Blackout initially that it was a conventional AR capable round that made major in some 3 gun venues due to its diameter while still having acceptable ballistics? This then combined with its capability to operate subsonic with a can, gave it two niche capabilities in one cartridge. Claiming to have terrific terminal ballistics is new on me, most of the hype I have heard is in competition rags like Front Sight.

rob_s
03-20-2012, 08:24 PM
Wasnt one of the big draws for the Blackout initially that it was a conventional AR capable round that made major in some 3 gun venues due to its diameter while still having acceptable ballistics? This then combined with its capability to operate subsonic with a can, gave it two niche capabilities in one cartridge. Claiming to have terrific terminal ballistics is new on me, most of the hype I have heard is in competition rags like Front Sight.

It is possible to make major in USPSA 3-gun with the 300 BLK. Daniel Horner won the 2011 multigun nationals using 300 BLK (http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2011/10/23/usamus-horner-takes-the-gold-with-300blk/). He also won Tac Optics in every single other Three-Gun Nation event he participated in save one (http://3gunnation.com/the_series/results), using 5.56 in all of those. I have not seen any scoring calculation that indicates that he would NOT have won USPSA with 5.56, and the USPSA Nationals is the only major 3-gun match where power-factor matters because all the others are outlaw matches that don't use power-factor.

rsilvers
03-26-2012, 07:27 PM
I feel lied to about the "cheap" ammo that was supposed to be here by now.

The cheap ammo is here, and has been here.

http://www.richiespng.com/product.php?item=136515

rsilvers
03-26-2012, 07:29 PM
It is possible to make major in USPSA 3-gun with the 300 BLK. Daniel Horner won the 2011 multigun nationals using 300 BLK (http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2011/10/23/usamus-horner-takes-the-gold-with-300blk/). He also won Tac Optics in every single other Three-Gun Nation event he participated in save one (http://3gunnation.com/the_series/results), using 5.56 in all of those. I have not seen any scoring calculation that indicates that he would NOT have won USPSA with 5.56, and the USPSA Nationals is the only major 3-gun match where power-factor matters because all the others are outlaw matches that don't use power-factor.

Regardless of if making Major power factor was "needed", the benefit of seeing him win with the cartridge was to show that it is powerful and capable of high performance.

rsilvers
03-26-2012, 07:38 PM
I'm not sure what the 300 did, or was even supposed to have done, better.

The 300 will expand to 0.60 at 300 yards. The very best 5.56mm ammo expands to 0.40 at 300 yards. 300 has as much energy from a 16 inch barrel as 5.56mm does from a 16 inch - you get 8 inches of barrel for free. 30 caliber bullets have a (much) greater difference in area over 5.56mm than 45 ACP does over 9mm, so big bullet fans will like it. It is also legal for hunting in far more areas. It is for people who want a bump up in terminal effects and better barrier-blind performance compared to 223/5.56mm without having to go to 6.8 SPC, which costs about 40% more for the practice ammo, is much more expensive to reload for, and needs special bolts and magazines. It is the alternate AR caliber which makes the most sense. The benefits are real for 16 inch barrels, and the shorter you go - the greater the benefit gets.

orionz06
03-26-2012, 08:17 PM
it was only a matter of time I guess...



The cheap ammo is here, and has been here.

http://www.richiespng.com/product.php?item=136515

That is closer to what the prices were said to be but when I asked you in November you hadn't the slightest idea where to get anything aside from Midway/Brownells for less than $900 a case.

rsilvers
03-27-2012, 12:06 AM
Well now you are talking about 4-5 months ago.

I think there is evidence that we made a good effort to deliver on the promises and succeeded. The cheapest 6.8 ammo is 40% more expensive, for example.

jmjames
03-27-2012, 01:51 AM
it was only a matter of time I guess...

That is closer to what the prices were said to be but when I asked you in November you hadn't the slightest idea where to get anything aside from Midway/Brownells for less than $900 a case.

I think it is an encouraging sign. I'm rooting for 300 AAC to succeed, because it looks like the right round for the job ballistically and I like the interchangeability with 5.56 stuff. I don't have a horse in the race since I don't own an AR at this time, but I think that if 300 AAC can come down in price, AKs and VZ58s will stop looking attractive to me.

J.Ja

orionz06
03-27-2012, 06:54 AM
Well now you are talking about 4-5 months ago.

I think there is evidence that we made a good effort to deliver on the promises and succeeded. The cheapest 6.8 ammo is 40% more expensive, for example.

Did you even read my post?

rsilvers
03-27-2012, 09:19 PM
Did you even read my post?

I read the one where you said you felt lied to that cheap ammo was supposed to be here by now, and where you implied the max range was just 100 yards when in fact it is 460 meters by M4 standards, and when the ammo expands to 0.600 and penetrates 20 inches in bare gel at 300 yards even from a 9 inch barrel.

orionz06
03-27-2012, 09:54 PM
I feel lied to about the "cheap" ammo that was supposed to be here by now. "Next year" is the drum we are continually beating as people sell uppers. If I had a need for a rifle with a range of 100 yards and it had to be whisper quiet the .300 would be the answer. If I ever get a can for a .308 I will have at least one AR upper with a .300 barrel. Otherwise I am not liking the fact that people are sold the idea that you can shoot the gun suppressed, instantly remove the fast attach AAC can, and then shoot supersonic ammo without having to compensate for height in a major way.

ETA: I have not fired a round from a .300 upper yet. I attempted to acquire 1000 rounds of affordable ammo to use a borrowed upper to shoot a F2S Consulting class in December but was unable to locate a case, even after contacting a few companies with stake in the round.


I can secede the zero issue between rounds if the supplies of ammo were here.


With supersonic ammo I believe it would do this quite well.


it was only a matter of time I guess...




That is closer to what the prices were said to be but when I asked you in November you hadn't the slightest idea where to get anything aside from Midway/Brownells for less than $900 a case.


Did you even read my post?




I read the one where you said you felt lied to that cheap ammo was supposed to be here by now, and where you implied the max range was just 100 yards when in fact it is 460 meters by M4 standards, and when the ammo expands to 0.600 and penetrates 20 inches in bare gel at 300 yards even from a 9 inch barrel.


I quoted all of my posts in this thread, I do not recall mentioning a max range... There was one edit, only to add content.

What are M4 standards? Are we playing number games with energy now?

ETA: Red text above... Looks like I need to cook some crow.

ETA2: Well, 100 yard zero and 13" drop at 150, I would call that close to ~100 yards. It is however on par with 5.56 subsonic loads and quieter, FWIW.

http://www.right2bearammo.com/shop/catalog/pdf/54.pdf

rsilvers
03-29-2012, 10:28 AM
ETA2: Well, 100 yard zero and 13" drop at 150, I would call that close to ~100 yards. It is however on par with 5.56 subsonic loads and quieter, FWIW.

Not sure why you are using special low-power ammo for your comparison. 300 AAC Blackout Barnes 110 grain is 2350-2400 fps and a 0.289 BC. You can easily shoot it to 230 yards with no adjustment to your sights, and expands to 0.60 caliber at 300 yards *from a 9 inch barrel* and penetrates 20 inches of bare 10% gel at that range.

M4 standards are by the methods for which the US Army rates the max range of the M4.

So you can call the max range 230 yards. You can call it 300 yards. You can call it 460 meters, but 100 yards - that implies this is a 12 gauge slug gun, when it is a rifle with 16.7% more energy than an AK at 300 yards.

orionz06
03-29-2012, 10:30 AM
Not sure why you are using special low-power ammo for your comparison. 300 AAC Blackout Barnes 110 grain is 2350-2400 fps and a 0.289 BC. You can easily shoot it to 230 yards with no adjustment to your sights, and expands to 0.60 caliber at 300 yards *from a 9 inch barrel* and penetrates 20 inches of bare 10% gel at that range.

M4 standards are by the methods for which the US Army rates the max range of the M4.

It was a round that I had trajectory info for and it indicated a 13" difference from 100-150 which led me to call it 100, or just over 100 if you wish.

What are those standards based on, energy, velocity, penetration?

rsilvers
03-29-2012, 10:33 AM
The Army rates max range for the M4 based on hit probability, and as 500 meters for a point target.

If the max effective range of the M4 with M855 at 2900 fps is 500 meters, that has 100 inches of drop, 41 inches drift, and 291 ft/lbs of energy at that distance:

A 16 inch 300 AAC BLACKOUT 125 grain at 2220 fps has:
100 inches drop at 440 meters
41 inches drift at 484 meters
291 ft/lbs of energy at 700 meters.

While the 300 AAC Blackout has way more energy, the military goes by hit probability. If we consider that the drift and drop range is correlated with hit probability, and discount the energy advantage of 300 BLK, we get 462 meters for equal hit probability.

Using M4 military standards, the max effective range of 300 AAC Blackout from a 16 inch barrel is 460 meters.

From a 9 inch barrel (2049 fps):
100 inches drop at 410 meters
41 inches drift at 470 meters
291 ft/lbs of energy at 625 meters, so 440 meter max effective range for a 9 inch.
300 BLK from a 9 inch barrel has the same energy at the muzzle as a 14.5 inch barrel M4, and about 5% more energy at 440 meters.

orionz06
03-29-2012, 10:40 AM
How does the mk262 stack up?

DocGKR
03-29-2012, 12:20 PM
Take a close look at page 15: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2004arms/session9/minisi.ppt; this directly addresses the official Army estimation of terminal effectiveness of the 5.56 mm M855 when fired from the M16, M4, and Mk18. Looks like the Mk18/M855 offers acceptable terminal effects to about 25m, M4/M855 to 125m, M16/M855 to 200m. If Mk262 is substituted for M855, then the Army data notes that Mk18/Mk262 offers acceptable terminal performance to around 65m; M4/Mk262 to 175m; M16/Mk262 to 250m or so. The .300 BLK 110 gr TTSX easily matches, if not exceeds, the terminal performance capabilities and effective distances of the military 5.56 mm loads.

rsilvers
03-29-2012, 09:08 PM
The best 5.56mm ammo is what the FBI uses. It expands to 0.40 caliber at 300 yards. The 300 BLK Barnes ammo expands to 0.60 caliber at 300 yards, even from a 9 inch barrel. Retained weight is something that people care about. 5.56mm ammo that starts at 62 or 75 grains - even with 100% retained weight is going to be 62 or 75 grains. 300 BLK at 110 grains will leave about 106 grains as one piece if it has 96% weight retention.

orionz06
03-29-2012, 09:20 PM
Take a close look at page 15: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2004arms/session9/minisi.ppt; this directly addresses the official Army estimation of terminal effectiveness of the 5.56 mm M855 when fired from the M16, M4, and Mk18. Looks like the Mk18/M855 offers acceptable terminal effects to about 25m, M4/M855 to 125m, M16/M855 to 200m. If Mk262 is substituted for M855, then the Army data notes that Mk18/Mk262 offers acceptable terminal performance to around 65m; M4/Mk262 to 175m; M16/Mk262 to 250m or so. The .300 BLK 110 gr TTSX easily matches, if not exceeds, the terminal performance capabilities and effective distances of the military 5.56 mm loads.

Checking it out now.

rsilvers
06-11-2012, 04:00 PM
By the way,

http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/2AACO102860-1.html

$10.36 per box ammo is back in stock at CTD.

VolGrad
02-08-2013, 08:41 AM
I'll resurrect this thread for kicks.

I was in my LGS the other day and found a Remington model 7 in .300BLK. For whatever reason it intrigued me. I think it was the compact, light feel of the gun and the fact I currently don't own a bolt gun of any kind. I later saw a post about the Mossy MVP in .300BLK. With the Mossy I could use my existing AR mags.

Thinking out loud here if I might want to venture into a new caliber, venture into a bolt gun, etc.

The first question I'll be asked is, "What is your intended use?". The answer is, "I have no idea."

Frankly, I don't own a bolt gun and think it might be nice to have one. I'm a small guy so the compact rifles like these are an attractive option for me. I like the idea of the .300BLK caliber in it gives more "oomph" than the 5.56 ARs I currently have. I don't really plan to do any long range shooting so the effective range of this caliber isn not an issue. I don't have immediate plans to get another suppressor but could find it in my heart for one if the political climate doesn't shut down that option. I am not a hunter but wouldn't mind trying it sometime. I'd especially like to go on a hog hunt.

So, talk me into/out of the caliber. Also, please provide any thoughts on specific rifles I should consider other than the Mossy MVP. Yes, I know this round was designed for the AR platform so a short barrel upper is also an option for use on my existing SBR lower.

Sean M
02-08-2013, 07:37 PM
Just one man talking here.............but seems to me you don't always have to have a reason to buy a gun. Or even an intended purpose. How about just a "want"? Your money, buy what you want.

There is some appeal to the .300BLK. Even though it will not replace any of my 5.56 guns, I intend to have a solid load out for SHTFZADTOTWAHRFTD. I went from "Not going .300BLK" to three of them in as many weeks. First was the little sexiness AAC H&R Handi-rifle. It is one of the most impractical firearms I have ever owned. Right now, it is sporting a bipod, 1-6x scope, visible laser, and a suppressor. "What do I intend to use it for?"

Fun.

My 12" Noveske order will ship on Monday, and another AR .300 BLK upper shipped today from the east coast. This time in an 8.5" barrel. The AR's have some practical use, or at least one that could be argued. But I don't feel the need. I wanted a .300 BLK. I bought one. Then another one. And another one. I've never felt the need to justify my purchases, or that a gun had to have a purpose beyond fun. The Remington caught my eye as a bolt gun, but the complete lack of practical application of the H&R was too powerful of a draw for me.

I have scheduled a coyote and hog hunt in early April with a buddy of mine down south. I'll be using the H&R in it's current configuration.

The appeal to me, was that since I already reload a couple of calibers, it wasn't a stretch to add .300 BLK at a fairly cheap price. The current panic has caused components to become more difficult to come by, but I have scored enough to keep me occupied, and I have some friends who also shoot it and I can always trade stuff for factory ammo. Brass is cheap, and very easy to come by. Just chop 5.56 brass down to about 1.4", resize, trim, and load. You also have a wide variety of loads to choose from based on what you want to do. Light, fast bullets, or big, heavy, slow bullets to keep the noise down. Suppressed, the H&R is (subjectively) on par with my .22LR suppressed pistols. Shooting it in the backyard at my buddy's house doesn't attract the attention of the neighbors.

It's a fun little gun/cartridge combination. If you think a bolt gun is something you want to add to your inventory, and you are not going to wring it out at extended ranges, and the .300 BLK interests you.............I don't have a reason to talk you out of it.

orionz06
02-08-2013, 07:45 PM
I'm all about buying shit for fun. What pisses me off more about 300blk is when people go to the ends of the earth to make up a reason.


Shit can be fun.