How does 300 BLK subsonic performs compared to handgun calibers?

[TiroFijo]

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...ic-ammunition/

Look at 1:39 of the Hornady video... looks like 0.48" of expansion measured with the dial caliper. At the height of expansion (while traversing 2"-3"? before the petals fold back) the expanded diameter should be larger, perhaps about an inch in diameter?

The final expansion is less than a comparable 147 gr JHP 9 mm subsonic, that expands to about 0.60". A 45 ACP JHP (also subsonic) should be .70"+. Both handgun rounds have enough penetration by FBI standards.

What does the subsonic 300 BLK brings to the table over handgun rounds?
Better accuracy due to the firearm used?
Better terminal effects?
Better penetration of intermediate barriers?
Or is it mainly a flexibility thing? Switching from supersonic to subsonic ammo depending on the scenario.

[Robinson]

I thought it was also the ability to use very quiet subsonic ammunition in a reliable AR15 style SBR that shares magazines and components with 5.56 versions, as well as supersonic ammunition with ballistics close to the AK round.

[Mike C]

If you look at the fact it was shot through a piece of sheet metal first in that video the expanded diameter looks pretty damn good thought, I am not DocGKR. That round went through the sheet metal like a hot knife through butter then had solid expansion, I imagine expansion would be better if it was a bare gel shot though WTF do I know. Good expansion through something like sheet metal and no over penetration, or lack there of like 5.56 can have from a round that doesn't blow out your ear drums. Color me interested. Don't get me wrong I would like to see the full gamut of the test numbers through all the FBI protocol but still even in the short video it looks very promising. I've been running nothing but .300 BLK for a while now and really like the round for what it is. Supers hit hard and having subs that meet FBI spec makes .300 BLK even better. This option is really what has missing in terms of cartridge options. I am really happy to see this option open up for users of the cartridge though it is mostly self serving. Hopefully other MFG's will get on the .300 BLK train, are you listening ATK?

ETA: I would be really curious as to how that round would handle a "B" pillar, through laminate glass, or through the trunk and into the cab of a car in addition to dry wall.

[5pins]

I have often thought the same thing and is one of the reasons I, for the most part, have stopped playing with the .300 BO. Even though the .300 is a rifle round it performs like a pistol at sub velocity. And that’s if you can find a .300 sub that expands, most don’t. In fact other than the new Hornady and the Lehigh, I don’t know of a lot of factory ammo that does. At super velocity, I would rather have a 5.56/.223.

A 9mm 147gr or a .45 230gr that expands to .50+ inches beats a .30 that expands to .40 inches or so and give similar penetration.

[Mike C]

I have often thought the same thing and is one of the reasons I, for the most part, have stopped playing with the .300 BO. Even though the .300 is a rifle round it performs like a pistol at sub velocity. And that’s if you can find a .300 sub that expands, most don’t. In fact other than the new Hornady and the Lehigh, I don’t know of a lot of factory ammo that does. At super velocity, I would rather have a 5.56/.223.

A 9mm 147gr or a .45 230gr that expands to .50+ inches beats a .30 that expands to .40 inches or so and give similar penetration.

I'm not advocating use for everyone but I think it depends on the application. Subs that preform similar to good expanding pistol ammunition with a 30 round mag in a package that is small, quiet and much easier to shoot than a pistol can be highly desirable, (obviously depending on application) so is the additional ability to go to supers for work at longer ranges since you aren't married to PCC ballistics/cartridges. 5.56mm is good cartridge there is no doubt about that but it is certainly not a favorite of mine when it comes to dealing with certain things, mainly vehicles. I will admit that much has changed with ammo and granted my view is slighted by my experiences but I'll take a .30 cal most days of the week, especially when they don't come with the same high cost of recoil as a full .308/7.62 package, or the reduced capacity.

I guess what I am trying to get at is that for specific application this is just another option, one that was missing and if one has the need this could fit the bill quite nicely.

[Unobtanium]

A 9mm becomes a .380 long before a .300BLK sub becomes a .32.

[TiroFijo]

A 9mm becomes a .380 long before a .300BLK sub becomes a .32.

That is true...

But shooting a subsonic is shooting a subsonic, rainbow trayectory. I´m shure there is a scenario where the added accuracy and range of the 300 BLK come in handy, but for most users and uses ???

[voodoo_man]

The only reason to use a subsonic .300 round is suppressed.

A supersonic .300 will out perform subsonic in almost every aspect, especially intermediate barrier penetration.

With all that said, the only reason to have a supersonic .300 is because you run a DI 8" barreled upper without a hiccup (so long as you use good ammo) - this is not something you can do reliably with a DI 5.56 or .308.

[Sensei]

Barnes VOR-TX from a 9” barrel 300blk offers terminal performance through intermediate barriers that rivals most barrier blind 5.56 loads fired from a 16” barrel.



The only real downside is a bit more penetration than necessary, but 21” in bare gel is fine with me when it opens up to 0.6”.

[voodoo_man]

Barnes VOR-TX from a 9” barrel 300blk offers terminal performance through intermediate barriers that rivals most barrier blind 5.56 loads fired from a 16” barrel.



The only real downside is a bit more penetration than necessary, but 21” in bare gel is fine with me when it opens up to 0.6”.

I'm assuming this is supersonic, correct?

More penetration is not a downside, in my opinion.