Disregard...

More
10 years 10 months ago #32876 by OleCowboy
Replied by OleCowboy on topic The .300 AAC BLK

jtallen83 wrote: :I-agree: Facts is facts, this is a short range CQB cartridge for most average shooters. I just don't see a significant advantage overall, if I only got to choose one AR it would not be the cartridge I would pick. That said I would still like to have one some day. :usa:

Granted I have not done my typical reserch on the .300. But what I have done leads me to believe it is an excellent rd for CQC and out to 300 yds its got a leg up on the 5.56. But not by an order of magnitude. Then the guy is talking telling me 'its and effective rd out to 750'...REALLY and you got a 131 in drop at 500 and I can only imagine what it is at 750.

Tried and proven .308 is effective out to 800 and in expert hands they would take a shot at 1000 with it, so the .300 is as good as a .308...I don't think so!

All this does is cast doubt on what I believe is most likely a good if not great rd...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 10 months ago #32878 by Lizardette
Replied by Lizardette on topic The .300 AAC BLK
I don't think anyone is saying that the .300 BLK is "better" than the .308/7.62 NATO.

As far as remaining energy goes, it doesn't take a whole lot to get the job done on an unarmored target. When I say "the job" I mean putting a bullet into a human body - no specific part, just as long as it hits. There are definitely better choices if you want to stretch the effective range of the AR15 platform. Specifically in .30 caliber, I'm thinking of the .30 HRT (Herret Rimless Tactial). It's essentially just a 6.8SPC necked up to .30 in a .30 Herret die. It uses the same magazines and bolt as the 6.8SPC. The only difficulty is finding a barrel.

Apparently it can get a 125 grain bullet up to 2500 fps, and a 240 grain bullet up to 1000 fps, without needing an adjustable gas block to make the two of them function in the same rifle, with or without a suppressor.

Just a thought. :whistle:
The following user(s) said Thank You: jtallen83

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 10 months ago #32879 by OleCowboy
Replied by OleCowboy on topic The .300 AAC BLK

Lizardette wrote: I don't think anyone is saying that the .300 BLK is "better" than the .308/7.62 NATO.

As far as remaining energy goes, it doesn't take a whole lot to get the job done on an unarmored target. When I say "the job" I mean putting a bullet into a human body - no specific part, just as long as it hits. There are definitely better choices if you want to stretch the effective range of the AR15 platform. Specifically in .30 caliber, I'm thinking of the .30 HRT (Herret Rimless Tactial). It's essentially just a 6.8SPC necked up to .30 in a .30 Herret die. It uses the same magazines and bolt as the 6.8SPC. The only difficulty is finding a barrel.

Apparently it can get a 125 grain bullet up to 2500 fps, and a 240 grain bullet up to 1000 fps, without needing an adjustable gas block to make the two of them function in the same rifle, with or without a suppressor.

Just a thought. :whistle:

No they did not say it was better, what they said it was effective out to 750 and I am saying the effective on a .308 is only 800. That translates to me its as good as and that is simply not the case, better than a 5.56, sure I buy that. Bottom line is I am not buying what they are selling. There is a Youtube showing the devastating AK 47 at supposedly 1000 yds...what is odd is that he is shooting from the prone position and his AK is parallel to the ground. The AK rd is not a 1000 yd rd, in fact it would be my very last choice and thats only if its all I have.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 10 months ago - 10 years 10 months ago #32920 by BUILDING MY SASS
Replied by BUILDING MY SASS on topic The .300 AAC BLK
IMHO.... :twocents:
The 300 BO is much like the 6.5 greed and 6.5 grend as well as the 6.8 spc...which out of the three would be the one I would go with....
It is someone's idea of trying to "Reinvent" the wheel...for military use...trying to bridge the gap between the 5.56 and 7.62x39 and the 7.62x51 or .223 and .308 and AK round...it is a great idea but it just can't be done in a way that is going to be economical for the military or LE to adopt...
Given all the calibers I stated...there are very few who make the ammo...again an issue...
Most that have the 300 BO reload their own and make the cases out of .223s...
Recently I had a friend get a 6.8 spc upper and he found out just how expensive and difficult it is to find ammo for it...Reloading time I told him...
When everything has been based on two or three calibers over decades...it is a novelty at best to come out with these new calibers....though the 6.8 spc has found it's way into some federal agencies...
I mean no offense to anyone who is looking at one or owns one...just voicing my opinion...
As I said...if I was to go to a off caliber...I would choose the 6.8 SPC first.
BMS
Last edit: 10 years 10 months ago by BUILDING MY SASS.
The following user(s) said Thank You: 10-76

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 10 months ago #32998 by SOC
Replied by SOC on topic The .300 AAC BLK
"CQB Weapon"

Even while using numbers from Afghanistan where long range shots are more common and is referred to as "A snipers paradise" more than 90% of enemy kills are under 100 meters.

Perspective.

Can it be close to 7.62x51? No, but it is slightly cheaper to reload.

Is it better than 7.62x39? Pushes same style and weight of bullet faster than good Mil surp 7.62x39. (Better bullet selection, better accuracy, more reloader friendly.)

Is it better than a 30-30? It can be loaded equal to it with same bullets. (A semi-auto 30-30 would be good wouldn't it?)

Is there a better subsonic round?


I looked real hard at the 6.8 vs 6.5 debate and since I reload I went with 6.5 due to wider bullet selection that also results in better ballistics.

The recent development and confusion over "6.8 SPC II" VS the original 6.8 SPC has cemented my opinion of the 6.8 being a military round to include the classic civilian/military chambering/ammo/safety confusion that goes with it and none of the vast ammo/component availability of rounds that "made the cut".

The 6.5 gives me the potential for a light "General Purpose" rifle that trades only a little muzzle energy vs the same in 308.

I like the 50 Beowulf over the 458 Socom, I liked it before companies started making bullets for the S&W 500 that just happen to work great in the 50 Beo.

The 300 BLK gives all the power/range of 30 30-30 rounds in semi auto with the option of quiet slow heavy rounds.



For a SBR? What would be better?
The following user(s) said Thank You: jtallen83

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 10 months ago #33006 by BUILDING MY SASS
Replied by BUILDING MY SASS on topic The .300 AAC BLK
Given the purpose of this round....maybe someone could design a weapon similar to a MP-5 but using the .300 BO. It of course would be a bit larger than the Standard MP-5...but it would really Rock...I think....An MP-5 using an AR magazine... :drool:
BMS

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 10 months ago #33019 by MrMarty51
Replied by MrMarty51 on topic The .300 AAC BLK

BUILDING MY SASS wrote: Given the purpose of this round....maybe someone could design a weapon similar to a MP-5 but using the .300 BO. It of course would be a bit larger than the Standard MP-5...but it would really Rock...I think....An MP-5 using an AR magazine... :drool:
BMS

:drool: :drool: :drool: :cowboy:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 10 months ago #33027 by jtallen83
Replied by jtallen83 on topic The .300 AAC BLK
Something like this?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMI_Tavor_TAR-21

This image is hidden for guests.
Please log in or register to see it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 10 months ago #33033 by faawrenchbndr
Replied by faawrenchbndr on topic The .300 AAC BLK
The 300 AAC is simply a ballistic copy of the communistic 7.62x39 cartridge

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 10 months ago #33040 by OleCowboy
Replied by OleCowboy on topic The .300 AAC BLK
Research: I have found a few cycles to take a harder look at the 300. A play with the ballistic tables brings a conclusion that is nothing more than a 7.62x39, the AK 47 rd. In fact run the table and you have ballistics so close its hard to distinguish between: 7.62x39, 300 ACC and 30 30 Win

That said it has a lot of advantages for us: Its based upon the 5.56 which makes it truly compatible with the existing AR platform with not much more than a barrel change.

It subsonic and built that way.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.