So who's going to convert their AR to 300 Ham'r?

[BigBore44]

I interpreted what you had said as your own thoughts, but in rereading I see that you must have meant that others often believe that it’s old fashioned, but you don’t necessarily agree with that. Makes sense. Sounds like we’re in violent agreement then

Yes sir. I think we are. I do agree it’s old fashioned. It’s performance by most modern centerfire standards is lacking. I could do more with my AR-10 than I could ever with a 30-30. 30-30 is more comfortable to carry though. No one gets googly eyed over a regular 336 levergun in 30-30. But yet the 30-30 is still around and putting game animals down by the thousands every year. Still being sold all the time. One of the most popular centerfire cartridges of all time. All that is happening is a guy came up with a new cartridge FOR THE AR that will essentially give you the same performance IN THE AR as a cartridge that was designed and marketed 123 years ago! That’s before cars. Before airplanes. And that was his goal!! Well congratulations sir. Well done.

 

[MachIVshooter]

The 308 or 6.5 Creedmoor in an AR-10 package is more performance, but in a bigger, heavier package than I want.

They may appear considerably larger, but they're actually only an inch longer than the AR-15 in a given barrel length, and if you don't have to do a bare bones budget build, it's pretty easy to put together a 6-7 lb .308 AR. Some guys have broken into the 4-5 lb range with them, but that can get pretty spendy.

Now, a loaded 25 rd .308 mag weighs more than double what 30 rds of 5.56 in a mag does, but if you're trudging through the woods hunting with it, you are practically and often legally limited to smaller mags (here in CO, it's 5+1 max in big game rifles).

 

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

Well, what makes a 30-30 “old fashioned” has nothing to do with performance, and everything to do with the fact that it isn’t really usable in popular actions. It’s really not much different than 6.5x55 that has been around for 100 years. 6.5x55 canndo anything a 6.5 Creedmoor can, but the modern revolutionary concept of the Creedmoor is that it will fit in popular short action rifles. Really no different than the HAM’R. A tried and true performance can now be replicated in a modern mini action. Not to say there aren’t other cartridges that can match or better this cartridge, all I’m saying is, sometimes the revolution is actually adapting old school performance into popular actions.

It doesn’t have to have revolutionary performance to be interesting. We already have every iteration of performance that anyone can dream up. The modern cartridge design is really all about getting the performance you want, in the firearm you want. Naturally AR15 being the best selling long gun in the US is going to drive a focus on a wide selection with tailored performance.

Also, Bbeing able to do more with an AR-10 really oesn’t have any relevance to a cartridge’s performance. I can do more with an AR-15 than I can with Ruger American .17 HMR and that doesn’t make .17 HMR old fashion or a poor performer.

Yes sir. I think we are. I do agree it’s old fashioned. It’s performance by most modern centerfire standards is lacking. I could do more with my AR-10 than I could ever with a 30-30. 30-30 is more comfortable to carry though. No one gets googly eyed over a regular 336 levergun in 30-30. But yet the 30-30 is still around and putting game animals down by the thousands every year. Still being sold all the time. One of the most popular centerfire cartridges of all time. All that is happening is a guy came up with a new cartridge FOR THE AR that will essentially give you the same performance IN THE AR as a cartridge that was designed and marketed 123 years ago! That’s before cars. Before airplanes. And that was his goal!! Well congratulations sir. Well done.

 

[BigBore44]

Also, Bbeing able to do more with an AR-10 really oesn’t have any relevance to a cartridge’s performance. I can do more with an AR-15 than I can with Ruger American .17 HMR and that doesn’t make .17 HMR old fashion or a poor performer.

Not sure I follow you on this one. By AR-10, I meant the 308 cartridge in an AR platform since that is what this new HAM’R is built on. The 308 will outperform the HAM’R (30-30 performance) in every aspect. And the second comparison is comparing a .223 centerfire rifle cartridge in a semiauto platform to a .17 rimfire cartridge on a bolt gun. Not really a great comparison. All I’m saying is this thing isn’t going to last. It simply can’t. It’s an average bologna sandwich that showed up too late to the cookout. But there will always be a few that want something different. Even if it isn’t better.

 

[1KPerDay]

I said the same thing about the Creedmoor. Boy was I wrong.

Creedmoor does something new. This really doesn't fill a pressing need.

 

[GunnyUSMC]

Not sure I follow you on this one. By AR-10, I meant the 308 cartridge in an AR platform since that is what this new HAM’R is built on. The 308 will outperform the HAM’R (30-30 performance) in every aspect. And the second comparison is comparing a .223 centerfire rifle cartridge in a semiauto platform to a .17 rimfire cartridge on a bolt gun. Not really a great comparison. All I’m saying is this thing isn’t going to last. It simply can’t. It’s an average bologna sandwich that showed up too late to the cookout. But there will always be a few that want something different. Even if it isn’t better.

I think you missed something. The 300 HAMR is used in a standard AR15 platform. The 308 will not fit in a standard AR15 platform.
The 300 HAMR came about for the same reason the .277 Wolverine did. When the 300 Blackout got popular people were trying to make it into something it wasn't. It's a close quarter combat round and shines like a bright light on a dark night when used for what it was designed for. But people tried to make it into a hunting cartridge, where it does ok, but doesn't shine very bright. The biggest reason for the 300 Blackout popularity is the fact that the only thing needed to convert a standard AR15 is a barrel.
A few years ago I started looking for a cartridge that would fit in a standard AR15 platform, but I wanted something that could get me out to 250 yards if needed on deer size game. The 300 Blackout couldn't get there. The 7.26x39 was close, but there were issues with mags and it was still lacking in performance. Then I found the .277 Wolverine. Mark over at Mad Dog Weapons Systems came up withe the .277 Wolverine as a mid range hunting round that would fit in a standard AR15 platform. The only thing needed to convert a AR15 in 5.56 to .277 Wolverine was a barrel. A $235 barrel is all I needed. I didn't need a special lower, a different bolt or different magazines.
I see the 300 HAMR in the same boat as the .277 Wolverine. A mid-range hunting cartridge that will fit on the standard AR15 platform. The only advantage I see that the 300 HAMR has over the .277 Wolverine is that it has a larger company backing it. Oh! and the bullet is a little bigger.
If you already have an AR in 5.56 and you want to convert it to 300 HAMR or .277 Wolverine, it will cost you the price of a new barrel, which is under $300.

 

[rbernie]

So you agree that there's a place for a slower twist 300 BLK barrel.

Um, yes? I don’t actually recall suggesting otherwise, but maybe somebody else did?

 

[BigBore44]

I think you missed something. The 300 HAMR is used in a standard AR15 platform. The 308 will not fit in a standard AR15 platform.

No. I meant they are both on AR platforms. The 308 on the AR-10 and the HAM’R on the AR-15. Maybe I didn’t articulate that well. In post 17, second paragraph, I quip about it fitting standard AR mags. But it’s possible you skipped that or it didn’t register. I’ll take the blame though. No worries. I’ve done the same thing many times.

 

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

Yes, thanks Gunny. When people say “but I can do more with X,” when referring to a cartridge that doesn’t fit in the platform, to me that misses the point. I get in principle what people are saying, which is basically, “it doesn’t add enough for me to want to buy it.” I feel the same way.

I think you missed something. The 300 HAMR is used in a standard AR15 platform. The 308 will not fit in a standard AR15 platform.
The 300 HAMR came about for the same reason the .277 Wolverine did. When the 300 Blackout got popular people were trying to make it into something it wasn't. It's a close quarter combat round and shines like a bright light on a dark night when used for what it was designed for. But people tried to make it into a hunting cartridge, where it does ok, but doesn't shine very bright. The biggest reason for the 300 Blackout popularity is the fact that the only thing needed to convert a standard AR15 is a barrel.
A few years ago I started looking for a cartridge that would fit in a standard AR15 platform, but I wanted something that could get me out to 250 yards if needed on deer size game. The 300 Blackout couldn't get there. The 7.26x39 was close, but there were issues with mags and it was still lacking in performance. Then I found the .277 Wolverine. Mark over at Mad Dog Weapons Systems came up withe the .277 Wolverine as a mid range hunting round that would fit in a standard AR15 platform. The only thing needed to convert a AR15 in 5.56 to .277 Wolverine was a barrel. A $235 barrel is all I needed. I didn't need a special lower, a different bolt or different magazines.
I see the 300 HAMR in the same boat as the .277 Wolverine. A mid-range hunting cartridge that will fit on the standard AR15 platform. The only advantage I see that the 300 HAMR has over the .277 Wolverine is that it has a larger company backing it. Oh! and the bullet is a little bigger.
If you already have an AR in 5.56 and you want to convert it to 300 HAMR or .277 Wolverine, it will cost you the price of a new barrel, which is under $300.

 

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

No. I meant they are both on AR platforms. The 308 on the AR-10 and the HAM’R on the AR-15. Maybe I didn’t articulate that well. In post 17, second paragraph, I quip about it fitting standard AR mags. But it’s possible you skipped that or it didn’t register. I’ll take the blame though. No worries. I’ve done the same thing many times.

It’s funny, because I think most of us all agree with the same outcome “I’ll pass for now, doesn’t seem Like it offers enough for me to want it.” We seem to all now be debating the best reason NOT to want it LOL.

 

[someguy2800]

I think their velocity gains are misleading. Their velocities are about 100 FPS faster than my blackout handloads and I’m certain you could safely meet or exceed them handloading a 7.62x39.

I don’t understand why they are confusing the market with this instead of promoting or renaming the 7.62x40wt.

I think it looks like a perfectly fine cartridge but I have no use for it since I have much more suitable firearms to hunt big game with than an AR15, and if I wanted to I would just handload for my 7.62x39 which will be a lot less work and produce the same results.

 

[<*(((><]

I think it looks like a perfectly fine cartridge but I have no use for it since I have much more suitable firearms to hunt big game with than an AR15, and if I wanted to I would just handload for my 7.62x39 which will be a lot less work and produce the same results.

I agree with the above.


My first response to this was a big "if" Bill Wilson's claims are true. However, I think a lot of people haven't reach the potential of the 7.62x39 that one can see with handloads. It would be interesting if a seasoned reloader had all three (300 BLK, 7.62x39, and the HAM'R) and see with all the new powders what the differences would be. I bet the 7.62x39 and the HAM'R would be closer enough that it wouldn't make me move away from my AR in 7.62x39.

 

[CoalTrain49]

I think their velocity gains are misleading. Their velocities are about 100 FPS faster than my blackout handloads and I’m certain you could safely meet or exceed them handloading a 7.62x39.

I don’t understand why they are confusing the market with this instead of promoting or renaming the 7.62x40wt.

I think it looks like a perfectly fine cartridge but I have no use for it since I have much more suitable firearms to hunt big game with than an AR15, and if I wanted to I would just handload for my 7.62x39 which will be a lot less work and produce the same results.

I can understand that. Lots of people have their needs and wants covered with an existing set up. When I find something that works I generally don't start looking for something else. The only 30 I have is a very old GI carbine. My vision isn't good enough anymore to shoot iron sights very well. I have several scoped .223's however. If I could somehow work a 30 in there without too much expense (I'm retired) I would do it. I'm looking for a .223/5.56 based 308.

I don't think the 300 ham'r is going to get into production very fast. I might have someone build a barrel for a 300 hamr and put it on a .223 Howa bolt action. I already have the action. Would that work?

 

[greyling22]

Yes. I was about ready to buy one when I saw this. The thing about 300 BLK is it was designed for heavy bullets with most rifles having 1/7 twist. I'm not going to use a suppressor or load anything heavier than 125 so it just isn't optimal for me. I do like the .223 based case however. If I could find a 300 BLK rifle with a 1/10 or 1/12 twist I would be all over it. I don't think anyone even makes a barrel in that twist.

I put this barrel on my brother's blackout. Shoots pretty well. 1" at 100 no problem. https://www.natchezss.com/adams-arms-16-carbine-300blk-medium-contour-barrel.html 1:12 twist

 

[CoalTrain49]

I agree with the above.


My first response to this was a big "if" Bill Wilson's claims are true. However, I think a lot of people haven't reach the potential of the 7.62x39 that one can see with handloads. It would be interesting if a seasoned reloader had all three (300 BLK, 7.62x39, and the HAM'R) and see with all the new powders what the differences would be. I bet the 7.62x39 and the HAM'R would be closer enough that it wouldn't make me move away from my AR in 7.62x39.

I think Wilson said that CFE BLK powder was their choice from extensive testing. That's a pretty new powder from Hodgdon. This looks like one of those rabbit holes people talk about.

I use AR Comp exclusively, which is also pretty new. Very versatile powder.

 

[mgmorden]

I personally think it's a good idea on paper.

The AR-15 platform is more popular than the AR-10 by leaps and bounds so having a cartridge that works on it is much more useful than an AR-10 solution (indeed, the whole POINT of this is that you don't nee to stray away from the AR15).

It's always been a bit of a challenge getting something that's truly "whitetail worthy" to work out of the AR15 action. 5.56 NATO kinda sorta works (where it's legal) but it's not optimal. .300 Blackout is legal just about everywhere but is also still a bit on the lower end of where you want to be for power. If you can truly get .30-30 ballistics out of the AR15 that's absolutely golden when it comes to deer hunting.

I'm personally not willing to jump onto this one myself until its popularity is a bit more settled (similar to how the .300 Blackout itself or the 6.5 Creedmoor have both kinda "settled in"), however if it becomes clear that brass and dies will be available for a good while I'd quite happily switch out a barrel on one of my AR's to fit this.

 

[GunnyUSMC]

The plus for the 300 HAMR is that you only need to change the barrel on your AR15 to change it from a poodle shooter to a midsize game rifle. With most other calibers that will work in the standard AR platform, you have to replace the bolt and magazines. And with some calibers, there have been issues.
I have nerve damage in my right shoulder so, shooting rifles with a lot of recoil starts to hurt after just a few rounds. I don't have much trouble with 5.56 and the .277 Wolverine, but I could see the 300 HAMR having a little more.
Just think if everyone had the attitude that this is just another fad and we don't really need any more new cartridges. We wouldn't have ever gotten the 38 Spl because the 38 Colt and 38 S&W did everything. Right? Then we never would have gotten the 357 Magnum.
There is nothing wrong with having more options. But as always, time will tell.

 

[CoalTrain49]

I’m curious what sort of issues you’re having with faster twist rate? Accuracy?

I'm just researching 300 something or other. I'm not having any issues per say. I know twist rate has a lot to do with bullet weight and stabilizing those bullets. If you notice most .223 bolt guns have a 1/9 twist. Originally I think a lot of them were 1/12. AR's are mostly 1/7. The reason I think is the military decided that 1/7 was much better for the heavier bullets they are now using. Everyone wants what the military uses so 1/7 became popular. My experience is that an AR with a 1/7 twist doesn't handle 55 grain bullets as well as 170. I have a friend that shoots several 5.56 AR's a lot.

Because I don't have a 300 BLK I'm just asking a lot of questions and getting some opinions.

 

[MachIVshooter]

the whole POINT of this is that you don't nee to stray away from the AR15).

It's always been a bit of a challenge getting something that's truly "whitetail worthy" to work out of the AR15 action

I love the AR, wouldn't have over a dozen of them if I didn't. That said, I can't help but opine that people are trying to push this (very flexible) platform into roles it's just not well suited to. With a narrow range of exceptions, big game hunting is one of them. Yes, we have .458 SOCOM and .450 Bushmaster and .50 Beowulf, which are suitable rounds for some larger species at very limited ranges, but here we're talking about severely handicapping magazine capacity and dealing with fairly punishing recoil that is also hard on the rifle. Then we have the various wildcats which don't beat the snot out of the rifle and cut mag capacity by 60-70%, but they're barely adequate for medium game at short range (<200 yards is short range, IMO).

I don't begrudge anyone who wants to use the AR within it's limitations, but I just can't get excited about a proprietary cartridge which is a marginal performer among common deer rifle calibers, and which seems to have been developed for little reason other than trying to reinvigorate a slumped market for one manufacturer. If I actually did want to use an AR-15 for deer hunting, I think the 6.5 Grendel is the best choice.

 

[Varminterror]

You can buy a stainless AR-10 right now for $480.

Not to derail the thread, but which AR-10 worth owning is only $480 right now?

As for the Ham’r, the 458 version exceeds the 458 socom, slightly, and with a lot more baggage. The 300 version seems to exceed the Blackout, but comes with a consequence of super-sonic game only - which is the drawing point for the 300blk.

As has been said, the supersonic blackout or this Ham’r give up too much in the field of super-sonic AR cartridges like the 6.8spc and 6.5 grendel. Only the guys on the “I only shoot subsonics” or “no cartridge specific parts” bandwagons can support the 300blk over the 6.8 or 6.5, and taking away sub’s with the Ham’r just doesn’t make sense.

I’m all for variety, and competition in the market is good - but I do not expect the hammer to be much of a viable contender.

 

[morcey2]

Someone ought to neck up the 6.5 Grendel to .30 cal and see what it does. There's gotta be some sort of market for that out there. Maybe run it at a little lower pressure so that it doesn't have potential bolt failure issues that the Grendel can have.



Matt

 

[Gtscotty]

I love the AR, wouldn't have over a dozen of them if I didn't. That said, I can't help but opine that people are trying to push this (very flexible) platform into roles it's just not well suited to. With a narrow range of exceptions, big game hunting is one of them. Yes, we have .458 SOCOM and .450 Bushmaster and .50 Beowulf, which are suitable rounds for some larger species at very limited ranges, but here we're talking about severely handicapping magazine capacity and dealing with fairly punishing recoil that is also hard on the rifle. Then we have the various wildcats which don't beat the snot out of the rifle and cut mag capacity by 60-70%, but they're barely adequate for medium game at short range (<200 yards is short range, IMO).

It certainly depends on the animals you are hunting and the environment you are hunting them in. Out west where I might be hunting anything from antelope to elk at ranges that can stretch out a bit, I don't have much use for a medium/big game capable AR of any kind.

Back when I was hunting thick woods, dark creek beds and small clearings of GA for deer and pigs, however, the 6.8 (and by extension 6.5G) made a lot of sense in a compact AR-15. They're not for everybody, but if set up right, they can be light, handy, low recoil, shooter adaptable, weather proof, plenty lethal and allow for quick, accurate follow up shots if necessary. There are more places than not, in the East, where a well set up AR-15 can make an excellent hunting arm.

 

[someguy2800]

I think Wilson said that CFE BLK powder was their choice from extensive testing. That's a pretty new powder from Hodgdon. This looks like one of those rabbit holes people talk about.

I use AR Comp exclusively, which is also pretty new. Very versatile powder.

Powder availability is one of the things I was thinking about when making up my mind on this cartridge. There is a bit of a donut hole in powder availability in the burn rate that this is going to need. You have the slow burning magnum pistol powders and then there is a pretty big jump to get to the fast burning rifle powders like RL7 and 4198. There is not very much in the middle. The blackout needs a powder in the same burn rate as magnum pistols, about the 2400 to H110 range is ideal. Just guessing on the case capacity of this 300 ham'r, the magnum pistol powders will definitely be too fast, and I think the fast rifle powders like 4198 will be too slow. The only powders that will really make it shine is probably 1680 and CFE BLK.

 

[someguy2800]

Someone ought to neck up the 6.5 Grendel to .30 cal and see what it does. There's gotta be some sort of market for that out there. Maybe run it at a little lower pressure so that it doesn't have potential bolt failure issues that the Grendel can have.



Matt

Great idea. Mabey put some taper back in it too and a steel case.



Actually I do think a "30 grendel" would be a nice deer caliber with a tiny bit more case capacity than the X39 and grendel pressure limit.

 

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

I'm super confused, because that isn't my quote.

I love the AR, wouldn't have over a dozen of them if I didn't. That said, I can't help but opine that people are trying to push this (very flexible) platform into roles it's just not well suited to. With a narrow range of exceptions, big game hunting is one of them. Yes, we have .458 SOCOM and .450 Bushmaster and .50 Beowulf, which are suitable rounds for some larger species at very limited ranges, but here we're talking about severely handicapping magazine capacity and dealing with fairly punishing recoil that is also hard on the rifle. Then we have the various wildcats which don't beat the snot out of the rifle and cut mag capacity by 60-70%, but they're barely adequate for medium game at short range (<200 yards is short range, IMO).

I don't begrudge anyone who wants to use the AR within it's limitations, but I just can't get excited about a proprietary cartridge which is a marginal performer among common deer rifle calibers, and which seems to have been developed for little reason other than trying to reinvigorate a slumped market for one manufacturer. If I actually did want to use an AR-15 for deer hunting, I think the 6.5 Grendel is the best choice.