Trying to decide what to get for a suppressed rifle/carbine

[someguy2800]

Absolutely not.
Cheaper doesn't mean better performance and that performance gap is tremendous.

We don't have hogs here so I have only shot a few skunks and coons with my 300 blackout and 9mm AR, but is there really a tremendous performace gap? We are talking about going from a fat fast expanding 147 or 150 grain bullet to a 200 grain skinny slower expanding bullet of the same velocity. Maybe that makes all the difference in getting through the shoulder on a hog, but a 147 hst is nothing to sneeze at. I guess on the small thin skin critters I typically need to dispatch I'd give the nod to the 9mm defensive hp's. I don't have a fair frame of reference for the performance of premium expanding 300 blk subs because the ones I've used were OTM or cast. I have not shot anything with like the 300 sub x or a maker t-rex.

edit, Talking subs only here of course. 300 blackout supers are waaaaaaay more powerful than 9mm

 

[mavracer]

Absolutely not.
Cheaper doesn't mean better performance and that performance gap is tremendous.


You could machine gun hogs with .22LR, but that is inhumane IMO.

Well then feral hogs really wouldn't be in the window where a 22 isn't enough AND the savings of moving from 300 BO to 9mm would be beneficial would it?

 

[dogtown tom]

edit, Talking subs only here of course. 300 blackout supers are waaaaaaay more powerful than 9mm

I don't shoot subs. I haven't found a need.

 

[dogtown tom]

Well then feral hogs really wouldn't be in the window where a 22 isn't enough AND the savings of moving from 300 BO to 9mm would be beneficial would it?

Can you rephrase that question?

 

[mavracer]

Can you rephrase that question?

Everyone repeats the mantra that 9mm is more powerful than a 22 and that it's cheaper than the blackout.
My question is what is the target that would make both somewhat necessary at the same time.
In my original post I joked that a good enabler would suggest all 3, but the reality is having both a 22LR and 300 Blackout I just find no use for a 9mm carbine.

 

[someguy2800]

Everyone repeats the mantra that 9mm is more powerful than a 22 and that it's cheaper than the blackout.
My question is what is the target that would make both somewhat necessary at the same time.
In my original post I joked that a good enabler would suggest all 3, but the reality is having both a 22LR and 300 Blackout I just find no use for a 9mm carbine.

If you had a 22lr and a suppressed 9mm, would you need a 300 blackout? I just don't really see what one does that the other doesn't so why rule one or the other out?

I get where you are coming from that if you're not shooting hundreds of critters in year then the ecconomics don't really make a big difference, but I don't just hunt with any of my guns. I also practice for proficiency and fun with all of them and that adds up to lots and lots more ammo expended then will actually be shot at game, and I prefer to practice with my hunting ammo whenever that is feasable. For every round I shoot at an animal I probably shoot 50-100 at targets because I need to be proficient with said firearm.

 

[someguy2800]

Actually in the past 8 months or so I’ve shot about 1000 rounds through my 9mm and 2 of those weee at animals. Either buying or reloading it would cost a lot more money to do that with a blackout. Yes I could shoot less or just use my 22lr, but either of those options means less fun.

 

[mavracer]

If you had a 22lr and a suppressed 9mm, would you need a 300 blackout? I just don't really see what one does that the other doesn't so why rule one or the other out?

Like you said

edit, Talking subs only here of course. 300 blackout supers are waaaaaaay more powerful than 9mm

And the supersonic crack IMHO is blown way outta prepositions especially in semiautomatic hosts.
Port pop is literally right next to your ear the crack is out in front of the gun.

For every round I shoot at an animal I probably shoot 50-100 at targets because I need to be proficient with said firearm.

Same here earlier in my life, now days you can probably add a zero 500+ rounds fired at targets, but of those 90% are rimfire and the 22 has the same trigger, optic and balance.

 

[halfmoonclip]

We're getting lost in that "need" aspect of gun ownership...follow that to its logical end?
A lot of the reasoning for possessing has nothing in on that...it's a 'grits and shins' proposition, because the gun is simply interesting, or entertaining to have.
I'm thinking of getting a can for an SBR Scorpion, just for the absolute hell of it. No further justification needed, and it will be entertaining to fool with.
Moon

 

[adcoch1]

We're getting lost in that "need" aspect of gun ownership...follow that to its logical end?
A lot of the reasoning for possessing has nothing in on that...it's a 'grits and shins' proposition, because the gun is simply interesting, or entertaining to have.
I'm thinking of getting a can for an SBR Scorpion, just for the absolute hell of it. No further justification needed, and it will be entertaining to fool with.
Moon

Trying to define "needs" just makes owning and purchasing guns stressful. That is why I don't get hung up on selling guns, if something gets sold to fund something else, well, I got to try out something new! Too poor for sports cars or planes, too married for younger women, so I play with guns. Try them all out, and sell off what you don't want. Don't let "needing" it limit your enjoyment, within reason of course...

 

[45/30-06OKIE]

Trying to define "needs" just makes owning and purchasing guns stressful. That is why I don't get hung up on selling guns, if something gets sold to fund something else, well, I got to try out something new! Too poor for sports cars or planes, too married for younger women, so I play with guns. Try them all out, and sell off what you don't want. Don't let "needing" it limit your enjoyment, within reason of course...

Ain't that the truth... I have spent a lot of money of guns and ammo and stuff that I've since gotten rid of cause it was dumb or the reloading components were impossible to find or I found something else I wanted or what have you.

 

[BreechFace]

I look at what I spend on firearms, optics, reloading equipment and components and it barely starts approaching a fully decked out side-by-side. I call that winning in the game of controlling "wantitius". My truck gets me everywhere I want to go.

 

[ExtremeSquared]

I agree with the 2 premises that 9mm is more powerful than 22 and it's cheaper than 300. My problem is what target exists in that window that requires a high volume of rounds?

Suppressed 9mm subsonic on steel targets is probably my top recipe for range fun.

 

[mavracer]

Suppressed 9mm subsonic on steel targets is probably my top recipe for range fun.

Not to me, 22LR rings steel just fine for a third the cost. Plus if I step that up and spend 1/2 as much (I'm buying Eley Contact for $5 a box) I can push the targets out further or make them much smaller.
9mm economics in this case seems penny wise and dollar foolish.
Spend 3x as much for the 1000s of rounds shot at paper, cans and steel to save a few cents on the handful of rounds shot at flesh.
The caveat would be if you could only own 1 of the 3 then a 9mm would prolly be the obvious choice, especially for someone that doesn't reload.

 

[CraigC]

I rarely have more fun than pecking at steel with suppressed .22's. Not with my clothes on anyway.

 

[ExtremeSquared]

Not to me, 22LR rings steel just fine for a third the cost...

You're right. Taking price/volume into account, 22 is absolutely better. But every now and then it's nice to have a little more satisfying thump and ring and not have to scrape lead off baffles afterwards, and paying for 300blk to get that experience is even less justifiable than 9mm.

 

[JumboJVT]

Pork Sword 300blk bolt pistol. No need for sbr.

Forgive my ignorance, but how is that not an SBR? Seems clear in the pic that the rear is supported by the toe of butt stock/brace.

 

[BreechFace]

Forgive my ignorance, but how is that not an SBR? Seems clear in the pic that the rear is supported by the toe of butt stock/brace.

One can’t see from the picture but I imagine he has a brace on the end of that folding brace/stock adapter.

It all depends on what one puts on the end whether it is considered a brace or stock.

 

[mavracer]

You're right. Taking price/volume into account, 22 is absolutely better. But every now and then it's nice to have a little more satisfying thump and ring and not have to scrape lead off baffles afterwards, and paying for 300blk to get that experience is even less justifiable than 9mm.

Steel has always been pass/fail for me satisfaction comes from precision, distance and speed.
My 3 most used 22 suppressors have steel baffles, no scraping, just drop them in the case cleaner.

 

[jmt1271]

One can’t see from the picture but I imagine he has a brace on the end of that folding brace/stock adapter.

It all depends on what one puts on the end whether it is considered a brace or stock.

Correct it is a pistol with a brace.

 

[CraigC]

Forgive my ignorance, but how is that not an SBR? Seems clear in the pic that the rear is supported by the toe of butt stock/brace.

It's the distinction between a brace and a stock.