Which is better overall?
- Thread starter Bill4282
- Start date
- Status
Better overall for what? What are you looking to do with it?
OpticsPlanet
Member
Better if you plan to suppress it. That's the only significant advantage.
What barrel length is this upper?
-Matt S.
What barrel length is this upper?
-Matt S.
crazysccrmd
Member
It's better at shooting heavy bullets quiet but not much else.
Jackal
Member
.300blk costs about the same as .308, so no thanks.
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,741
Depends also on where you are at. My state (Wa.) doesn't allow .223 for deer, so .300 blackout is a cheap way to get into an AR legal for hunting around here if you are already set up for reloading .223.
I also know a guy who goes helicopter hog hunting every year. He won't use a .223 on hogs anymore, and since going with .300 blackout has been much happier with terminal performance.
It does have advantages over the .223 other than suppression, depending on what you need.
I also know a guy who goes helicopter hog hunting every year. He won't use a .223 on hogs anymore, and since going with .300 blackout has been much happier with terminal performance.
It does have advantages over the .223 other than suppression, depending on what you need.
B!ngoFuelUSN
Member
I guess I'd take a different cut. The .300BLK has a lot more flexibility than the 5.56.
1. It is designed to be shot effectively from a 9" barrel
2. Subsonic loads are effective and can be suppressed
3. Out of a 16" barrel I'd take the power of a 300BLK over a 5.56 any day up to 200 yards.
4. Of course, they cost more $$/round but if you reload, who cares?
B
1. It is designed to be shot effectively from a 9" barrel
2. Subsonic loads are effective and can be suppressed
3. Out of a 16" barrel I'd take the power of a 300BLK over a 5.56 any day up to 200 yards.
4. Of course, they cost more $$/round but if you reload, who cares?
B
35 Whelen
Member
One advantage the .300 will always have over the .223 is a larger, heavier which makes a larger, deeper wound cavity.
35W
35W
I've never understood the 300bo craze when a dedicated 7.62x39 upper, with cheap available ammo, just slaps it down. And can be used as a deer round, and is readily available in many configs,and can be supressed, and can be mounted on a 233 lower vs. 308, and available as a pistol, and...and...
Ibmikey
Member
Bill 4282, i have a fondness for the 300 BO and have three AR's and a Handi Rifle in that caliber (shot a 350 # Texas hog with the Handi, one shot) but mostly i use them for plinking and in supersonic loadings. The 300 BO is easy and economical to load with recycled GI bullets and just a pinch of pistol powder gives a fun time shooting soda cans and steel gongs. If however you have only one AR you are much better off with 5.56 chambering . Buy lots of ammo now while reasonable for shooting and storage. When you shoot an AR a whole new world of fun opens up for you to enjoy, and then an upper or complete rifle in 300 Blackout will be appreciated more.
There's a lot of interest in .300BO, but it does go to understanding the ballistics.
Yes, it has a bigger, heavier bullet. That means it can carry more power, but it doesn't mean it carries if further. Typically it has a shorter effective range, with more bullet drop. You could go 6.8SPC and have more range, less drop, and extend the effective range further - plus it was designed from the ground up as an SBR round, where the .300 was just a workaround to get AR's into 3Gun competition decades ago. .300B0 wasn't originally intended to be a suppressed round - it was a .30 stuffed in a 5.56 case to avoid the rules against poodleshooters in the days when "Real Men shoot .30 cal battle rifles!" Then the AR15 was a 20" barrel and that was it.
.300BO has no surplus or cheap import ammo, so shooting it is still commercial priced - same as 6.8SPC. Which is about 2 1/2 times more expensive if you practice a lot. And which is why "everybody" says "It's great if you reload!" Well, so is any other non military caliber - if you want to spend the minimum $200 for equipment and the hours of time weekly to do it. Some do - others would rather buy ammo and go shooting than work over a press coming up with ammo that 1) voids the warranty on a new over the counter rifle, and 2) is the #1 cause of kabooms.
I plan to get into reloading, too. I just don't gloss it over.
Rather than go thru that loop now, I choose 5.56 for my AR pistol . There's cheap surplus practice ammo, and look to Black Hills for the box or two of hunting/SD ammo that I might want on hand. 77gr OTM or TMK has great performance and it legal for hunting.
If it's a matter of numerical legality per a specific states hunting regs, and 5.56 isn't allowed, then there are better choices than .300BO - but you have to spell out exactly the conditions to make the judgment. "Better" is a good thing, but it also requires measuring it and that means with numbers, and they require knowing what ranges and what kind of target.
Define "better" by having numbers, or it's all just chest thumping and ego. In general - which reflects the finite overall loaded length of ammo in the AR15 magazine well - the shorter the range, then the fatter the bullet you can use. And vice versa - longer ranges need narrower, longer bullets with better aerodynamics to retain energy.
Again, in general, because of the OAL of the mag well, you line them up by diameter of the bullet and you get different results with a spread of ranges. The bigger bullets can take bigger game - at shorter ranges. The narrower bullets reach further, extending range. but the size of the game diminishes - as does the opportunity to even see them unless you are out in the open.
You apply the cartridge best matched to the situation - exactly the opposite of what marketing does, invent a new niche round and watch popularity drive sales.
What happens then is that the shooter realizes they didn't get the One Cartridge That Rules Them All, and ammo may not be commercially available at taxpayer subsidized rates. Which isn't the problem of the people who sell them. It's yours.
Choose appropriately, match the cartridge for what the gun is intended to do, and you get happiness. Go out of the way to force something to fit a choice that is inversely optimal for it's original design intent, and you'd better have really good reasons. Or it will be a waste of gun money.
Again, .300BO is popular, it was originally meant as a wildcat to force 3Gun to accept the AR15. Much later others worked with it and found it was a good SBR suppressed - but that doesn't make it the "better" round for everything.
You have to specify what it will be used for.
Yes, it has a bigger, heavier bullet. That means it can carry more power, but it doesn't mean it carries if further. Typically it has a shorter effective range, with more bullet drop. You could go 6.8SPC and have more range, less drop, and extend the effective range further - plus it was designed from the ground up as an SBR round, where the .300 was just a workaround to get AR's into 3Gun competition decades ago. .300B0 wasn't originally intended to be a suppressed round - it was a .30 stuffed in a 5.56 case to avoid the rules against poodleshooters in the days when "Real Men shoot .30 cal battle rifles!" Then the AR15 was a 20" barrel and that was it.
.300BO has no surplus or cheap import ammo, so shooting it is still commercial priced - same as 6.8SPC. Which is about 2 1/2 times more expensive if you practice a lot. And which is why "everybody" says "It's great if you reload!" Well, so is any other non military caliber - if you want to spend the minimum $200 for equipment and the hours of time weekly to do it. Some do - others would rather buy ammo and go shooting than work over a press coming up with ammo that 1) voids the warranty on a new over the counter rifle, and 2) is the #1 cause of kabooms.
I plan to get into reloading, too. I just don't gloss it over.
Rather than go thru that loop now, I choose 5.56 for my AR pistol . There's cheap surplus practice ammo, and look to Black Hills for the box or two of hunting/SD ammo that I might want on hand. 77gr OTM or TMK has great performance and it legal for hunting.
If it's a matter of numerical legality per a specific states hunting regs, and 5.56 isn't allowed, then there are better choices than .300BO - but you have to spell out exactly the conditions to make the judgment. "Better" is a good thing, but it also requires measuring it and that means with numbers, and they require knowing what ranges and what kind of target.
Define "better" by having numbers, or it's all just chest thumping and ego. In general - which reflects the finite overall loaded length of ammo in the AR15 magazine well - the shorter the range, then the fatter the bullet you can use. And vice versa - longer ranges need narrower, longer bullets with better aerodynamics to retain energy.
Again, in general, because of the OAL of the mag well, you line them up by diameter of the bullet and you get different results with a spread of ranges. The bigger bullets can take bigger game - at shorter ranges. The narrower bullets reach further, extending range. but the size of the game diminishes - as does the opportunity to even see them unless you are out in the open.
You apply the cartridge best matched to the situation - exactly the opposite of what marketing does, invent a new niche round and watch popularity drive sales.
What happens then is that the shooter realizes they didn't get the One Cartridge That Rules Them All, and ammo may not be commercially available at taxpayer subsidized rates. Which isn't the problem of the people who sell them. It's yours.
Choose appropriately, match the cartridge for what the gun is intended to do, and you get happiness. Go out of the way to force something to fit a choice that is inversely optimal for it's original design intent, and you'd better have really good reasons. Or it will be a waste of gun money.
Again, .300BO is popular, it was originally meant as a wildcat to force 3Gun to accept the AR15. Much later others worked with it and found it was a good SBR suppressed - but that doesn't make it the "better" round for everything.
You have to specify what it will be used for.
Not necessarily.
Most rifle bullets need at least 1700-1800 fps to expand. The heavier bullets won't do that at the muzzle. The mid weights run out of gas at around 100 yards. The lighter 125 gr or so bullets might get you to 150-200 yards before they are too slow to get reliable expansion.
One of the heavy for caliber 223's in a 69-77 gr softpoint will still be fast enough to give more than enough penetration on deer size game out to 200 yards and with enough speed for good expansion. I'd bet money the 223 with big game bullets gives every bit as much penetration and expands larger than the 300 at any range.
At best both are 200 yard deer loads. Neither are suitable for anything larger, nor at any greater distance.
d2wing
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,435
As jmr said, that a .300 will not produce a larger wound. A slow bullet will not have cavitation and will produce a much smaller wound. Unless it expands it will pass through with minimal damage like other slow rounds. People that say stuff like like that have no experience with a variety of rounds and don't ever look at wound data on actual living flesh.
Comparing actual wounds and wound data, in either FMJ or soft point with comparable bullet construction the 5.56 or .223 is more lethal and creates larger wounds in most circumstances. The .300 or 7.62x39 will likely have a little more penetration which may result in an exit wound or pass through which means what little energy it has is expended in air. But that depends on several factors. Neither cartridge is a powerhouse. We are talking about an enhanced varmint cartridge vs an enhanced pistol cartridge.
IMHO in a very short barrel or suppressed the 300 has an advantage. Long barrel the .223. On a thick skinned animal like a large hog the .300 could have an advantage, I don't know, we don't have them here.
Comparing actual wounds and wound data, in either FMJ or soft point with comparable bullet construction the 5.56 or .223 is more lethal and creates larger wounds in most circumstances. The .300 or 7.62x39 will likely have a little more penetration which may result in an exit wound or pass through which means what little energy it has is expended in air. But that depends on several factors. Neither cartridge is a powerhouse. We are talking about an enhanced varmint cartridge vs an enhanced pistol cartridge.
IMHO in a very short barrel or suppressed the 300 has an advantage. Long barrel the .223. On a thick skinned animal like a large hog the .300 could have an advantage, I don't know, we don't have them here.
Last edited:
Here is my take on 300 Blk, and I own a couple guns chambered in that cartridge. It is a pretty versatile gun. However, there are very very few tasks that something else doesn't make more sense to use IMHO. It is good for shooting subs, but it is expensive. It offers good ballistics for an intermediate cartridge from an SBR within about 200 yards. However, it is expensive. This means there are often either superior or significantly less expense options that will work for any given task.
It is normally touted as a round for shooting subsonics. It does that well. A proper set up is very quite. However many of the purported advantage here depend on what specifically you are shooting at. Inside of 100 yards for defensive use I don't know that it offers particular advantage versus shooting say a 147 gr 9x19 gold dots (or similar).
The advantaged of shooting those heavy 30 cal bullets is a much better BC that gives better eternal ballistics and stretches the range somewhat. However most of those bullets have plain horrible terminal ballistics when fired at subsonic velocities. The only thing that might be an exception and I admittedly have not investigated them closely are the rather expensive ($50/20 cartridges) Lehigh defense offerings.
The other advantage is you can get much more precision out of 220 gr SMKs than out of even match grade pistol bullets. However, at the ranges I most often shoot subs it doesn't matter for anything other than shooting small groups just to do so.
The other big advantage of a 300 Blk is if you want as compact a package as possible. 300 maintains its usefulness out of shorter barrels than 5.56. 5.56 is best in barrels over 10.5 with 11.5 or longer arguably being better. That said I think I prefer a 10.5" for a 300 that will shoot subs and supers.
Some say it is a good hunting round which is often compared to 7.62x39. Inside of 200 yards it is probably fine for medium game. Arguably a 6.5 or 6.8 clambering for an AR is a better hunting round.
Shooting where terminal ballistics matter the 300 Blk offers some advantage over 5.56. When ranges go past 200 yards a 5.56 is probably a better choice.
Now what the 300 does offer is that it is versitale. The same gun can fire subs and supers reliably (if the guns is set up right). It can do a wide range of tasks reasonably well even if it isn't the absolute best choice for any of them
It is normally touted as a round for shooting subsonics. It does that well. A proper set up is very quite. However many of the purported advantage here depend on what specifically you are shooting at. Inside of 100 yards for defensive use I don't know that it offers particular advantage versus shooting say a 147 gr 9x19 gold dots (or similar).
The advantaged of shooting those heavy 30 cal bullets is a much better BC that gives better eternal ballistics and stretches the range somewhat. However most of those bullets have plain horrible terminal ballistics when fired at subsonic velocities. The only thing that might be an exception and I admittedly have not investigated them closely are the rather expensive ($50/20 cartridges) Lehigh defense offerings.
The other advantage is you can get much more precision out of 220 gr SMKs than out of even match grade pistol bullets. However, at the ranges I most often shoot subs it doesn't matter for anything other than shooting small groups just to do so.
The other big advantage of a 300 Blk is if you want as compact a package as possible. 300 maintains its usefulness out of shorter barrels than 5.56. 5.56 is best in barrels over 10.5 with 11.5 or longer arguably being better. That said I think I prefer a 10.5" for a 300 that will shoot subs and supers.
Some say it is a good hunting round which is often compared to 7.62x39. Inside of 200 yards it is probably fine for medium game. Arguably a 6.5 or 6.8 clambering for an AR is a better hunting round.
Shooting where terminal ballistics matter the 300 Blk offers some advantage over 5.56. When ranges go past 200 yards a 5.56 is probably a better choice.
Now what the 300 does offer is that it is versitale. The same gun can fire subs and supers reliably (if the guns is set up right). It can do a wide range of tasks reasonably well even if it isn't the absolute best choice for any of them
- Status
