Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,629
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Sept 11, 2023 15:28:10 GMT
Very recently, and quite tragically, I've inherited a bunch of new (to me) firearms, and among them are a Smith and Wesson M&P 15 with both 5.56 NATO and .300BLK uppers.
I have a ton (some might say too much) experience from my time in the army shooting 5.56, and it's a fantastic round for its intended use. I have zero experience with the .300 AAC Blackout though. I seem to recall my brother saying they are a good choice for hog hunting, but that's all I know as far as first-hand anecdotes go.
I'd love to hear/read anyone else's personal experience with the .300 AAC Blackout, and how it compares to 5.56 NATO and .223 Remington. I can obviously just look up ballistics stats, so I'm really much more interested in the intangibles or hard to classify elements of your experience(s).
My brother was much more of a gun-enthusiast, whereas I've always been more into hunting-specific firearms (and swords obvs). I'll probably be popping up in the Firearms section quite a bit more now, with similar questions for other firearms and ammunition I'm unfamiliar with.
|
|
|
Post by mrstabby on Sept 11, 2023 17:05:55 GMT
I think the primary points for the .300blk are it's easier to suppress and it doesn't get deflected by brush as easily as 5.56 does. I have never stot one myself, it's not very widely used by hunters or sport shooters around here, though this might be changing since suppressors are becoming easier to get for hunters. From what I have heard the recoil of the 300blk is slightly heavier.
|
|
seth
Member
Just Peachy
Posts: 977
|
Post by seth on Sept 11, 2023 18:41:03 GMT
I'm sorry to hear about your loss. Did you inherit these from your brother? Tough deal.
I really like .300. I like shooting 125 grain best. I do best under 150 yards as it drops sharply after that. I think it would be a good caliber for deer sized game at those ranges. It feels similar to shooting 30-30 range-wise but much less recoil. When I first started hunting, I used a 30-30. I first got a BO AR upper and then got one in a bolt action because I think with a good optic, it's a better option for my kids to start to hunt with than a lever action 30-30 or the .30-06.
Price-wise, the 5.56 is more wallet friendly. You can also make longer shots. My range has some nice goings at 300 yards which I have hit with a high hold over with the BO, but I hit them much more reliably with the 5.56.
|
|
|
Post by gator on Sept 13, 2023 4:03:55 GMT
Suppressed .300 AAC is fun to shoot, but it's application is limited. I have a 10" AR and 200 grain subsonic .300 AACs have the about the same muzzle energy as 230 gr .45 ACPs from a 1911. Which is fine for what I want, which is a handy home defense carbine. Home defense for me would more likely be defending the chickens against coyotes and feral dogs, rather than prowling meth heads, and I want to make as little ruckus as possible. I have no experience with unsuppressed .300 AAC.
|
|
|
Post by William Swiger on Sept 13, 2023 9:49:01 GMT
I am sort of old school with the AR15 platform. Mine are chambered in 5.56 which also shoots 223. For a larger cartridge, I have some AR-10s chambered in 308 which of course will shoot the 7.62 NATO.
I have always looked at the best all-around semiauto rifle as the AK47 and variants. I have one of those chambered in 308 and another in 556 as well as the normal 7.62x39 ones.
The AK is a much more durable rifle in the field and I would only be shooting at a distance out to 300 yards with any rifle. I would agree the AR rifles are better at further out distances.
I also have a couple AR/AK hybrid rifles.
|
|
|
Post by nerdthenord on Sept 13, 2023 11:51:38 GMT
Sorry about your loss, Zen. IIRC, the M&P AR-15 in 5.56/.223 has a 1/9 twist rate, which is one reason I never got one. Doesn't matter too much, but it won't be as accurate with heavier bullets. Will still shoot 55 grain no problem though. The M16A1 was built around shooting 55 grain bullets with a 1/12 twist rate, after all. I like 1/7 and 1/8 (my personal AR's twist rate).
|
|
|
Post by nerdthenord on Sept 13, 2023 11:53:42 GMT
Oh, as for my thoughts on best AR-15 Caliber, I like the workhorse 55 grain .223 or 5.56 because it's dirt cheap as far as rifle ammo goes, allowing you to actually practice and train with it, and does it's job as well today as it did in the 50s and 60s.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Newport on Sept 15, 2023 3:59:32 GMT
Sorry about your loss, Zen. IIRC, the M&P AR-15 in 5.56/.223 has a 1/9 twist rate, which is one reason I never got one. Doesn't matter too much, but it won't be as accurate with heavier bullets. Will still shoot 55 grain no problem though. The M16A1 was built around shooting 55 grain bullets with a 1/12 twist rate, after all. I like 1/7 and 1/8 (my personal AR's twist rate).
|
|
|
Post by nerdthenord on Sept 15, 2023 16:08:21 GMT
Sorry about your loss, Zen. IIRC, the M&P AR-15 in 5.56/.223 has a 1/9 twist rate, which is one reason I never got one. Doesn't matter too much, but it won't be as accurate with heavier bullets. Will still shoot 55 grain no problem though. The M16A1 was built around shooting 55 grain bullets with a 1/12 twist rate, after all. I like 1/7 and 1/8 (my personal AR's twist rate). Interesting, hadn’t seen that particular chart. Seen others but not that one.
|
|
tera
Moderator
Posts: 1,658
|
Post by tera on Sept 15, 2023 16:55:44 GMT
Zen, my condolences. I know you've had many hard years but I hope we can be a place you can come to for some friendship. You know we're always happy to see you around.
Regarding your question, my simplified answer is that in terms of exterior and terminal ballistics subsonic .300 BLK is very similar to 9mm, whereas supersonic .300 BLK is similar to 7.62x39 (as most commonly seen in AK platforms).
Also, note that the ONLY mechanical difference between an AR-15 in .300 BLK and one in .223 Rem or 5.56 NATO is the barrel. That's it. Someone might try to "tune" towards one or the other, but Mr. Silvers (who designed and codified the cartridge with SAAMI) wanted to get our military something that slapped harder with minimal need for logistics change. I have no idea why it wasn't adopted when all you need is a barrel swap and you can cut down 5.56 brass and neck them to load the .30 cal projectiles (already in the supply chain for the m240 and other NATO standard arms).
NOTE: This means it is extremely important to keep your AR pattern firearms and their ammo stored separately, and be careful at the range. You can mechanically chamber and fire .223/5.56 in a .300 BLK barrel and (sometimes, depending on the projectile) vice versa. You will likely be ok shooting one .22 caliber cartridge in a .30 caliber barrel, but it's not good for the barrel or lady luck to do it on purpose. If you manage to chamber a .300 BLK in a .22 caliber barrel (.223/5.56) that bullet will plug itself at the throat, going essentially nowhere, and you will overpressure the receiver potentially leading to catastrophic failure (upper go boom). You can Google pictures of where people have done this.
Ok, scary stuff our of the way... full disclosure, I love the .300 BLK cartridge.
Some nuances about suppressed .300 BLK. I have found .300 BLK, suppressed, to be quieter to the ear than a suppressed Colt pattern 10" barrel 9mm carbine. Recoil is also extremely tame, on par with 9mm. Subsonic 208gr A-MAX seems to slap the target audibly harder than 147gr 9mm sub-loads. So, subsonic .300 BLK was intended to fill the roll of an MP5, but with slightly better energy on target.
Supersonic .300 BLK drops and hits very similar to 7.62x39 (like an AK-47, basically). For most practical engagements, that's fine. So, why not just get an AK or an AR-15 chambered in 7.62x39? Two reasons. AKs are famously reliable (because they have loose tolerances). The loose tolerances tend to have a negative affect on accuracy. There may be some US manufacturers building to tighter tolerances to overcome this, but that may come at the cost of being pickier on what ammo works well. ARAKs, or AR-15s chambered in 7.62x39 tend to be more accurate but have two issues. First, unlike .300 BLK, there are many non-standard parts that have to be swapped. Second, but related, there's not much meat to an AR-15 Bolt. When you open up the bolt-face to accept the 7.62x39 rim you leave less metal to handle higher pressures, so bolt cracking and failure is a not-so-uncommon issue with ARAKs and most folks always keep a spare bolt on hand. Finally, the interior ballistics differ. That is, .300 BLK was designed to get the projectile to more or less the same velocity as an AK would, but out of an 8" barrel. .300 BLK was meant to be SBR/sub-gun sized. Even with a suppressor, it would be about the same size of an AK or smaller, but hit just as hard.
Finally, remember how I said the only mechanical difference was the barrel? Well, that means you can go back and forth between shooting supersonic and subsonic loads out of the same gun by doing nothing more than changing magazines. You should even be able to load the same magazine alternating between the two and not experience a jam. That's what makes it versatile and appealing to the special forces community. Suppressed MP5 quiet to hitting as hard as an AK-47 with a mag swap, mid mission, had strong appeal.
Only negative of .300 BLK I could cite is higher cost per shot. It does drop like an AK, but for most practical purposes that's fine. If you need something that flies flatter, you probably also need something that hits harder than 5.56, so we're talking Grendel or other cartridges possibly requiring more part changes.
Sorry for the rambles, I hope some of that was helpful.
|
|