PDA

View Full Version : 7.62 x 40 WT vs. .300 BLK


Rusty Shackleford
February 1st, 2012, 11:41 PM
Alright, so I've been bitten by the AR bug. I'm now doing am upper build. I was perusing the interwebz and stumbled across this:

http://www.wilsoncombat.com/762x40WT.htm#Overview

I'm intrigued. More case capacity than the .300 blk, .30 bullet, ballistically equivalent to the 6.8spc at point blank range (?).

Seems like a good package if you're not interested in going suppressed.

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts and analysis.

Maybe I'll have to build one of each.

clandestine
February 1st, 2012, 11:48 PM
The .300 BLK will kill that round before the weirdo caliber fanboys go all gay for it.

Rusty Shackleford
February 1st, 2012, 11:51 PM
The .300 BLK will kill that round before the weirdo caliber fanboys go all gay for it.

OK but why is it more of a weirdo caliber then the .300 blk?

clandestine
February 2nd, 2012, 12:00 AM
OK but why is it more of a weirdo caliber then the .300 blk?

Popularity is all I mean. I consider all of the alternative AR calibers worthless. If I have an AR its .308, 5.56, or .22LR.

I dont expect anyone to agree with me.

Sev
February 2nd, 2012, 12:38 AM
OK but why is it more of a weirdo caliber then the .300 blk?

has it been adopted by ammo manufacturers as a caliber they produce?
Have other companies started making uppers or barrels for it?

I've heard almost nothing about the Wilson Combat caliber, so i don't know

But like clandestine said, 300 has the popularity right now. Unless there's something DRASTICALLY special or better about the WC round over the 300 blackout, 300 will win

Markp
February 2nd, 2012, 04:25 AM
Alright, so I've been bitten by the AR bug. I'm now doing am upper build. I was perusing the interwebz and stumbled across this:

Seems like a good package if you're not interested in going suppressed.
Maybe I'll have to build one of each.


The barrel is cheap enough that it's almost tempting to do just that, and as you note, for a non-suppressed (or even suppressed supersonic) build this seems to offer some good overall performance. Unfortunately the twist rate seems to be more of an issue with heavier sub-sonic bullets requiring a 1:8 twist and lighter bullets liking a 1:12.

Wilson states that the mags need to be modified to work, which is a little annoying, but livable. The .300 Blkout does not need any magazine modification that I know of. The extra case capacity of the .300 WT offers some interesting possibilities.

Mark

Af_catfish
February 2nd, 2012, 04:31 AM
Popularity is all I mean. I consider all of the alternative AR calibers worthless. If I have an AR its .308, 5.56, or .22LR.

I dont expect anyone to agree with me.

I agree with you. This is getting out of hand.

sykesville
February 2nd, 2012, 06:34 AM
Don't leave the Wilson Combat page. The 6.8mm is a hunting caliber. It requires no magwell modification or anything else. Plug and play on the same lower 5.56 or 6.8. (Even WC stated that if you couldn't decide between 6.8 and 7.62x40WT, get the 6.8) If you buy a complete Wilson Combat rifle, that lower is outfitted with their superb trigger unit, and of course made with legendary Wilson Combat precision and quality, lifetime guaranteed not only for original buyer.
No, I don't have stock. Yes, I got WC.

boatbod
February 2nd, 2012, 07:48 AM
Popularity is all I mean. I consider all of the alternative AR calibers worthless. If I have an AR its .308, 5.56, or .22LR.

I dont expect anyone to agree with me.

Yup, the .300BLK is getting as much attention as the 6.8 did a couple years back. It's probably just another fad as there are plenty of guns already available in .30

Hopalong
February 2nd, 2012, 08:43 AM
Popularity is all I mean. I consider all of the alternative AR calibers worthless. If I have an AR its .308, 5.56, or .22LR.

I dont expect anyone to agree with me.

Subsonic .300 BLK on a suppressor host has some clear advantages over subsonic 5.56, but other than that? Yeah, I'm not convinced yet. Because it's relatively similar to 5.56 (same mags at same capacity, same basic cartridge dimensions, can be formed from 5.56 brass, etc.) I'd say overall that this one has the most potential, but I still have no idea how well it'll do.

(I largely agree with you on other rounds though.)

BenL
February 2nd, 2012, 08:55 AM
Yup, the .300BLK is getting as much attention as the 6.8 did a couple years back. It's probably just another fad as there are plenty of guns already available in .30

Except with the Blackout, brass and bullets will always be available. (unless .223 and .308 disappears, as well.)

Russ D
February 2nd, 2012, 10:22 AM
IMHO the 300 BLK will not only stay around, but will settle in with something like 40% of all new AR sales will be in 300 blk.

clandestine
February 2nd, 2012, 10:27 AM
IMHO the 300 BLK will not only stay around, but will settle in with something like 40% of all new AR sales will be in 300 blk.

I agree completely. If I ever do an alternate AR caliber the .300BLK will be it.

The ammo will always be easy to manufacture and the weapon and mags require no proprietary parts or mods. Just a special barrel and DONE.

Cant get much better than that.

sailskidrive
February 2nd, 2012, 10:29 AM
I don't think the 300 AAC is going away any time soon. The 6.8 never caught on because it is based upon the 30 Remington cartridge case; while not a rare offering it certainly doesn't enjoy the popularity or plethora of already existent tooling used to crank out the 5.56/.223. It's very easy for a manufacturer of 5.56 to retool for the 300AAC. Not to mention there are already millions of magazines in existence supporting the cartridge. Ever look at the 6.8SPC ammo offerings on the shelf at a sporting goods store? It's like shopping for performance parts for a Volvo on line.

Now that they've stuffed a .30 cal bullet into a 5.56 casing, I'm waiting for someone to stick a 5.56 bullet in a .308 casing. It's kind of like a wife swap.. :roll eyes:

sailskidrive
February 2nd, 2012, 10:31 AM
IMHO the 300 BLK will not only stay around, but will settle in with something like 40% of all new AR sales will be in 300 blk.

Russ, I want my crystal ball back. :lol2:

erwos
February 2nd, 2012, 10:43 AM
IMHO the 300 BLK will not only stay around, but will settle in with something like 40% of all new AR sales will be in 300 blk.
Not a chance in the world. I remember back when 6.8mm was the new hotness... everyone thought the whole universe was going to use it. Fast-forward two years later, it's a reloader's cartridge... and that was with broad industry support, too. (6.8mm Remington SPC, anyone?)

What's .300BLK really good for? AR-15 SBRs. Those are not floating about in the civilian world in great numbers, and the military is not going to be buying boatloads of .300BLK any time soon. The limited market alone is going to keep sales of .300BLK way, way, way below .223.

Rusty Shackleford
February 2nd, 2012, 10:47 AM
I agree completely. If I ever do an alternate AR caliber the .300BLK will be it.

The ammo will always be easy to manufacture and the weapon and mags require no proprietary parts or mods. Just a special barrel and DONE.

Cant get much better than that.

See, that's it though. the .300WT uses the same brass as 5.56 and seems easier to manufacture than .300 blk. The .300WT has more case capacity then the .300 blk. It uses the same mags but need a little modifications. It is ballistically similar to the 6.8. Perhaps my lack of familiarity of the 6.8 is clouding my understanding but what's not to like? Seems like it is everything the .300 blk is and some more.

hvymax
February 2nd, 2012, 10:55 AM
I agree completely. If I ever do an alternate AR caliber the .300BLK will be it.

The ammo will always be easy to manufacture and the weapon and mags require no proprietary parts or mods. Just a special barrel and DONE.

Cant get much better than that.

Plenty of fire formable brass as well. The buttload of 30cal options out there with the increse in firepower make this a no brainer.

BenL
February 2nd, 2012, 11:11 AM
What's .300BLK really good for?

Essentially, it's a 30 caliber rifle in a lightweight platform. It can be a tack-driving 123gr supersonic shooter or a 220gr subsonic that, with quality suppressor, sounds like a mouse fart but still has the same energy at 300 yards as a .45ACP at point blank range. It uses the same bolts and mags as a .223, the ammo is readily available at most gun shops, and it's parent case (a 223) and its bullets (308) can be found everywhere.

I tend to agree with Russ; a few years from now, it will be a big chunk of the AR market.

Forest
February 2nd, 2012, 11:20 AM
The .300 BLK will kill that round before the weirdo caliber fanboys go all gay for it.

Agreed. The .300BLK is a commercialized .300 whisper (which has had it's followers for quite a while). The .300 Black makes it an industry supported mainstream round.

The 7.62x40 was a wildcat that the tinkerers have been playing around with for a couple of years (big thread on it's developement on ARFcom). It's even more of a nitch round than the .300.

Forest
February 2nd, 2012, 11:28 AM
It is ballistically similar to the 6.8.
Perhaps my lack of familiarity of the 6.8 is clouding my understanding but what's not to like? Seems like it is everything the .300 blk is and some more.

The .300 BLK is easier to buy/use as magazine mods are not needed AND it works well with subsonics. It's a decent general purpose short range (200M and under) round.

It launches 110gr projectiles between 100 and 150fps slower than the 6.8 so it's really not up in the 6.x class of performance.

More like a bridging round between the 6.x class rounds and the .300. It will give you more useable range (with supersonic bullets) but if you need more range you might as well step up to the 6.5G or 6.8.

Indiana Jones
February 2nd, 2012, 11:32 AM
I hope it doesn't, but I keep feeling like .300blk is going to end up like 6.8. Everyone tells me it's not but I still don't see it selling anywhere near 5.56 or 7.62. I hope it stays, another alternative is really nice to have especially since you only need a barrel. If you have a 5.56 SBR that is not registered as "Multi" can you legally swap barrels (same length) to shoot .300blk or does it need to say "Multi" on lower and documents.

erwos
February 2nd, 2012, 11:33 AM
Essentially, it's a 30 caliber rifle in a lightweight platform. It can be a tack-driving 123gr supersonic shooter or a 220gr subsonic that, with quality suppressor, sounds like a mouse fart but still has the same energy at 300 yards as a .45ACP at point blank range.
Again: suppressors, SBRs, etc. These are all NFA items. They're awesome, but they are a miniscule fraction of the market.

Also, you want a good 30 cal platform?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-10

This brings me to my follow-on point: .308 is much cheaper than .300BLK. .300BLK is not going to be going mainstream any time soon at 60 cents per round (and usually more). .308 will do anything .300BLK does better, excepting the NFA-related stuff (which, as I've mentioned above, is not a sizable portion of the market).

It uses the same bolts and mags as a .223, the ammo is readily available at most gun shops, and it's parent case (a 223) and its bullets (308) can be found everywhere.
You're vastly overestimating the market for reloaders. It's a nice touch for future usage and development, but it's basically irrelevant as far as market share. We're talking about a prediction that it would take almost HALF the AR-15 market. Reloading and NFA usage gets you 4%, not 40%.

And before I get branded a hater, I would positively LOVE for .300BLK to get cheap and available enough for me to use in it my SBR. But it's not there yet, and I sincerely doubt it ever will be. Just my opinion, nothing personal.

Forest
February 2nd, 2012, 11:39 AM
I hope it doesn't, but I keep feeling like .300blk is going to end up like 6.8. Everyone tells me it's not but I still don't see it selling anywhere near 5.56 or 7.62.

The 7.62x51 don't sell that well, and while 7.62x39 support has grown it still (after 30 some years) isn't at the level of 6.8 support.

What the .300 has the best intial offering support of ANY cartridge due the parent company (Ceberus). It will give the improved terminal performance that many want (especially for hunting) with a potentially lower ammo cost than the 6.x rounds. Indeed as of right now less than a year after it rollout it has the lower cost factory ammo available ($11.99 for a box/20 FMJ).

Wide industry support, reasonable ammo costs, fits in the smaller/lighter AR-15 platform, while having the terminal performance needed to take down deer and hogs at typical Eastern/woodlands hunting ranges? That's a winner IMHO.

erwos
February 2nd, 2012, 11:41 AM
Wide industry support, reasonable ammo costs, fits in the smaller/lighter AR-15 platform, while having the terminal performance needed to take down deer and hogs at typical Eastern/woodlands hunting ranges? That's a winner IMHO.
That's what they said about 6.8 Remington SPC. Remington is owned by Cerberus, FYI.

Forest
February 2nd, 2012, 11:42 AM
.308 will do anything .300BLK does better, .

Carry a .300 BLK AR-15 rifle all day, then a .308 AR-10 - then come back and tells us which one was more the joy to carry on an all-day hunt. ;)

'Better' is a subjective term, but if I were going out hunting - where I'm not going to take a shot much over 200y the .300 BLK is 'better' as hunting ammo costs ARE THE SAME, magazines are cheaper for the .300, the .300 is lighter, shorter (even with the same barrel length), has less muzzle blast and recoil.

Forest
February 2nd, 2012, 11:47 AM
That's what they said about 6.8 Remington SPC. Remington is owned by Cerberus, FYI.

No they didn't say that about the 6.8.

BTW Remington was not owned by Ceberus at the time the 6.8 came out and had nothing to do with it's development. It was merely the commercial company that was willing to get it accepted by SAAMI.

They (Remington) ****ed up the chamber drawings submitted to SAAMI which gave many users bad results and problems with MV and chamber pressure.

Companies like PRI which were following the original AMU chamber designs didn't have problems, but companies that followed Remington's submitted chamber had problems with some ammo.

Remington was the problem - just as they messed up the .30 RAR (again a Remington problem).

This time Remington is the servant instead of playing the 'master' and I'm betting the management at Ceberus won't allow them to sabotage this effort as they have others in the past.

erwos
February 2nd, 2012, 11:55 AM
I actually think the hunting scenario isn't a bad one, but is it really being marketed towards hunters very much? The marketing seems to mostly be "tactical" and "NFA".

As for Remington, I very much doubt they were out to screw themselves on any of their previous efforts. Simply put, there just wasn't much of a market for the value proposition of 6.8mm or .30 RAR. Why you think .300BLK is so much different, I'm still not sure. Technical greatness just doesn't always carry the day in the market.

Rusty Shackleford
February 2nd, 2012, 11:58 AM
I actually think the hunting scenario isn't a bad one, but is it really being marketed towards hunters very much? The marketing seems to mostly be "tactical" and "NFA".

As for Remington, I very much doubt they were out to screw themselves on any of their previous efforts. Simply put, there just wasn't much of a market for the value proposition of 6.8mm or .30 RAR. Why you think .300BLK is so much different, I'm still not sure. Technical greatness just doesn't always carry the day in the market.

Believe it or not, that's part of the reason I am looking at these rounds. Where I hunt, it gets close in. Most of my kills have been sub 75 yds. Now, most bolt actions do the job just fine but I'm always on the lookout for an alternative. Hunting with an AR sounds like a lot of fun.

olddawg
February 2nd, 2012, 12:04 PM
I'm enjoying this exchange. Its informative and most importantly civil. Thanks guys.;)

erwos
February 2nd, 2012, 12:11 PM
I'm enjoying this exchange. Its informative and most importantly civil. Thanks guys.;)
Yeah, and you know, I could be wrong. Maybe this time next year, I'll be posting pictures of my sexy new .300BLK SBR upper and raving about the cheap factory ammo I'm putting through it.

olddawg
February 2nd, 2012, 12:29 PM
I think a lot of us are sitting on the fence. I'm trying to decide what to build next. So I'm watching threads like this closely.

drking2
February 2nd, 2012, 12:38 PM
I'm watching also, I have 4 lowers to build out this year

aquaman
February 2nd, 2012, 12:58 PM
Popularity is all I mean. I consider all of the alternative AR calibers worthless. If I have an AR its .308, 5.56, or .22LR.

I dont expect anyone to agree with me.

Is .300 blackout the new 6.5spc?

Hopalong
February 2nd, 2012, 01:17 PM
I think a lot of us are sitting on the fence. I'm trying to decide what to build next. So I'm watching threads like this closely.

This is me. I'm planning on at least one AR this year and I'm getting into suppressors, so I'm really torn between 5.56 and .300 BLK. I'll probably just end up doing both....

Forest
February 2nd, 2012, 01:40 PM
I actually think the hunting scenario isn't a bad one, but is it really being marketed towards hunters very much? The marketing seems to mostly be "tactical" and "NFA".

True enough. But the 6.8SPC was originally marketed toward the 'tactical' crowd as well - but found a strong following with the hunters. Indeed it was the hunters that introduced the SPC2 chamber.


As for Remington, I very much doubt they were out to screw themselves on any of their previous efforts
It's corporate incompetance. We could go through the whole thing, but yeah they continually have screwed the pooch on both calibers.

Simply put, there just wasn't much of a market for the value proposition of 6.8mm or .30 RAR.
There is a market. The .30 in particular was aimed at hunters (since there were no 'hi cap' magazines for it. But by then the 6.8 and 6.5 had grabbed most of the AR-15 medium game hunting market.



Why you think .300BLK is so much different, .
It uses the same magazines & bolts so it helps keep introductory costs down. Guys that didn't want to buy calibers specific magazines (especially at two to four times the cost of a standard AR magazine) will take a look at this.

It's being introduced out the door with a variety of ammo including inexpensive FMJ.

Lower costs will get the attention of a larger market.

For example when the 6.8 was first introduced there were only two companies producing FMJ. Remmington and SSA. Remmington promised $14-15/box FMJ but at most stores they ended up selling it for the same prices as the match OTMs (around $20-$22/box). SSA produced a lower cost FMJ - but because Remmington ****ed up the SAAMI drawings if you tried running the ammo in a SAAMI chambered rifle you'd end up with shavings off the TMJ which would eventually result in pressure spikes. SSA had to withdraw the ammo.

So untill Tula comes out with their steel cased ammo this summer the only way to get 'cheap' 6.8 was to reload.

Russ D
February 2nd, 2012, 02:04 PM
There is a huge market of AR owners that have been waiting to get behind a new cartridge for years, but until now none had true mainstream support. To me it's purely a timing issue. The time is perfect right now for the 300 BLK and now there is a huge truck load of money pushing it.

Nemesis
February 2nd, 2012, 04:25 PM
imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...thats all i have to say :D

Russ D
February 2nd, 2012, 04:34 PM
imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...thats all i have to say :D

I like to think of it as best of both worlds.

Nemesis
February 2nd, 2012, 04:41 PM
I like to think of it as best of both worlds.

indeed, it is.

i still think 300 blk will take the lead in popularity though, it got a head start.

Sirex
February 2nd, 2012, 05:41 PM
I'm not buying an AR until one is chambered in 7.62x54r.

mopar92
February 2nd, 2012, 06:01 PM
I'm not buying an AR until one is chambered in 7.62x54r.

So what you didn't like mine?

Markp
February 2nd, 2012, 07:40 PM
I'm not buying an AR until one is chambered in 7.62x54r.

LOL, just re-chamber an AR-10 is what I am thinking!!!

teratos
February 2nd, 2012, 07:59 PM
I like the 300 BLK a lot. It is a potent round for hunting, All i have to do is swap out uppers on my AR and I can use my lower and mags "as-is". It can also be loaded in a sub-sonic flavor which I can fire through my 9mm suppressor (Multimount). What's not to like?

Kingjamez
February 2nd, 2012, 09:12 PM
I see the .300BLK growing in popularity and staying popular for two reasons:

1. As has been discussed, it is ridiculously easy to swap over to it. Bolt, and mag compatability are huge.

2. It's a great suppressed round. Don't under estimate the rise of suppressors. Sales of suppressors have skyrocketed in recent years as the price of a tax stamp continues to erode. I don't see that trend stopping any time soon. I believe that soon, most gun owners will own suppressors, and hope that one day it will be rude not to own one.
.300BLK is really the best suppressed solution for the AR platform, and that will be the deciding factor in its survival.

-Jim

Jimbob2.0
February 2nd, 2012, 09:28 PM
The reality is that .300 blackout hit the mark (or rebranded the mark from .300 whisper) in terms of market acceptance.

- Greater punch of the .30 round
-Uses a .30 bullet interchangable with other loads (e.g., 30-06, 30-40 etc)

- Uses existing mags
- Uses existing bolt
- Uses formed existing cases

Basically all the wonders that lead to a low production cost, good performing, easily reloadable round that fits the market. Smart move.

Everything else including my beloved 7.62*39 is a hobby round in the AR platform.

Sirex
February 2nd, 2012, 09:32 PM
So what you didn't like mine?

I liked your AR, it just didn't reek of urine and vodka, and make my chest hair stand on end. And my shoulder wasn't sore after shooting it. ARs are cute little guns:D

rsilvers
February 3rd, 2012, 07:40 AM
Not a chance in the world. I remember back when 6.8mm was the new hotness... everyone thought the whole universe was going to use it. Fast-forward two years later, it's a reloader's cartridge... and that was with broad industry support, too. (6.8mm Remington SPC, anyone?)

What's .300BLK really good for? AR-15 SBRs. Those are not floating about in the civilian world in great numbers, and the military is not going to be buying boatloads of .300BLK any time soon.

Quoted for posterity. What does 6.8 have to do with it? 6.8 has more expensive ammo, requires a custom bolt, custom magazines, does not hold 30 rounds, the military never adopted it, etc.

rsilvers
February 3rd, 2012, 07:42 AM
This brings me to my follow-on point: .308 is much cheaper than .300BLK. .300BLK is not going to be going mainstream any time soon at 60 cents per round (and usually more). .308 will do anything .300BLK does better, excepting the NFA-related stuff (which, as I've mentioned above, is not a sizable portion of the market).

308 does not even work in an AR15. That is the whole point - 300 BLK works in AR15s.

rsilvers
February 3rd, 2012, 07:44 AM
They (Remington) ****ed up the chamber drawings submitted to SAAMI which gave many users bad results and problems with MV and chamber pressure.

To be fair, the greater problem was barrel companies making bores that were smaller than SAAMI minimum cross-sectional area.

rsilvers
February 3rd, 2012, 07:47 AM
Why you think .300BLK is so much different, I'm still not sure.

Lower cost to get into. Brass is as little as 11 cents a case. 30 cal is the most popular bullet size. 30 rounds in normal magazines. Normal bolt. 40% cheaper ammo than 6.8. Also I am the project lead on it at AAC and I know what mistakes to avoid.

rsilvers
February 3rd, 2012, 07:50 AM
The Ballistic Research Facility of the FBI Academy in Quantico VA has completed its testing of Barnes 110 grain 300 AAC Blackout ammunition. They will furnish the test report to any Federal, State, or Local law enforcement agency that requests it, providing that the request is on official letterhead containing contact information (address and phone number). The request must be signed by a supervisor (Sgt. or higher) and the letter must contain the following statement: "The information is requested for official use and will not be disseminated outside our agency."

erwos
February 3rd, 2012, 08:03 AM
Quoted for posterity. What does 6.8 have to do with it? 6.8 has more expensive ammo, requires a custom bolt, custom magazines, does not hold 30 rounds, the military never adopted it, etc.
Your responses are taking my argument completely out of context. What I was arguing against was .300BLK getting 40% of the AR-15 market share in the near term. I was not arguing against .300BLK being a good round, or having a purpose, or even stick around commercially. By all means, I'd like it to stick around and get cheaper. But let's address this from my perspective. 6.8mm was the hotness two years ago. It fizzled out. That is the point of comparison. It is not entirely unreasonable to start there.

Reloading? Not really relevant to market share.

Compatible with existing uppers via rebarrel? Again, also not very relevant. How many people actually rebarrel their guns, versus buying new uppers or (more likely) buying new ones entirely?

Magazines? Well, you got me there. That's a nice feature. I still don't think it's make or break.

So, yes, quote me for posterity. For all of the above reasons, .300BLK will not be taking 40% of the AR-15 market in the next two years. If you're truly the project manager, you'll have the sales projections. Are you genuinely telling me that it's 40%+ of the AR-15 market in the next two years?

jimbobborg
February 3rd, 2012, 08:09 AM
Quoted for posterity. What does 6.8 have to do with it? 6.8 has more expensive ammo, requires a custom bolt, custom magazines, does not hold 30 rounds, the military never adopted it, etc.

Barrett's mags hold 30, I have three of them.

BenL
February 3rd, 2012, 09:05 AM
Prediction of Irony (TM): Erwos will own a Blackout in the next 5 years and it will be his favorite caliber.

:D

erwos
February 3rd, 2012, 09:39 AM
Prediction of Irony (TM): Erwos will own a Blackout in the next 5 years and it will be his favorite caliber.
Ha! Entirely possible. I really like .300BLK as an SBR and suppressor caliber, and I'm getting into those areas. Believe me, I'd like nothing better than to be wrong and be putting my 30 cents a round .300BLK downrange in a few years.

Hopalong
February 3rd, 2012, 09:41 AM
Prediction of Irony (TM): Clandestine will own a Blackout in the next 5 years and it will be his favorite caliber.

:D

Fixed it for ya. :innocent0

Rusty Shackleford
February 3rd, 2012, 10:41 AM
The Ballistic Research Facility of the FBI Academy in Quantico VA has completed its testing of Barnes 110 grain 300 AAC Blackout ammunition. They will furnish the test report to any Federal, State, or Local law enforcement agency that requests it, providing that the request is on official letterhead containing contact information (address and phone number). The request must be signed by a supervisor (Sgt. or higher) and the letter must contain the following statement: "The information is requested for official use and will not be disseminated outside our agency."

rsilvers, is the only difference between .300blk and .300WT the cartridge length. What is there to recommend one over the other?

BenL
February 3rd, 2012, 10:44 AM
rsilvers, is the only difference between .300blk and .300WT the cartridge length. What is there to recommend one over the other?

In the interest of complete disclosure...

"rsilvers" = Robert Silvers, AAC Research and Development Director

He birthed this beautiful baby. :D

Forest
February 3rd, 2012, 11:02 AM
To be fair, the greater problem was barrel companies making bores that were smaller than SAAMI minimum cross-sectional area.

The bigger issue was the chamber & case drawing screwup.

It was bad enough the Remington submitted design had less freebore and a much sharper angle where the neck transitions to the freebore, than the original chamber of the 5th SFG; but if you look at the drawings you can have a conditon where a case 'in spec' to the max dimensions would not fit in a chamber that was 'in spec' to the minium dimensions.

olddawg
February 3rd, 2012, 11:08 AM
In the interest of complete disclosure...

"rsilvers" = Robert Silvers, AAC Research and Development Director

He birthed this beautiful baby. :D

Pretty cool that he's hanging with us and sharing his expertise. :thumbsup:

Russ D
February 3rd, 2012, 01:07 PM
My whole estimate on the 40% is due to the fact that almost everyone who wants an ar15 right now already has one or two. When these people are getting back into the market for their next rifle, the 300 BLK will already be established with lots of options and cheap ammo. Then the only decision will be another 556 or a more capable hunting/sbr cartridge. I cannot see the 300blk not doing well in that scenerio.

AwesomeBill
February 3rd, 2012, 01:23 PM
I really need to stop reading these threads. Now i want to build a suppressed .300 BLK. My wife is going to kill me!!!

rsilvers
February 3rd, 2012, 04:19 PM
If you're truly the project manager, you'll have the sales projections. Are you genuinely telling me that it's 40%+ of the AR-15 market in the next two years?

No. I would not forecast that much. I do think it will be the #1 alternative centerfire rifle AR cartridge within the next year.

rsilvers
February 3rd, 2012, 04:23 PM
The bigger issue was the chamber & case drawing screwup.

It was bad enough the Remington submitted design had less freebore and a much sharper angle where the neck transitions to the freebore, than the original chamber of the 5th SFG; but if you look at the drawings you can have a conditon where a case 'in spec' to the max dimensions would not fit in a chamber that was 'in spec' to the minium dimensions.

That is the popular perception. Western Powders did a study and it was determined that the free bore being shortened only accounted for 1000 psi typical (1500 psi max) additional pressure and 20 fps typical (30 fps max) lost velocity. The greater problem were bores that had chrome plating without accounting for their thickness. Being under SAAMI minimum cross-sectional area is a big problem.

erwos
February 3rd, 2012, 04:36 PM
No. I would not forecast that much. I do think it will be the #1 alternative centerfire rifle AR cartridge within the next year.
I'll buy into that prediction.

rsilvers
February 3rd, 2012, 04:38 PM
rsilvers, is the only difference between .300blk and .300WT the cartridge length. What is there to recommend one over the other?

7.62x40mm is not a SAAMI round, so larger companies won't make products for it. There is one or maybe a few companies working on it, while 300 BLK has about 90 companies. 7.62x40mm has less of a taper, so it has to be fire-formed to make the brass in-spec if you start with 223 or 5.56mm brass - a very costly step for reloaders as it requires firing a bullet. The cartridge is not compatible with standard magazines unless you download them to lower capacity. It has a very short neck length, so there is, in my opinion, not enough bullet support. And while it is claimed to be 200+ fps faster than 300 BLK by some users - that is only if you load it to well over 55,000 psi. If loaded to the same 55,000 psi pressure as 300 BLK, then it is more like 85 fps faster with 125 grain bullets. While fans of it have said it is better if you want just supersonic ammo, I don't see it that way - for the reasons listed - even for just supersonic use.

Markp
February 3rd, 2012, 04:50 PM
Just curious, what would be the implications for a small (85 grain) pistol bullet or 100 grain rifle bullet. Would this be practical for a supersonic load with increased velocity in the .300 blkout?

Just curious (and a little stupid).

Rusty Shackleford
February 3rd, 2012, 05:00 PM
7.62x40mm is not a SAAMI round, so larger companies won't make products for it. There is one or maybe a few companies working on it, while 300 BLK has about 90 companies. 7.62x40mm has less of a taper, so it has to be fire-formed to make the brass in-spec if you start with 223 or 5.56mm brass - a very costly step for reloaders as it requires firing a bullet. The cartridge is not compatible with standard magazines unless you download them to lower capacity. It has a very short neck length, so there is, in my opinion, not enough bullet support. And while it is claimed to be 200+ fps faster than 300 BLK by some users - that is only if you load it to well over 55,000 psi. If loaded to the same 55,000 psi pressure as 300 BLK, then it is more like 85 fps faster with 125 grain bullets. While fans of it have said it is better if you want just supersonic ammo, I don't see it that way - for the reasons listed - even for just supersonic use.


Thanks! That was the info I was looking for. Good to know. Looks like I am going .300blk for my new build.

Rusty Shackleford
February 3rd, 2012, 05:01 PM
I really need to stop reading these threads. Now i want to build a suppressed .300 BLK. My wife is going to kill me!!!

Welcome to the jungle baby! This place will feed your addiction.

BradMacc82
February 3rd, 2012, 05:13 PM
Welcome to the jungle baby! This place will feed your addiction.

Yes it will, I just got done putting together my lower - minus buffer tube/stock - for my 300 Blk build. :D

Still haven't decided on barrel length - 10"pistol/sbr, or 16", decisions, decisions.

rsilvers
February 3rd, 2012, 06:46 PM
Just curious, what would be the implications for a small (85 grain) pistol bullet or 100 grain rifle bullet. Would this be practical for a supersonic load with increased velocity in the .300 blkout?

Just curious (and a little stupid).

The bullet would be too short to feed. 2.1 inches is the shortest OAL that is very reliable in an AR - same as 223. You can go shorter if reliability is less important, or if you are using a single shot or bolt-action rifle.

Markp
February 3rd, 2012, 07:10 PM
The bullet would be too short to feed. 2.1 inches is the shortest OAL that is very reliable in an AR - same as 223. You can go shorter if reliability is less important, or if you are using a single shot or bolt-action rifle.

Awesome, thanks... I plan on running only heavier sub-sonic loads, but it's nice to know 2.1 is the lower limit for reliable feeding!

Mark

teratos
February 3rd, 2012, 07:19 PM
This has turned into a great thread. I have a lower I was wondering what to do with.....now I know. Looks like more paperwork off to the BATF......

Kingjamez
February 3rd, 2012, 07:24 PM
Once I saw how easy it is to convert .223 brass into .300BLK, I too knew that my next AR will be 30 caliber.

-Jim

robmints
February 3rd, 2012, 08:56 PM
If you look at the barrel group buy thread, look at how many blk barrels are being asked for. Kind of amazing to me. I have tried to avoid all the AR hype but I can't. First time AR buyer, 300blk for me, just waiting on the lowers to come in.

reynolds25
February 4th, 2012, 08:34 AM
One more vote for 300 blackout. Easy to convert and quiet when suppressed

Forest
February 4th, 2012, 11:16 AM
I really need to stop reading these threads. Now i want to build a suppressed .300 BLK. My wife is going to kill me!!!

I'll second this. I was planning on a SBR 6.8 to go along with my SPR, but the allure of using a smaller/lighter 9mm handgun supressor is tough to ignore.