What’s with the 300 blackout stigma?

[mcb]

I don't have a suppressor. I don't reload. I already have 7.62x39 for my AK. For me, .300 blk is unnecessary and expensive.

Seriously, though, factory ammo in .300 blk costs 2-3x more than 7.62x39 or 5.56.

You're comparing a relatively old and very widely used military cartridge with tons of mil-surplus and overseas cheap (steel cased or otherwise) suppliers in the market place to a relatively new cartridge with minimal military use and thus almost no surplus in the market to drive the price down. I bet the profit margin on 7.62x39 is pretty thin in today's market. For better or worst the hype/performance is making the 300 BO a relatively high margin cartridge. Demand is high, and apparently the market is bearing the price. The price will go down as demand goes down and/or supply goes up.

As a reloader, that wanted (and now has) a suppressor and a heap of AR parts lying around 300 BO made more sense for me than 7.62 x39.

 

[JR24]

Yeah, I doubt I'd have gotten into .300 BLK if I didnt reload. But since I do I love it and shoot it far more often than my .223.

Haven't had a chance to shoot one with it yet, but with 110s it's by far my favorite "walkin' around" deer rifle since where I walk there isnt a shot longer than 100 yards anyway.

 

[mavracer]

Problem with the blackout is two fold first it was introduced at a bad time shortly after it really hit the market Sandy Hook happened good bye to the promise of cheap ammo.
Second it was really never meant to replace the 5.56 or 7.62 carbine in the arsenal it was meant to replace the PCC 9mm ie MP5 and put it on a much more even footing with the carbine. This was for the public hurt very bad by the first problem.

For a guy that reloads like myself it's perfect in this role I have no desire for a 9mm SBR or carbine.

 

[doubleh]

I'll confess to looking at this caliber with some interest and doing some research to boot. The most interesting thing I found is that WW296 is a powder that can be used for reloading it. I have about 7 pounds of this that I will never shoot up. I haven't throw the option of getting an upper for it out of the door yet. Yes, if I do twist off and get one the upper and magazines will be marked where I won't confuse them. I'll paint the rail on the upper and mags red or something like that.

 

[CraigC]

You're comparing a relatively old and very widely used military cartridge with tons of mil-surplus and overseas cheap (steel cased or otherwise) suppliers in the market place to a relatively new cartridge with minimal military use and thus almost no surplus in the market to drive the price down.

And also comparing it to the cheapest crap that still goes bang out of the 5.56 or 7.62x39. No cartridge can compete with that sort of economy. It's a silly comparison, the .300 is not intended or suitable for cheap blasting. Neither is the .375H&H but nobody complains about it. Not to mention that the 7.62x39 is not applicable to heavy bullet subsonic loads and subsonic 5.56 is .22LR.

That said, the cheap ammo for the .300BO is relatively cheap and it's relatively good but where it really is shines is when handloaded where it can be as cheap or expensive as you want it to be.

 

[Jeff H]

And also comparing it to the cheapest crap that still goes bang out of the 5.56 or 7.62x39. No cartridge can compete with that sort of economy. It's a silly comparison, the .300 is not intended or suitable for cheap blasting.

That said, the cheap ammo for the .300BO is relatively cheap and it's relatively good but where it really is shines is when handloaded where it can be as cheap or expensive as you want it to be.

I'm going to challenge that statement that .300BO isn't suitable for cheap blasting. With cheap 147 grain pulled 308 bullets or even cheaper lead bullets, I can load 300BO cheaper than I can load 7.62x39. After all, it uses a handgun powder which makes it very economical.

Of course, that only is true if you are a handloader.

<--- That is my 300BO in my avatar

 

[reddog81]

And also comparing it to the cheapest crap that still goes bang out of the 5.56 or 7.62x39. No cartridge can compete with that sort of economy. It's a silly comparison, the .300 is not intended or suitable for cheap blasting. Neither is the .375H&H but nobody complains about it. Not to mention that the 7.62x39 is not applicable to heavy bullet subsonic loads and subsonic 5.56 is .22LR.

That said, the cheap ammo for the .300BO is relatively cheap and it's relatively good but where it really is shines is when handloaded where it can be as cheap or expensive as you want it to be.

How is .300 not intended or suitable for cheap blasting? It seems like it would be a great round for cheap blasting if the ammo existed. The problem is that the ammo cost twice as much. You can list a dozen reasons why it costs more but in the end none of that matters. When it comes down to it the only thing most customers care about the fact that it cost so much more. If you could buy rounds for $.30 a piece it would be a much stronger rival against 5.56. That's probably the biggest impediment to it's success and the reason for much of the stigma against it.

 

[JR24]

I'm going to challenge that statement that .300BO isn't suitable for cheap blasting. With cheap 147 grain pulled 308 bullets or even cheaper lead bullets, I can load 300BO cheaper than I can load 7.62x39. After all, it uses a handgun powder which makes it very economical.

Of course, that only is true if you are a handloader.

<--- That is my 300BO in my avatar

You know? That's an idea. I have a few hundred of the 147 grain surplus Winchester 7.62 that can barely hold 4" at 100 that I was debating what to do with.

Maybe I'll just pull em for .300 blasters and then use the brass for my .308 handloads. Waste the powder, but still 2 birds one stone.

 

[Jeff H]

You know? That's an idea. I have a few hundred of the 147 grain surplus Winchester 7.62 that can barely hold 4" at 100 that I was debating what to do with.

Maybe I'll just pull em for .300 blasters and then use the brass for my .308 handloads. Waste the powder, but still 2 birds one stone.

Yep, and if you keep your eye on the classifieds here and what Jake at RMR has, you can scoop up some good deals of the 147s. I'm sitting on about 750 of them at the minute. Those will last me a while since I do way more pistol shooting than rifle.

Found these also although I haven't tried them yet.

http://missouribullet.com/details.php?prodId=212&category=20&secondary=36

 

[CraigC]

Let's try actually reading my entire post.

And also comparing it to the cheapest crap (factory ammo) that still goes bang out of the 5.56 or 7.62x39. No cartridge can compete with that sort of economy (still talking factory ammo). It's a silly comparison, the .300 is not intended or suitable for cheap blasting (still talking factory ammo). Neither is the .375H&H but nobody complains about it. Not to mention that the 7.62x39 is not applicable to heavy bullet subsonic loads and subsonic 5.56 is .22LR.

That said, the cheap ammo for the .300BO is relatively cheap and it's relatively good but where it really is shines is when handloaded where it can be as cheap or expensive as you want it to be. (now we're talking handloads)

 

[CoalTrain49]

300 BLK is a pretty versatile cartridge for military applications, the reason it was developed. I'm not seeing much use for it in the civilian population. Most rifles chambered for 300 BLK have 1/7 twist barrels which is far from optimal for 125 gr bullet, 1/15 would be a lot better for 110-135 gr bullets. Then it really shines when compared with the 7.62 x 39.

If I were building a 300 I wouldn't mess around with a 1/7 BLK barrel. I would buy a Wilson 300 HAMR 1/15 barrel. You would then have what you suggest, a very usable 308 caliber rifle.

300 HAM’R
16.25” Barrel
Sierra 110gr HP 2600FPS MV, 1651FP ME
Sierra 125gr SBT 2520FPS MV, 1763FP ME
Sierra 135gr HP Varminter 2400FPS MV, 1727FP ME
Hornady 150gr SST 2240FPS MV, 1671FP ME


7.62×39
16.25” Barrel
Remington 125gr Cor-Lokt 2365FPS MV, 1552FP ME
Winchester 150gr Razorback XT 2056FPS MV, 1408FP ME

 

[mavracer]

All of my Blackout barrels have been 1 in 8" twist, and all have shot my 125gr load just fine.

 

[CoalTrain49]

All of my Blackout barrels have been 1 in 8" twist, and all have shot my 125gr load just fine.

If 1/8 would have been optimal for 125 I doubt that Wilson would have gone to 1/15 with their hamr. They build their own barrels so they can put any twist they want to in a barrel. 1/8 has to be used for the longer heavier bullets that 300 BLK was designed for. The OP was comparing 125 gr BLK to the 7.62 x 39. The 1/7 or 1/8 twist is for use with heavier subsonic bullets. If you're going to shoot lighter bullets why not just get a barrel with the appropriate twist. How many people are going to be shooting subsonic with a 300 BLK. The ballistics suck and it's expensive to shoot unless you reload.

 

[pressure]

How many people are going to be shooting subsonic with a 300 BLK. The ballistics suck and it's expensive.

My daughters like shooting subsonic and so do I. I guess it just matters what game you're doing. All those AR skills and gadgets transfer instantly so from that perspective it's very cheap and my handloads are not expensive. I don't intend to ever load supersonic for 300.

 

[hdwhit]

beeenbag asked:
"...how come there are so many quick to dismiss the 300 blackout, when in the 125g flavor, it rivals the Russian round very closely?"

It seems to me that while the 300BLK can be compared to the 7.62x39, with a short cartridge firing a light 30 caliber bullet at (comparatively) slow velocities, the natural analog in this part of the world is to see the 300BLK as the AR world's answer to the M-1 Carbine and that dooms it to share that storied cartridge's reputation.

 

[CoalTrain49]

It seems to me that while the 300BLK can be compared to the 7.62x39, with a short cartridge firing a light 30 caliber bullet at (comparatively) slow velocities, the natural analog in this part of the world is to see the 300BLK as the AR world's answer to the M-1 Carbine and that dooms it to share that storied cartridge's reputation.

If you look at the tests for the 110 gr HAMR you have about 700 fps more than a 30 Carbine. That's substantial. Plus the 30 Carbine is very limited to bullet weights. It isn't that great of a cartridge. I know, I reload for a 44 Inland. I would much prefer a 300 BLK or 300 HAMR with the appropriate twist and chamber for lighter bullets.

Eventually we'll get all of this sorted out. Barrels designed to shoot 110-150 gr bullets will become more common, then you truly will have replaced the 30 carbine.

 

[mcb]

The twist rate is a bit over blown. No doubt with 110-125gr bullet 1: 15 twist is more appropriate and probably a touch more accurate than the fast twist most 300 BO has but at realistic ranges I and I suspect most users are going to use our 300 BO at, over-stabilization of the bullet by a 1: 8 or 1: 7 twist barrel is not much of an issue. I am still shooting a bit over minute of angle at 200 yards with Barnes 110gr TAC-TX out of my 1: 7 16-inch barrel while still stabilizing the super long all copper 220gr Maker bullet. The Maker bullet is longer than the empty case and designed for 300 BO sub-sonic expansion. I like the flexibility of 300 BO. 300 Ham'r has little interest for me since is removes half of why I enjoy 300 BO, suppressed sub-sonic.

 

[mavracer]

CoalTrain49, you pretty much exemplify the stigma of the Blackout, much like the M1 Carbine it is SO good at what is a secondary role that people focus on it's shortcomings in that roll.
As to the twist too fast (groups open up aasmidge) isn' near the problem too slow isi( bullets lose stability and tumble) and I as I'm sure many blackout owners am not interested in the smidge better it would shoot slowing the twist down to give up the ability to shoot subs.
Besides as I said I used my blackout as intended it doesn't replace my 5.56 Carbine or rifle, so 1.3- 1.5 moa is plenty good enough.

 

[jmorris]

...the 300BLK as the AR world's answer to the M-1 Carbine and that dooms it to share that storied cartridge's reputation.

I don’t really see that one, I think most AR owners never ask about the WW II veteran. A few did though and Olympic made 30 carbine uppers for awhile.

I think the success of the 300 blk was the push behind it. After all it had been around for years without much success before AAC. That and I think anything with a cool name sells these days.

The reputation angle is an interesting one having always been fond of the BR rounds I have wondered in the past why the .30 AR was a dud when it was so close to them. Guess they should have named it the 30 hogslayer...

 

[illinoisburt]

300 BLK is a pretty versatile cartridge for military applications, the reason it was developed. I'm not seeing much use for it in the civilian population.

Not really. The whole concept of the 30-in-a-5.56 was a quirk of the old military high power match rules which required 30 caliber rifles to compete. A lot of younger service members (vietnam era) wanted to use M16 or AR platform instead of the older WWI and WWII rifles. At the time the older guys who did not much care for the "poodle shooter" objected to changing the rules, so a simple 30 caliber barrel swap came up and these guys began winning the competitions using converted 5.56 rifles. Times changed, the rules changed, but we already had a number of wildcats which had become somewhat popular and barrel manufacturers were turning out 30 calibers, so we watched as various companies attempted to standardize and come up with useful applications. The fact that the blackout rose to the top of the bunch to it's current popularity was really a story of the simplicity of a barrel change and reawakening of the suppressor market where the round works pretty well. It was never intended to replace or supplant an existing service cartridge.

So although it might happen to be close to 762x39 in specs, that was more coincidence than anything else. There wasn't much interest for a long time in 762x39 ARs simple because it needed different mags, bolts, and sometimes lowers along with the 30 caliber barrel. It's been a whole lot better to simply swap a barrel and run brass through a sizer.

** obviously none of this would have mattered without the meteoric rise of AR rifles since then AWB sunset

 

[Hookeye]

I know a bunch of .300 blk owners. Some of them even shoot! LOL
About half of them own suppressors.
Dunno if they just like to experiment w subsonic reloading, think they're billy badarse having such a rig (suppressed or not)...........or if they actually intend to hunt with the things (deer legal here, the cartridge and suppressors).
Saving one's hearing is a great thing.
Think a cartridge w flatter traj and more oomph (and electronic hearing protection) a better option.
But as long as folks are having fun........why not a .300 blk?

 

[Hookeye]

I was not interested in the .300 Whisper when I was shooting Contenders.
Not interested in .300 Blk now that I own ARs.

Is funny, young guys coming into the LGS w Beiber haircuts and skinny jeans, ooh and aw over the black rifles and rattle off all sorts of stuff regarding suppressors.
The average gun shopper is way different these days.

 

[dogtown tom]

6The .300 Blackout experienced a meteoric rise in popularity due to Advanced Armament Corp holding silencer shoots across the country. They wanted to showcase their "Honey Badger" concept and sell more silencers and it worked spectacularly.
They did one of these demo days at Elm Fork range and that night I had three calls regarding .300Blackout and what silencer for it. No one gave a darn about the .300Whisper until AAC came along renamed it and found a niche for it.

Those that are "not interested" don't hunt hogs like we hunt hogs in Texas. A silenced AR in .300 Blk is faaaaaaaaar superior to a bolt gun in .308. If you question that you need to do some more research on hog hunting.

Is funny, young guys coming into the LGS w Beiber haircuts and skinny jeans, ooh and aw over the black rifles and rattle off all sorts of stuff regarding suppressors.
The average gun shopper is way different these days.

That's funny, but I sell/transfer more AR's and silencers to the 60+ crowd than anyone in skinny jeans. In fact the Bieber haircut skinny jeans crowd can't afford both a silencer and an AR. Maybe that's why they come in to your LGS and ooh and aah.

 

[Bfh_auto]

I would find it safe to say that no one questions the usefulness of the 7.62x39 round. Many find it as a very capable round for both medium game hunting (deer) and personal defense.

My question is, how come there are so many quick to dismiss the 300 blackout, when in the 125g flavor, it rivals the Russian round very closely? Add to favor on the side off the 300, the ability to be suppressed easily, and the pistol powders used making it much more effective (read retaining velocity) in shorter barrels.

I would agree that between 150g and up to subsonic heavy pills, there is very little use as far as from a practical standpoint, other than say target shooting close range or general plinking. But the more common .308 bullets used also allow for versatility regarding components you may already have.

This is by no means a, “300 blackout is superior”, type post. I simply wonder if there is something I am not seeing in regards to performance from this round in comparison to rounds similar.

The only way I want one is in a slower twist barrel for cast bullets.
My dislike came from all the "I want to deer hunt with subsonic bullets" people.

 

[mcb]

The only way I want one is in a slower twist barrel for cast bullets.
My dislike came from all the "I want to deer hunt with subsonic bullets" people.

Where not as evil as the propaganda makes us out to be.