.300AAC & 6.8SPC...how come?

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

patriot53

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2014
Messages
135
Ok, so I have both...
...and I am just wondering, maybe someone can work this out?
I know, they serve different functions, use, application...however, they both are often cited as an "alternative"...
...to the anemic (or some say) 5.56 / .223 rounds.

So the great thing about the .300AAC Blackout,
(besides the subsonic/suppressed abilities...) is the FACT that you can use standard AR15 5.56/.223 Mags., so Pmag & the like compatibility...
and it can be re-loaded or hand-loaded from the same caliber's above brass.
also;
Heavier, larger bullets.
Better stopping power.
Plus the variety of .30 cal bullets.
Lower muzzle flash.

Seems to have a lot going for it?
Then how come...I still cannot go into a Walmart, Sportsman's Warehouse, Bass Pro, Cabelas...etc., etc., and find a box of ANY kind of .300AAC on the shelf.
Same for most LGS, although here in Vegas, some do due to our local ammo manufactures starting to crank it out.

However, the 6.8 SPC ...which many say is an answer to a question no one was asking...
which;
does not have "standard" mag compatibility...
...and the mags have been "iffy" and a source of contention.
You have two variants of such out there, the older Barrett - ASC metal mags and now the new Magpul / LWRC mags, resized...to fit thier (LWRC) NEW mag well size on their Rifles...supposedly leading the way for ALL 6.8SPC
Rifle-Makers to re-tool to?
Also;
There is the original 6.8SPC ammo...
...and NOW the new 6.8SPC II, with newer guns chambered to shoot THAT and the older ammo..."newer guns" designated "SPC II" safe???
HOLY COW-LIB-ER :eek:
But I can go into any of those BIG-BOX chains & most LGS and find at least ONE brand of 6.8SPC, sometimes several brands...
...NOT so for the caliber (.300AAC) with ALL kinds of stuff going for it?
WHY?

Seems ALL backwards?
Kinda reminds,in a way, of the VHS vs. Beta video tape wars of the 80's:rolleyes:
 
patriot53 said:
But I can go into any of those BIG-BOX chains & most LGS and find at least ONE brand of 6.8SPC, sometimes several brands...
...NOT so for the caliber (.300AAC) with ALL kinds of stuff going for it?
WHY?

Seems ALL backwards?
Kinda reminds,in a way, of the VHS vs. Beta video tape wars of the 80's:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It's still on the shelves because nobody's buying it. It the opposite of the reason you can't find 22LR.
 
Robert said:
My Sportsman's has gobs of both. Heck mine even has Remington 30AR by the ton. Sorry it is not available in your area. But if you reload there really is no reason to worry about what the LGS stocks...
Click to expand...
Hmmmm...
...could it be that, is your area in TX., BIG Hog hunting country?
I live in an area that has a ton of stores, ranges, etc., hardly ever see .300AAC.
I travel back and forth and stay in the Flathead Valley area, of MT. a lot...none there either?
Walmart never has or has had .300AAC, and never saw it at the large BassPro / Outdoor world here either. Only been to Cabelas a few times up in MT., and our Sportsman's here, does not have it either. Guns are sold though, that shoot it...but for 300 AAC, have to ALWAYS buy online.
I plan on reloading soon, but was just wondering why the 6.8SPC ammo is so prevalent but so little virtue written of or spoken of for that caliber...
... for an AR15 & most LGS here call it a "niche", odd caliber AR...yet, they sell the name-brand ammo like
Federal Fusion and others for it...but none for the .300AAC?
 
The .300 AAC gives you 7.62x39 performance in an AR platform. To some that is a good idea. To most it is a backwards idea. Particularly since you can just buy cheaper 7..62 ammo and an AK type gun cheaper. Also the same guys that want a .300 AAC tend to like piston guns and AKs. Hence no large market.
The 6.8 on the other hand offers a real advantage over the .223 in hunting situations. The 6.8 solves a real problem and is useful for real life situations. Hence demand and sales. There are plenty of low powered .30 cal cartridges.
 
Last edited:
6.8SPC has a decade head start over the 300AAC - that has implications on the supply chain.
 
By your explanation of the 6.8 SPC, you seem easily confused. It is really not that difficult. I am not sure if this thread will be able to answer your question.
 
The .300 AAC gives you 7.62x39 performance in an AR platform. To some that is a good idea. To most it is a backwards idea. Particularly since you can just buy cheaper 7..62 ammo and an AK type gun cheaper. Also the same guys that want a .300 AAC tend to like piston guns and AKs. Hence no large market.
Click to expand...
The .300 BLK is a [strike]commercialized[/strike] SAAMI standardized version of the .300 Whisper with slight variations to avoid violated JD Jones intellectual property rights. [strike]It[/strike] 300 Whisper was not intended to give 7.62x39 ballistics in an AR-15, per se. It was designed from the ground up as a subsonic cartridge that can be easily suppressed, still be capable of medium to high velocities (per SSK industries) and used in any .223 Remington / 5.56 NATO firearm with just a barrel swap. It has gained popularity as a supersonic cartridge with many folks who want to hunt with their AR-15 type rifles and prefer the simplicity of just an upper swap without having to switch to different magazines (and brass if they hand load). However, AAC states that .300 BLK, despite being a near clone of .300 Whisper, was also intended to replicate 7.62x39 ballistics (see post #12 below). [strike]Those are far from backward ideas.[/strike] A multipurpose .30 caliber cartridge that requires only a barrel change to be used in the AR-15 family of rifles, and nearly every other .223 Rem / 5.56 NATO firearm, is not a backwards idea.

Your assertion that an AK type rifle is cheaper is a poor comparison. An AK type rifle of equal quality to a typical AR type rifle will cost just as much as, if not more than the AR type rifle, and it still suffers from inferior control layout and control ergonomics. The same is true for ammo. Yes, you can get steel cased 7.62x39 ammo cheap, but brass cased 7.62x39 ammo with equal quality bullets to typical .300 BLK ammo will cost just as much. .300 BLK is not a cheap plinking cartridge, but, despite your assertions to the contrary, it has legitimate uses.
 
Last edited:
I have a great affection for the 300 Blackout cartridge and have built several AR's to shoot it. Last week in East Texas I used my AAC Handi Rifle to shoot a 350 pound boar, one shot (125 gr TNT 17 gr H110) ran 60 yards and was dead. One should give it a try and experience the accuracy, low recoil and flash plus the energy of a .30 cal bullet.
 
Ibmikey said:
I have a great affection for the 300 Blackout cartridge and have built several AR's to shoot it. Last week in East Texas I used my AAC Handi Rifle to shoot a 350 pound boar, one shot (125 gr TNT 17 gr H110) ran 60 yards and was dead. One should give it a try and experience the accuracy, low recoil and flash plus the energy of a .30 cal bullet.
Click to expand...
I have shot several big pigs here in Texas, with the 6.8 120SST

The furthest one ran 15ft, all the others were DRT


Both calibers are good and have a place

For pig hunting I wanted the extra "ooomph" of the 6.8
 
ugaarguy said:
It was not intended to give 7.62x39 ballistics in and AR-15.
Click to expand...

From AAC's website on the objectives for 300 BLK. (http://300aacblackout.com)


DESIGN OBJECTIVES
• Create a reliable compact 30-cal solution for the AR platform
• Utilize existing inventory magazines while retaining their full capacity
• Create the optimal platform for sound and flash suppressed fire
• Create compatible supersonic ammo that matches 7.62x39 ballistics
• Provide the ability to penetrate barriers with high-mass projectiles
• Provide all capabilities in a lightweight, durable, low recoiling package
 
patriot53 said:
But I can go into any of those BIG-BOX chains & most LGS and find at least ONE brand of 6.8SPC, sometimes several brands...
...NOT so for the caliber (.300AAC) with ALL kinds of stuff going for it?
WHY?
Click to expand...

In my opinion, as already said, it is the time that each round has been on the market.

While I have not looked recently, a year or two ago, 300 BLK ammunition was about as rare as hen's teeth at the mail order emporiums that I frequent. I am sure that would transfer to the brick and mortar stores, the panic shortages not with standing.

Not really a problem for me since I reload.
 
ugaarguy said:
The .300 BLK is a commercialized version of the .300 Whisper.
Click to expand...
Close enough, but the 300 Whisper was developed by J D Jones at SSK Industries and is a proprietary cartridge. AAC had a similar design and had it SAAMI certified, so any ammunition manufacturer can make and sell the ammo. The chambers differ to the extent that the 300BLK has a slightly deeper throat, but for all intents and purposes, in an AR chassis, they are the same.

It has been compared to 7.62x39, but 300BLK surpasses 7.62x39 past 200 yards due to better BC (for similar weight bullets). 300BLK has the added versatility of using bullets from 110 grains to 220 grains. A well built Blackout can easily shoot 1.5 MOA. Mine will do 2 MOA all day, with a better shooter than me (no great stretch) it would probably be better than that. I've shot silhouettes at 300 yards with mine using 155 grain Palma Match, using a red dot 1x sight.
 
bangswitch said:
AAC had a similar design and had it SAAMI certified, so any ammunition manufacturer can make and sell the ammo.
Click to expand...

Ammunition manufacturers don't need SAAMI approval to make ammunition ... if that's what you meant.
 
I'll be honest, I have a fundamental problem with both rounds, though it has nothing directly related to their performance.

I see the use of either round in an AR as a defense option (which I'm not sold on), as a hunting option, or as a having fun option.

From a defense purpose, I've yet to find many situations that I can play in my head where either has a benefit over premium .223/5.56 ammo.

From a hunting point, I struggle to see many situations where this is much better than one of many rifles chambered in 7.62x39 or a .30-30. I'm sure the AR setup benefits some, but for the masses, it seems like a solution for a problem that really wasn't there. Anyways, it's still a use that uses rather few bullets and mostly in areas where hogs or other large pests live in mass. Neither bullet does well as a long range option, so it's mostly limited to short-medium range hunting.

Then there is the fun use. Neither rifle has cheap enough ammo available to be much fun through an AR, to me. If I'm shooting slow/low quantity, I might as we'll be playing with a round that more exactly fits the desire and in a rifle that isn't load picky. If I'm just looking to shoot subsonic, suppressed ammo down range through an AR, give me a .22lr or 9mm setup and a bunch of subsonic ammo.

I bought into a bit of the hype of the .300blk, especially when debating a suppressor. In the end, I got tired of loading plinking rounds that weren't that cheap that we're rather load sensitive. The 6.8 wouldn't be any different in that aspect. I guess I'd rather have a hunting rifle that's better at hunting as well as a plinking rifle that's better at plinking than trying to make one rifle setup to do both well. I don't think either round is inherently good or bad, just that at their current price points neither do anything for me we'll enough to shoot them. If either came down to even $0.50/shot I could see changing my feelings, but as is, I'll keep shooting bulk .223/5.56 for fun and more traditional medium game hunting rounds in more traditional medium game hunting rifles for such hunting.

Which one my local Wal-mart stocks for $1.50-$2/round is the wrong debate in my mind.
 
1858 said:
Ammunition manufacturers don't need SAAMI approval to make ammunition ... if that's what you meant.
Click to expand...

They don't "need" SAAMI "approval"
But I would imagine no major manufacturer, gun or ammo, will touch a cartridge that has not been standardized by SAAMI.
Standardization limits liability to ammo manufacturers if their cartridge blows up a gun. If the ammo was loaded correctly and to SAAMI specs, it's not the cartridge manufacturers liability if the round blows up a gun. The scrutiny would instead go to the gun, or shooter error. Vice vs for a gun manufacturer.
Without SAAMI specs, guns can be built to withstand one level of pressure, but ammo could conceivably loaded to a higher level.
Or OAL could vary between manufacturers, making for reliability issues. Chambers could vary significantly.
SAAMI makes sure that cartridge manufacturers load to a standard max pressure within safe operating ranges and with the same cartridge dimensions, and gun manufacturers build to withstand that pressure plus have headroom for error, using the correct chamber.

SAAMI standardization is crucial for a commercially successful cartridge because it ensures everyone is loading the same cartridge at the same maximum pressure for use in chambers that are all cut at the same dimensions in guns all built to handle that pressure.
 
Last edited:
68wj said:
By your explanation of the 6.8 SPC, you seem easily confused. It is really not that difficult. I am not sure if this thread will be able to answer your question.
Click to expand...
yeah sure..there always seems to be one guy like you...not just content to criticize the "content" of the OP...but criticize & attack the person, who is posting !

No...NOT "confused", just not an expert, such as yourself, on the 6.8SPC & .300AAC, lol.
New to those calibers, and wondering why the one lauded for it's versatility & compatibility has ammo issues over the one OFTEN referred to as a "niche" caliber?

If ALL you are interested is in humiliating me and elevating yourself...
...get off this thread, you are NOT contributing anything constructive;)
 
From a defense purpose, I've yet to find many situations that I can play in my head where either has a benefit over premium .223/5.56 ammo.
Click to expand...

6.8SPC offers 50% more foot pounds of force and nearly identical speeds when loaded to SPCII specs (the original intent that Remington somehow missed,) and does it from a 14.5" barrel. We typically are forced to use a 16" which adds another 7% bonus.

6.8 also is loaded in many hunting bullets, and comparing the costs at that level, they aren't more expensive. There is no military surplus expanding point bullet legal for hunting as none were ever specified or made.


With a 4" shorter barrel and using midlength gas, the carbine is shorter, lighter, handier, and widely available, vs a 20" AR15 which doesn't sell as well now.

How did those facts get missed? It's been at the top of the list of reasons to go 6.8SPC for ten years - unless someone is simply not looking.

As for .300BO, the "advantage" of using mostly the same parts is based on three items, the barrel, bolt, and magazines. Those are the only changes to the AR to shoot 6.8. For some the idea they don't have to change a bolt seems like a good idea, for those who shoot both calibers nobody recommends swapping bolts in carriers, or barrels for that matter. Too much work. AR's aren't Legos as much as we say that, you build a rifle to a specific purpose and it stays that way. So much so that the swap barrel vendors regularly go out of business every few years and another pops back up. Switching calibers on a moment's notice is an internet fantasy, in real life nobody much bothers.

As for the six8 by LWRC, it's propriety and the contract called for polymer mags that were a different size to prevent getting mixed up with M4 mags. It just happens that Magpul was saying that all along and they got tapped to do the job as it was a short lead delivery. Six8 replacing the AR15 based 6.8SPC has a long way to go.

Since the .300BO/Whisper actually started back in the late '70s as a way to get AR15's into 3Gun, you might look to how well it took over the market for the last 40 years. It wasn't until AAC wanted to use the round subsonic that t was renamed and pushed by Remington, which for some reason is opposite how they treated the 6.8SPC that they sandbagged with a SAMMI load and damaged spec. Nobody uses that spec anymore, most chamber in Spec II, which is now the standard. However, the detractors never quote those ballistics as they would have to realize just how much denial is affecting their perspective.

Here's the real boots on the ground issue that sorts them out - shoot them from a 10" barrel and you see exactly what the designers of the cartridges were going for. A 10" 5.56 barely exceeds 2,700 fps at the muzzle, which means milspec ammo would likely not fragment. .300BO subsonic has a shorter range with a lot of drop past 250m, while 6.8 can still exceed 2500 fps and keep a flat trajectory past 300m.

Instead of cherry picking apples and oranges to highlight "shortcomings," put them on a level playing field and things become clearer.

And, BTW, it's another situation where it's a comparison against the 6.8 - which means it's a standard to be exceeded to demonstrate superiority. That happened a lot five years ago and the fate of that competitor should be an example - it wasn't mentioned in this thread yet

Give it another five and we will see what the next cartridge of the month is stacked up against 6.8.
 
Tirod said:
6.8SPC offers 50% more foot pounds of force and nearly identical speeds when loaded to SPCII specs (the original intent that Remington somehow missed,) and does it from a 14.5" barrel. We typically are forced to use a 16" which adds another 7% bonus.

6.8 also is loaded in many hunting bullets, and comparing the costs at that level, they aren't more expensive. There is no military surplus expanding point bullet legal for hunting as none were ever specified or made.


With a 4" shorter barrel and using midlength gas, the carbine is shorter, lighter, handier, and widely available, vs a 20" AR15 which doesn't sell as well now.

How did those facts get missed? It's been at the top of the list of reasons to go 6.8SPC for ten years - unless someone is simply not looking.

As for .300BO, the "advantage" of using mostly the same parts is based on three items, the barrel, bolt, and magazines. Those are the only changes to the AR to shoot 6.8. For some the idea they don't have to change a bolt seems like a good idea, for those who shoot both calibers nobody recommends swapping bolts in carriers, or barrels for that matter. Too much work. AR's aren't Legos as much as we say that, you build a rifle to a specific purpose and it stays that way. So much so that the swap barrel vendors regularly go out of business every few years and another pops back up. Switching calibers on a moment's notice is an internet fantasy, in real life nobody much bothers.

As for the six8 by LWRC, it's propriety and the contract called for polymer mags that were a different size to prevent getting mixed up with M4 mags. It just happens that Magpul was saying that all along and they got tapped to do the job as it was a short lead delivery. Six8 replacing the AR15 based 6.8SPC has a long way to go.

Since the .300BO/Whisper actually started back in the late '70s as a way to get AR15's into 3Gun, you might look to how well it took over the market for the last 40 years. It wasn't until AAC wanted to use the round subsonic that t was renamed and pushed by Remington, which for some reason is opposite how they treated the 6.8SPC that they sandbagged with a SAMMI load and damaged spec. Nobody uses that spec anymore, most chamber in Spec II, which is now the standard. However, the detractors never quote those ballistics as they would have to realize just how much denial is affecting their perspective.

Here's the real boots on the ground issue that sorts them out - shoot them from a 10" barrel and you see exactly what the designers of the cartridges were going for. A 10" 5.56 barely exceeds 2,700 fps at the muzzle, which means milspec ammo would likely not fragment. .300BO subsonic has a shorter range with a lot of drop past 250m, while 6.8 can still exceed 2500 fps and keep a flat trajectory past 300m.

Instead of cherry picking apples and oranges to highlight "shortcomings," put them on a level playing field and things become clearer.

And, BTW, it's another situation where it's a comparison against the 6.8 - which means it's a standard to be exceeded to demonstrate superiority. That happened a lot five years ago and the fate of that competitor should be an example - it wasn't mentioned in this thread yet

Give it another five and we will see what the next cartridge of the month is stacked up against 6.8.
Click to expand...
OK...that's what I'm talking about...
...very informative, you know this caliber and clearly answered my question.

Now the other half of what I was wondering...
7.62x51 / .308 vs 6.8 SPC ???
The 6.8 is often cited as having 80% the power of the .308 ...
...in a lighter , more compact Rifle, lighter ammo, less recoil?
On the ballistic tables...I JUST DON'T SEE IT?
I see the 6.8spc about HALF the ft. pounds energy of the .308 /7.62x51?
Also, the 7.62x51 has all that cheap (cheaper...)military surplus ammo to practice with
...low recoil loads, and great hunting loads & bullets.
Why the 6.8spc, then?
 
I don't even know why the 6.8SPC is considered a better cartridge. It performs less than a .308 AR10 and less than the new kid on the block 6.5 Grendel.

66ballistics_zps28c87bc5.gif
 
patriot53 said:
However, the 6.8 SPC ...which many say is an answer to a question no one was asking...
which;
does not have "standard" mag compatibility...
...and the mags have been "iffy" and a source of contention.
You have two variants of such out there, the older Barrett - ASC metal mags and now the new Magpul / LWRC mags, resized...to fit thier (LWRC) NEW mag well size on their Rifles...supposedly leading the way for ALL 6.8SPC
Rifle-Makers to re-tool to?
Also;
There is the original 6.8SPC ammo...
...and NOW the new 6.8SPC II, with newer guns chambered to shoot THAT and the older ammo..."newer guns" designated "SPC II" safe???
:
Click to expand...
I clipped the imaginative 300 BO commentary to attempt to clarify some of this then.

The question asked was, "How do we keep our M4 rifles and not have the baddies hide safely behind things like auto glass or mud/thatch walls?". This is a debated topic still, with some denying the issue while others continue to look for options (M855a1, other cartridges, etc). The 6.8 SPC was the result to real trigger pullers demanding better and working with industry to develop it. Tests put the 6.8 pills as the best balance of accuracy and lethality.

Mags: Made by PRI, Barrett, ASC, CProducts Defense, D&H, and a number of house brands (Midway USA, Palmetto State Armory, Stag, etc). I have been fortunate enough to have good 6.8 mags I guess, though have had issues with some 5.56 mags but didn't hold that against my 5.56.

LWRCI designed a specific rifle for a specific customer. In that they wanted the best for the end use and chose to skip any compromise. The result was a rifle in 6.8 being fed with Magpul mags. The thickness of the polymer required a larger mag well to get those Federal Gold Dots into the chamber. If you don't have that rifle, the above is a non-issue. LWRCI has said that they will make the design open source, but there is no obligation for anyone to retool. Variety is spice, but not everyone likes the flavor.

Ahh ammo. Most all 6.8 ammo you find is normal SAAMI loading, and most all barrels are SPCII (or some other name for a 6.8 chamber with a longer leade). No problem if you have the improved chamber, much like having a 5.56 and buying .223. Also no problem if you have one of the few barrels with the old chamber (Remington, 6 groove DPMS, LMT, and Ruger). Wilson Combat and SSA do make ammo with a little more powder and recommend using only in the improved chambers.

Now the actual question of the thread, I can't answer for the retailers. The 6.8 had SAAMI acceptance in 2004 and hunters have slowly, steadily been finding that they can have a potent cartridge for large to small game in a compact, accurate rifle. That isn't niche and they want to stock what people buy.
 
I thought the 300 BLK was superfluous at first, but the more I think about it the more I think about buying a 300 BLK upper to be able to swap out. Why buy an AK when I can get similar ballistics simply by swapping out an upper and using the same mags?
 
Tirod,

I'm not debating that the 6.8 hits harder, I'm debating if as a civilian that there is a defensive situation that it would be beneficial over 5.56. Is good defensive 5.56 ammo too light to be an effective man stopper with SD distances (typically a few yards, maybe out to 100)? I can certainly see where a military unit may like the option better, but as later stated, I have no mud huts to shoot through. I've got a few layers of sheet rock and a few pine boards. I can't think of a situation I'd personally encounter in my area that a 5.56 wouldn't get it done that a 6.8 or 300blk would that could be justified as self defense.

For hunting, I guess my question is so what? It hits harder, but why? What game needs 20 rounds of 6.8 or 300 blk? I can see a use for larger magazines for something like varmint hunting where you have a very populated target area. For medium game, where either the 6.8 or 300 outshine the 5.56, what game gives you the chance to shoot 20-30 times that a semi-auto system is advantageous? From what I've seen, it simply makes mediocre hunters feel better, and miss a moving target more times. Maybe hog hunting, maybe. I simply don't see a situation where such a rifle is a better choice than a conventional bolt rifle in a conventional chambering for the bulk of the US hunters.

I'd like to say, I'm not against either cartridge, just that I haven't been presented with a realistic situation for my life that it turns out to be the best option. If there was a use that it made sense (and medium game sized pest control would be one of the few that would make sense, though I have none of them locally) I'd be all for it. As is, it seems I'd either be in close enough that energy numbers are rather meaningless or I'd be shooting something large enough I'd be better off with a lower cost conventional rifle in a conventional, more powerful, and more available cartridge.
 
I agree with Benzy. While a few are avid fans of the .300, and find good uses for it, you are very much in the minority. If you like very short barrels in a small package for close in defense or short range hunting that is good. But there are other options and in any case that would be a very limited market in the real world. And I stand by my well proven comment that it is made to duplicate the 7.62x39. Recently AK rifles have gone from 1/3 the price of an AR to nearly equal so that has changed but has not impacted demand. I just don't see enough market for it with the high demand for ammo in more popular rounds. Retailers also,only want to stock fast moving products. I am not against the round, I just don't see a big demand for it compared to the 6.8. Also when you go subsonic, the advantage goes to bigger heavier bullets like the .44 mag or even .357. If you are going to be slow, you should be big and heavy to have energy and a more compact weapon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Whats the best defensive ammo for an LWRC 8 inch SBR/PSD rifle in 5.56 cal?
Replies
1
Views
504
rbernie
rbernie
R
  • Locked
Whats the best defensive ammo for an LWRC 8" PSD in 5.56?
Replies
0
Views
458
Roman11
R
C
  • Locked
6.8SPC SBR: The story so far...
Replies
1
Views
1K
MarshallDodge
MarshallDodge
amprecon
  • Locked
.276 Pedersen Garand Reincarnate?
Replies
9
Views
875
jpwilly
J
amprecon
  • Locked
This Is It, New Rifle Coming...Which One?
Replies
7
Views
783
amprecon
amprecon
Back
Top