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

d2wing said:

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.

Click to expand...

It might have been developed to duplicate 7.62x39, but it betters it, and significantly (almost 17% more energy), past 300 yards.

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.

Click to expand...

I can't argue about a revolver being more compact than an AR carbine (or even SBR), but a subsonic 220 grain spitzer with a BC of .600+ will carry equivalent or greater energy much farther than a 240 grain JHP or solid flat-nosed bullet with a BC of around .175-.200 at similar velocities. Even something like a 300 gr. XTP a couple hundred fps faster than the 220 sub won't hold as well or shoot as flat past 100 yards. You also have the greater inherent accuracy of a rifle as compared to a handgun.

Rifle stuff....

I'm more into combat handguns & carry stuff than rifles but if I could buy a new AR platform rifle in 2014/early 2015, Id opt for the .300AAC Blackout.
I'm left handed so the new Stag Arms L series has a lot of appeal.
Smith & Wesson rolled out a .300AAC Blackout M&P AR too so it looks like the caliber is starting to get some notice from the large shooting sports industry names.

I thought the 6.8SPC(which was T&Eed by the US military's special ops community) would surpass the 5.56x45mm & larger 7.62mmNATO calibers for CQB/direct action type missions.
Several "operators" would trick out & slick up M14s to carry "down range".
The procurement officers & commanders chose to select a new round rather than tinker around with the "outdated" M1A or M14 battle rifles.

Will the .300AAC Blackout hold out in the next 5/10 years? Id say yes. The 6.8SPC or 6.8x40mm will not stand up and be the dominant defense/hunting/target rifle load for ARs.

Once your big stores start carrying 300 then there will be a shortage of this as well. Wal mart always seems to be a hoarders first stop for ammo.

@Benzy, mag capacity is moot to cartridge or rifle selection for hunters typically. The ability to carry more does not negate how good it can be. If I have an AR in 6.8, 16" barrel, low power optic, then I have a very nice package for stalking white tail or moving in a blind. The recoil is so little that the scope never blurs and I can watch the deer dash and fall, confident that my shot counted and I don't need a 2nd.

An AR isn't better than a bolt per se, it is an option. If a hunter like an AR, chambering in something like a 6.8 makes it a great option for ethically taking game. BTW, I use 5 round mags voluntarily to help the traditionalists sleep better in their stands.

While they are both alternate chamberings, they really are different from a commercial standpoint, the blackout is better for the high volume shooter and as such they aren't interested in running to wal mart to grab 2 boxes or pay premium prices at Cabelas. However many 6.8 owners are relatively low volume shooters and hunter types that may well be happy with just a couple boxes and won't be as bothered sending a couple extra bucks.

Oh, I'd definitey say the AR is better than a bolt, and all the guys who bought self loading huning rifles in the 1920-30's believed it, too. That's moot, we are talking the AR.

6.8SPC, .300BO, whatever, were NEVER intended to replace the .308/7.62x54 as a battle rifle carbine. The 5.56 did that. Some still haven't got the memo. In crew served weapons or in a sniper role, .308 still has a place because of it's effectiveness at a distance, but it's just one tool in the arsenal in a unit. Crew served weapons almost all reach well past the effective range of a the individual soldiers rifle. It's a bogus argument to suppose that an intermediate round is going to step up and take that role.

Don't confuse 7.62 x 39 with 7.62 x 54, either. The AK round - which is largely obsolete in first and second tier armies - has about the same ballistics as the .30-30. Not the much more powerful .308, which is about 10% off the .30-06. The AK is just another intermediate cartridge.

All of them - 6.8, 6.5, .300, 7.62x39, .30-30, are in about the same range of performance, but it takes avoiding a knowledge of their detailed purpose and bluntly, ignorance, to compare them in a way that ranks them in terms of superiority. That's a game for fanboys attempting to sort out the old locker room measuring contest.

Each cartridge was designed for a specific purpose and application. 5.56 was originally designed for 3,000 fps from a 20" barrel for Infantry fighting. 7.62x39 was a different take on the same application. 6.8 was designed to improve the 5.56 when it was relegated to being used from 14.5" barrels and it's performance suffered. 6.5 was a wildcat long distance precision shooters cartridge that got picked up by Adams Arms, and converted to the x39 brass, because it's the basis for most long range cartridges in that class. And .300BO was invented to get around the early 3Gun rules to get the AR onto the range.

We still don't see 3Gunners using it. The drop at distance doesn't provide better ballistics. It might carry a larger heavier bullet, that can be used in hunting just as the .30-30 was, but it suffers the same problem - it loses energy and drops, too. For most whitetail hunters in broken woodlands, tho, both work and do fine if you limit your range.

Hunting antelope, it would be a major disadvantage.

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.

Click to expand...

And I already pointed out the 6.8 in an AR pistol would offer more range and power. In that defensive situation, it's better. It's also the reason why the .300BO is a good choice - more power from a short barrel. I'm still internally debating that in a pistol build.

Do I trade a flatter trajectory for more mass down range? The 6.8 will carry 1,000 foot pounds out far enough from a 10-12" barrel, as as pointed out, why would I need more from a .300? It won't make a deer more dead, only careful shot placement keeps the reliability up. And for deer hunting, why would I need more than one or two shots? I have no argument with my state's mandatory limit of 10 rounds other than on the individual liberty rights.

Since I have heard bolt gunners with their frenetic emptying of a 6 shot magazine firing haphazardly away at a fleeting deer, I don't see they have a moral superiority in the field AT ALL. So don't play that card, it's really about class warfare, son. Elitist bolt action nonsense that only they are ethical hunters in the field.

I'm not proposing that 6.8 is "the" cartridge that should be used, just that is does have certain attributes that can be for a specific situation. Inside 300m, in a self loading action, it simply does the better overall job among the cartridges mentioned.

Move to 600m, or less than 50, I won't say all bets are off, but changing the conditions means defining that specific ballistic situation and seeing if it fits. That's the problem some fanboys have - they think their cartridge of the month is superior in all uses, and even go out of their way to compare them to cartridges out of their league.

Nope, the 6.8 was never meant to replace the .308, and neither were any of the others, either. 5.56 was.

Tirod said:

6.8SPC, .300BO, whatever, were NEVER intended to replace the .308/7.62x54 as a battle rifle carbine. The 5.56 did that.

Don't confuse 7.62 x 39 with 7.62 x 54,

Click to expand...

You do mean 7.62x51 (.308), don't you? 7.62x54(R) is the Mosin Nagant round. 5.56 may have been used by the military to replace 7.62x51, but history is showing that it's not doing the job as well in its current role. Its biggest advantage is that you can carry more of it, longer. If given the option, as a soldier, whether to carry a rifle chambered in 5.56 or 7.62x51, I'd take the .30 cal any day, and suffer the weight penalty.

One could argue till the cows come home that this cartridge is better than that cartridge for these reasons.

Ditto for rifles and their actions.

Personally, I am glad that I have a choice of cartridges to experiment with in a choice of actions.

mavracer said:

While they are both alternate chamberings, they really are different from a commercial standpoint, the blackout is better for the high volume shooter and as such they aren't interested in running to wal mart to grab 2 boxes or pay premium prices at Cabelas. However many 6.8 owners are relatively low volume shooters and hunter types that may well be happy with just a couple boxes and won't be as bothered sending a couple extra bucks.

Click to expand...

Huh?

It may be early, but this paragraph isnt clear to me

Why do you say the 300BLK is better for the high volume shooter, vs the 6.8?


Case 1 - The reloading crew

If you are a reloader, the 300BLK and the 6.8 shooter can both shoot volume economically

I reuse my brass, and expect to get 10-15 loads

If I pay for used brass (6.8) at 35 to 40 cents a piece, my net price is 3-5 cents per shooting

For plinking rounds, I get 110PH Sierras blems that cost 11-13 cents per round

I shoot for around 16 to 25 cents per round

The hornady Bullet I like for hunting is 35 cents or so as a component


If I reloaded the 300blk, I would count my brass as free (pickups), there is some labor in
cutting, lubing, and resizing these (but you might count that as free as well)

You still have the same primer and similar powder costs(300blk uses less powder), and with the
pulldowns of 147g (used by many shooters of 300blk as plinkers) becoming harder to get, and approaching
15-20 cents per round, the cost, even with the brass difference, is nearly equal

A premium hunting bullet 110g to 120g is going to run .50 at least

To be fair, if you cast your own bulets, the 300BLK is going to offer more cost advantages


Case 2 - The Non-reloader

The promised cheap 300BLK ammo is almost never available.

There is almost never 300blk on any store shelf

6.8 seems to be increasing on the shelf

On the web, there is growing availability of both, and prices are not that far apart.
(Sometimes 300blk is higher, sometimes 6.8 is lower)

A quick search on gunbot has the cheapest within 7 cents of each other

I really think the 300BLK is an awesome round. It has many positive attributes.


I looked at both, but because I hunt, I wanted the extra power and distance the 6.8 gives

I try very much to stay at 1000 ft/lbs as a minimum for hunting mid sized animals
(Of course, shot placement trumps energy)

I use the SST from Hornady, and it carries 1kft lbs to 275 yards
The best bullet I could find in 300BLK, carried 1kft lbs to 126 yards

That decided it for me - It doubles the distance for 1kft lbs

If you hunt under 150 yards, you will be fine with either

I will say again, the 300BLK, seems to be a great round
Some of the issues listed above are because the round is growing in popularity
(I believe the 6.8 is growing as well, but with the headstart on the 300, maybe not as
fast)

I wish I could slow down the 6.8 so that I could shoot suppressed

I may buy one at some point, but the misinformation passed on the web by the fanboys
of both cartridges is amazing.

Buy what works for you

300blk must be gaining momentum because I just saw some at feet farm for the first time, and one of the smaller local gun shops as well. Not that I'd ever need to buy factory ammo, but that is neither here nor there.

Why do you say the 300BLK is better for the high volume shooter, vs the 6.8?

Click to expand...

Because it's cheaper to shoot high volumes of ammo.
Cherry pick components and remain in denial all you want but
$350 to $400 for 1000 pieces of brass is a lot more than the $50 I paid for the chop saw to make unlimited brass for my blackout.

I can share more pills in the 308 range with the 300AAC than I can share .277 pills between my 270 and 6.8SPC. That provides some additional economy of scale for the 300AAC, even as the 6.8 provides better down range performance.

mavracer said:

Because it's cheaper to shoot high volumes of ammo.
Cherry pick components and remain in denial all you want but
$350 to $400 for 1000 pieces of brass is a lot more than the $50 I paid for the chop saw to make unlimited brass for my blackout.

Click to expand...

Not cherry picking anything

Let me do this again

If I get my brass at .35..... And I get 15 reloads.... (Common for many 6.8 reloaders)

The actual cost is.(the most important thing)........ The 6.8, when you reuse the brass costs Less than 3 cents apiece PER SHOT

Yours is free.(with some labor). Mine is less than 3 cents. For the brass only..... Minimal difference

The pills for both are getting expensive. Unless you use cast, you are probably paying
3 to 8 cents more for the plinking bullets than I am.

My point is..... The true cost of shooting both is very close, which is why I posted about the
6.8 not being a "high volume" in deference to the 300blk


Understand, I am not insulting you.... I think the 300blk is a good cartridge

My self worth is not tied to the rifle that I shoot. (Or others opinion of my choice)

I shoot several calibers and am in mid build of a 308 AR

It's all good


We can agree to disagree


Not life or death. The OP asked for opinions.......

I laid out my discussion for my choice

Pick what you want.

Enjoy your rifle

I'll personally be sticking with my 7.62x39 and skip the whole short .30 AR craze. I like my clunky, poorly ergo'd AK's. Funny thing is, no matter how often I hear people talk badly about AK ergo's, I cant help wonder why in the hands of qualified individuals, both the AK and AR are almost equal in every functional regard.

Not cherry picking anything

Click to expand...

Show mw where I can buy a couple thousand .277 bullets today for 11 cents.

Mine is less than 3 cents. For the brass only..... Minimal difference

Click to expand...

I notice when we're talking high volume you want to look at single round cost lol.
You still need to spend $350 to $400 bucks just to have enough brass for a good two day carbine class, and you're gonna waste a lot of valuable learning time picking up your precious brass so you can claim 3 cent prices.

what about mags can you show me where I can get 40 to 50 30 rnd GI surplus mags cheap so I don't have to spend valuable range time loading mags.

mavracer said:

Show mw where I can buy a couple thousand .277 bullets today for 11 cents.

I notice when we're talking high volume you want to look at single round cost lol.
You still need to spend $350 to $400 bucks just to have enough brass for a good two day carbine class, and you're gonna waste a lot of valuable learning time picking up your precious brass so you can claim 3 cent prices.

what about mags can you show me where I can get 40 to 50 30 rnd GI surplus mags cheap so I don't have to spend valuable range time loading mags.

Click to expand...

I buy blem Pro Hunters 110g .277 from Sierras factory, they sell them by the pound.

It used to be 9 cents, then 11 cents, now it's 13 cents per round

IMHO, Calculating cost by the round gets you to more of an accurate overall number vs a general thought

Again,

I didn't mean to offend you. Please accept my apologies for my input to this discussion.

Sometimes I post when I shouldn't

Good luck with your Rifle, I may be getting a 300blk myself at some point.

Take care

I buy blem Pro Hunters 110g .277 from Sierras factory, they sell them by the pound.

Click to expand...

And let me guess Sierra doesn't sell blems in .308 and if they do there's probably somehow more 110gr .277 bullets in a pound than 110gr .308s

Unless you use cast, you are probably paying
3 to 8 cents more for the plinking bullets than I am.

Click to expand...

Or maybe just buy 110gr Seirra blems when I run out of my cheap 147s.

I reuse my brass, and expect to get 10-15 loads

Click to expand...

So you don't actually have any brass that's made it to 10 loadings and yet in only hours you claim.

And I get 15 reloads

Click to expand...

At least you got this right

but the misinformation passed on the web by the fanboys
of both cartridges is amazing.

Click to expand...

7.62 x 51, oops, I'm corrected. It's just as easy to make the mistake the other way.

As for reloading, the time and expense to operate and purchase the chop saw to shorten a round for .300BO would be nearly equivalent to trimming the rim off .30-30 and making 6.8 brass.

I mentioned that two years ago on the 6.8 forums and it was generally considered too much work. So, why is chopping brass to length OK? Sounds like a lot of work to do precisely, with an expensive machine to do in volume.

I understand where someone wouldn't use a small tubing cutter to accomplish it, that would be the alternative.

Of course, once the cartridges are shortened, handloaded, and then used in a carbine course, it's would be a waste not to pick them up, too. After all the time spent trimming them, squaring the neck, deburring, etc., I would be aghast to just throw them away.

Entirely why 5.56 is use to shoot in bulk because the cost is low. That's because it's subsidized by us, the taxpayers, and we pay the government to hire a contractor to run our taxpayer purchased machinery at Lake City so we have our own strategic sources here in the US that can't be compromised during a war.

Rather than a foreign source that could be bombed back into parkland forcing us to count every shot.

Nope, anybody who handloads buy cutting the brass down but doesn't calculate a fair value for their time and machinery isn't putting their round costs on a level playing field with other rounds.

If I can buy Federal 6.8 in bulk - which in more likely in the near future than .300BO because they actually have a foreign contract to supply it, then I see 6.8 as having a potential advantage.

That the foreign contractor sees the strategic necessity of loading their own ammo for their own use is likely, too. And with three players in the Mid East all now using it, that likelihood is even higher. It may not be the looked for 6.8NATO round as my barrel is marked, but it's a government issue cartridge, at least there.

Goes to the OP - why alternative cartridges? More power downrange, as 5.56 out of a 14.5 barrel exhibits some loss and there are those who consider it tactically a poor choice. It is a fact that the round isn't being used in it's original intent, and the results are being questioned. So, you can neck it up to handle a bigger diameter bullet which relatively cheap to obtain, or you can design a cartridge to meet the demands of being shot from a short barrel but yet delivering the power at the ranges needed. Which the SF/AMU did with 6.8.

But why choose a round that won't work directly in most of the "platform?" There are advantages for armies. If the magazines won't fit, then mixups can't occur on the battlefield. You can't chamber the wrong ammo if the mag won't go in and stay in. Entirely the point behind the six8 dimensions, and exactly what we have seen when someone does manage to chamber the wrong ammo at a square range here. Kaboom.

Secondly, the other guy doesn't get to use yours if they are scrounging. The old wives tales of soldiers picking up the opponents weapons are just that, hearing the wrong kind of shooting at close range tends to make soldiers think a flanking move is involved, and return fire is directed that way. Covert operators do it to blend into a scene, but that is a rare situation.

Shoot what you like, just fit it into the range and type target you are shooting at. I would no more attempt to shoot 7.62x 51 from a 10" barrel as I would 6.8 from a 24" for some highly defined situation - because there are better for that specific job. From a 16" NFA legal barrel, which is what a lot of carbine shooters use in AR's today, the 6.8 is a good fit if you need more downrange power - hunting, self defense, etc.

If I was popping caps on a square range all day practicing 3Gun or match, even self defense, I'd shoot 5.56 for it's subsidized cost advantage. Handloading that wouldn't be a real good use of my time, tho. It takes exponentially more range time to achieve the higher rankings, an hour spent reloading won't make another step up in skill level happen.

That's what is happening in the big picture, high volume shooters have to prioritize things, but at least they are paid to shoot all day. We aren't.

Tirod said:

I mentioned that two years ago on the 6.8 forums and it was generally considered too much work. So, why is chopping brass to length OK? Sounds like a lot of work to do precisely, with an expensive machine to do in volume.

I understand where someone wouldn't use a small tubing cutter to accomplish it, that would be the alternative.

Of course, once the cartridges are shortened, handloaded, and then used in a carbine course, it's would be a waste not to pick them up, too. After all the time spent trimming them, squaring the neck, deburring, etc., I would be aghast to just throw them away.

Click to expand...

For forming 300 BLK cases. A two inch cut off saw is available from Harbor Freight for $30. $10-$12 for a cut-off fixture on Amazon, or make your own. Blades last at least 1500 cases, longer if they are not abused. Forming can be done in the size die, you got to have one anyway to load the cases. You need a trimmer anyway to keep the cases the appropriate length after shooting.

New 300 BLK cases are showing up on the market. I bought 1000 new cases a couple years ago and another 500 within the last couple months. Could of bought more but between the 1500 cases I made and the 1500 that I have purchased, I am flush with new, empty cases.

Whether cases are formed or purchased, i would still pick them up for reloading. I would not buy loaded ammunition, factory new or surplus, unless I could reload the cases.

Cost of time is an age old discussion concerning reloading. Since reloading, of which case forming is a part, is a hobby for me, my time is valueless. If I wasn't reloading, I would be doing something else as "useless" like surfing the internet or watching re-runs of NCIS on television.

Some folks do not like to reload and frequently they justify their decision by putting a cost value to their time. That's OK by me.

Just one person's opinion.

As for reloading, the time and expense to operate and purchase the chop saw to shorten a round for .300BO

Click to expand...

Just as an FYI to this thread - I just bought 2K of once-fired LC brass trimmed/reformed to 300AAC for $99/thou. That's not bad, and a dang sight cheaper than I can buy once-fired 6.8SPC.

The economy argument still wins out in favor of 300AAC in the end - brass is cheaper in whatever form I buy it, low end 30cal pills are cheaper than their equivilent .277 bretheren, powder and primers are a wash, and the only change to the gun that's required is the barrel itself - not the mags and the bolt.

I have both and use both. Given my druthers in the hunting fields, I will usually carry the 6.8SPC for its superior downrange performance. But if I lacked that choice, needed reloading supply commonality (308 bullets, 223/5.56 brass), wanted AR part commonality with my small-bore ARs, or wanted to shoot SBRed/suppressed guns then I'd be very happy and well served with the 300AAC.

I mentioned that two years ago on the 6.8 forums and it was generally considered too much work. So, why is chopping brass to length OK? Sounds like a lot of work to do precisely, with an expensive machine to do in volume.

Click to expand...

and it's still laughable today $50 harbor freight chop saw, a C clamp and a block of scrap to set length and you're ready to go, in large quanaties.
Cutting off the rim is going to require a lathe $$$$ and isn't something you could do a 1000 rounds while you watch a foot ball game.

rbernie said:

Just as an FYI to this thread - I just bought 2K of once-fired LC brass trimmed/reformed to 300AAC for $99/thou. That's not bad, and a dang sight cheaper than I can buy once-fired 6.8SPC.

The economy argument still wins out in favor of 300AAC in the end - brass is cheaper in whatever form I buy it, low end 30cal pills are cheaper than their equivilent .277 bretheren, powder and primers are a wash, and the only change to the gun that's required is the barrel itself - not the mags and the bolt.

I have both and use both. Given my druthers in the hunting fields, I will usually carry the 6.8SPC for its superior downrange performance. But if I lacked that choice, needed reloading supply commonality (308 bullets, 223/5.56 brass), wanted AR part commonality with my small-bore ARs, or wanted to shoot SBRed/suppressed guns then I'd be very happy and well served with the 300AAC.

Click to expand...

Pretty fair analysis. Hoping that with S&B's recent 6.8 entry with low priced FMJ loads and quality brass reports, the costs continue to drop. As a component, it will be neigh impossible to compete with a surplus cartridges though, and the cottage industry of case conversion doesn't add much.

The economy argument still wins out in favor of 300AAC in the end - brass is cheaper in whatever form I buy it, low end 30cal pills are cheaper than their equivilent .277 bretheren, powder and primers are a wash, and the only change to the gun that's required is the barrel itself - not the mags and the bolt.

Click to expand...

Actually powder isn't even close to a wash, the 6.8 uses at least 25% more powder.

Not meaning to slight anyone's favorite round here... if you shoot and enjoy it, that's reason enough to have it, and I have no business spoiling someone else's enjoyment.

I think the whole concept of the ability to swap uppers suffers from the same problem that the Thompson Contender did/does: You can buy a whole dedicated, complete firearm for just a little more than the cost of the top part, especially when you factor in the cost of optics. So I don't think the ability to pop a different chambering on top of your lower is much of an advantage.

If you cross the bridge that says there is small financial advantage in swapping uppers and optics, and that you're as well off with dedicated rifles, the next question is, would you choose a dedicated rifle that shoots subsonic 308 bullets, or would you choose a dedicated 308?