6.8 spc or 300bo for a kids hunting rifle?

Which cartridge?

  • 300 blackout

    Votes: 8 25.8%

  • 6.8 spc

    Votes: 23 74.2%
  • Total voters
    31
Status
Not open for further replies.
Steve S. said:
The 6.8, 6.5, 300, (add most any other centerfire cartridge), etc, will effectively kill a deer. I think that we get way too anal about the God-like performance of our pet cartridge. Put a round in the center area of their chest and they will die (albeit some faster than others) but, they will die - contrary to some popular belief, that are not magic.
As to the OP’s question, I occasionally use my 6.8 AR to kill deer - it is easy - very little if any challenge (killing with that caliber that is). I also use a .308, 45-70, .45 Colt and .50 ML - they all kill deer effectively - I am sure that the 300 will do the same. In my mind, it is up to the skill of the shooter and a well placed shot, not the Godliness if the caliber used.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more, I've never been one to embrace the magnum craze. There is a constant push towards more and more "performance" or "terminal effectiveness" in hunting. It gets out of hand fast. I have no doubt either of the cartridges the OP mentioned would do the job on deer sized game. My comments were more directed in the fact that I think the trajectory, projectiles available to the round and in the end performance bears out to the decision I would make. A .223 with a good bonded bullet in the 64-75gr weight would do fine on deer as well, if legal in the state (albeit that many on this board would find that prospect appalling).
 
I have to vote for the x39 as well. The ammo is so cheap it can’t be just dismissed. The problems originally associated with the uppers has long ago been fixed. I have 3 x39 uppers from Bear Creek Arsenal. Right at about $200 for a complete upper. And they are great shooters. I have ~800 rounds through each of mine. Not one hiccup. You can spend a lot more for an upper. But why, when you can spend less and get a great product with a lifetime warranty. They also have complete 450 BM uppers for $220 (I have 2 of those as well). I’ve built all my rifles from BCA uppers and PSA MOW EPT lowers. I have no more that $400 in any of them and a couple are at $350. Cheaper than you can buy a basic AR-15 with flimsy handguards and cheap adjustable stocks. These are all H-Bars with free float, lightweight, MLOK handrails.

The x39 will take any deer or pig that walks out to 125 yards with Wolf ammo. And rolling your own will take you past that with the right bullets.

If you’re stubborn and just dead set against the x39, my vote is for the 6.8. You could give me a 300BLK. But I’d sell it and probably buy another x39 or 223 Wylde.

If nothing else, give them a look. It’s free to look.
 
As a .270 Lite , the 6.8 to me is the perfect youngster's deer cartridge. if you are putting on the muzzle device to protect hearing I presume you won't be fooling with sub sonics that IMHO are not good deer rounds except for very specialized and experience folks.
 
BigBore44 said:
I have to vote for the x39 as well. The ammo is so cheap it can’t be just dismissed. The problems originally associated with the uppers has long ago been fixed. I have 3 x39 uppers from Bear Creek Arsenal. Right at about $200 for a complete upper. And they are great shooters. I have ~800 rounds through each of mine. Not one hiccup. You can spend a lot more for an upper. But why, when you can spend less and get a great product with a lifetime warranty. They also have complete 450 BM uppers for $220 (I have 2 of those as well). I’ve built all my rifles from BCA uppers and PSA MOW EPT lowers. I have no more that $400 in any of them and a couple are at $350. Cheaper than you can buy a basic AR-15 with flimsy handguards and cheap adjustable stocks. These are all H-Bars with free float, lightweight, MLOK handrails.

The x39 will take any deer or pig that walks out to 125 yards with Wolf ammo. And rolling your own will take you past that with the right bullets.

If you’re stubborn and just dead set against the x39, my vote is for the 6.8. You could give me a 300BLK. But I’d sell it and probably buy another x39 or 223 Wylde.

If nothing else, give them a look. It’s free to look.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree, more the OP's desire for his kids rifles just screams x39 to me. I think the cheap ammo that is actually really good out of my x39 AR (Wolf in particular) will allow the kids plenty of trigger time to get used to shooting and get comfortable with the rifle. The 7.62x39 is one of my all time favorite cartridges. And with handloading with CFEBLK with .308 and .311 bullets it only gets better. But don't want to detract further as the OP said he doesn't want an x39; so I'll leave it at that.
 
Of the two, I’d go with a 6.8 SPC running factory loaded Hornady 120 grain SST ammo. I’ve killed several pigs and deer with this combo and I’ve been very pleased with the results. I think a 6.5 Grendel should also be in your thought process and I’d be hard pressed to make a decision between the 6.5 G and 6.8 SPC for a hunting rifle. I’m starting an SBR build right now and trying to decide between the 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel. Not a lot of difference. Ammo availability in my area is about the same. 6.8 has always fed more reliably for me than the Grendel though.
 
5F226F8E-FF2A-4BE7-927E-41BFC7CB7061.jpeg 6FF0762F-59B6-4E7C-86D5-3A04378B6417.jpeg [QUOTE
Varminterror said:
@z7 - guessing your oldest is 6-9yrs old with a 10” LOP, and total rifle weight is always on my mind when putting rifles in young hands.
Click to expand...

you nailed the age and size. She is 7 1/2 (she reminds me of the 1/2 all the time )

she is really good and patient with her 22lr, of course I have taken the time to fit it to her, and she is on a bench and is well supported, but she has the patience to make it count

the target pictured is a 3” circle at 100 yds, winds were variable but 10mph which makes a difference with a 22lr
 

Attachments

  • B8336C16-3FBF-4DD7-BA2C-722E6400D9E4.jpeg
    B8336C16-3FBF-4DD7-BA2C-722E6400D9E4.jpeg
    113.5 KB · Views: 5
IMO, if you are not going to suppress it, there is little reason to go with 300 blackout. Other calibers out perform it at supersonic velocities and/or they are cheaper.

I think 6.8 would make a good low recoil hunting round and do pretty well for target shooting. I agree with others that 7.62x39 is pretty good also and has the benefit of very cheap ammo to plink with. Those two would be a hard choice without something else pushing the decision.
 
I just cannot recommend the blackout. And I have one. I'm not sold on the suppressed hunting aspect of it. I don't think it's a good hunting round, and for plinking, 9mm suppresses better and way cheaper. For hunting, it's just pretty marginal, especially out of my short barrel rifle. For a hunting round, I'd recommend the 6.5 grendel or 6.8 spc all day every day. The grendel is nice because it has very little recoil, hits hard, outperforms the blackout in every way, and there is cheap wolf ammo available.
 
Actually based on my hunting experience with the .223 and 7.62x39, I would stick to a .223. 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC in that order. A soft point .223 does and excellent job on deer and is accurate, flat shooting and low recoil. I have shot 300 lb.deer with an AR in .223 like any bullet, it works if you put it in the rest place. Plus it does massive tissue damage. I also think a bolt action or lever is a better option due to the weight and bulk of the AR. The adjustable stock though is a big help. My son and I just a had a big discussion about this. I also went through this with my own kids when AR's weren't legal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: z7
Unless you live in one of the handful of states that do not allow it a 223 loaded properly will not be a handicap at ranges inside of 200 yards on deer size game. That is the simplest route to go. The 300 will certainly kill deer, but it is a step down from 223. If I wanted more punch for game larger than deer, or for ranges longer than 200 yards and it had to work on an AR 15 platform either the 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 are the only 2 I'd consider.
 
jmr40 said:
Unless you live in one of the handful of states that do not allow it a 223 loaded properly will not be a handicap at ranges inside of 200 yards on deer size game. That is the simplest route to go. The 300 will certainly kill deer, but it is a step down from 223. If I wanted more punch for game larger than deer, or for ranges longer than 200 yards and it had to work on an AR 15 platform either the 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 are the only 2 I'd consider.
Click to expand...

A step down from 223?
Anyone have the stats on 223 vs. 300Blackout (supersonic) muzzle energy?
 
jmr40 said:
Unless you live in one of the handful of states that do not allow it a 223 loaded properly will not be a handicap at ranges inside of 200 yards on deer size game. That is the simplest route to go. The 300 will certainly kill deer, but it is a step down from 223. If I wanted more punch for game larger than deer, or for ranges longer than 200 yards and it had to work on an AR 15 platform either the 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 are the only 2 I'd consider.
Click to expand...


Yeah that whole step down thing is not true at all. A 110g bullet from a 300 blk going roughly 2350 fps (lil gun can do this with ease from a 16” barrel) will give you roughly 1400 ft/lbs of energy. A common 223 hunting bullet, 60g Partition going 3100 fps (this is load data from a 22” barrel) will give you around 1320 ft/lbs of energy. Personally I prefer the almost double mass of the 300 with a slight edge in energy.

This is taking into consideration the OP stated all shots would be under 100 yards. The 223 will retain energy further but let’s be honest, at that point, neither are ideal for deer.
 
beeenbag said:
Yeah that whole step down thing is not true at all. A 110g bullet from a 300 blk going roughly 2350 fps (lil gun can do this with ease from a 16” barrel) will give you roughly 1400 ft/lbs of energy. A common 223 hunting bullet, 60g Partition going 3100 fps (this is load data from a 22” barrel) will give you around 1320 ft/lbs of energy. Personally I prefer the almost double mass of the 300 with a slight edge in energy.

This is taking into consideration the OP stated all shots would be under 100 yards. The 223 will retain energy further but let’s be honest, at that point, neither are ideal for deer.
Click to expand...

I’m not going to argue the physics of the two rounds, but after shooting several pigs and deer with both a 60 grain 223 and a 110-125 grain 300 BLK, I can say that I will choose the 223 over the 300 BLK all day, everyday. The 223 kills bigger than it has any right to.
 
Unfortunately many or most of you fail to understand how bullets work. Animals and people are largely liquid. Living tissue like water resists deflection as a square of velocity, Once you reach a certain velocity, tissue is not longer able to deflect fast enough. At that point the tissue acts more like a solid and the force is spread over a much larger area. It may help you to understand that at a certain velocity water cannot be deflected fast enough by a boat and instead of displacing water the boat begins to ride on top. That is called plaining. Since a bullet entering tissue cannot plane the resistance causes destruction to spread like a wave perpendicular to the axis of the wound channel. That is why high velocity bullets are so much more effective. It is the application of energy by bullets that deform and retain mass that causes the most effect on tissue. This has been known for over 100 years but apparently gun people don't believe what they can't understand even though the results speak for themselves. The Army found out over 50 years ago that the 5.56 NATO at normal combat ranges does as much if not more damage as the 7.62 NATO. Both bullets must be FMJ and deformation is limited. No one is going to say the 5.56 has more energy. 120 years later people still argue that big slow bullets are better. Just not true. And many of you will refuse to believe it. Don't worry slow bullets will still kill if you put them in the right place. Much of the wildlife in the US was wiped out when we were still using muzzleloaders.
 
I own several 300 blackout ar's and if I have to run a 16" barrel give me a 6.8 or 6.5 grendel any day. The compromise that is built in with the 300 blk isn't as obvious in short barrels, but if I have to keep it rifle legal and not sbr length,I am not using the blackout for a beginner. I also really like a 7.62x39, but in 18" min barrels.
 
Depends on terrain. 6.8 hands down after 75 yards or so. 300BO inside 50. If your expecting shots longer than 100 then lean 6.8. If your hunting in the thick stuff then the BO is a heavier bullet that will penetrate brush and twigs with less damage and less deflection. Bullet choices for 300 and 6.8 reflect the brush buster categories as well, because most hunting bullets I see for 6.8 are ballistic tips which will fail on a solid twig where the 300 essentially uses a 30-30 bullet that has been a brush bucker for decades.
 
I have to come to the 300 blackouts defense a little bit here. Mine seams to be a faster barrel than some others, but my 16” 300 blackout shoots a 125 grain hollow point right at 2400 FPS with no pressure indications of any kind with a book max load of H110. It was even faster with lil gun but it was unstable at sub zero temps. It is a Mighty Mouse of a cartridge.

My 16” 7.62x39 shoots factory wolf to 2300-2400 depending on the temperature. My hunting load was a 125 grain nosler accubond over a max load of CFE-BLK which gives 2620 FPS. Point blank hold to 200 yards and still 2000 FPS out to 250.
 
Last edited:
d2wing said:
Unfortunately many or most of you fail to understand how bullets work. Animals and people are largely liquid. Living tissue like water resists deflection as a square of velocity, Once you reach a certain velocity, tissue is not longer able to deflect fast enough. At that point the tissue acts more like a solid and the force is spread over a much larger area. It may help you to understand that at a certain velocity water cannot be deflected fast enough by a boat and instead of displacing water the boat begins to ride on top. That is called plaining. Since a bullet entering tissue cannot plane the resistance causes destruction to spread like a wave perpendicular to the axis of the wound channel. That is why high velocity bullets are so much more effective. It is the application of energy by bullets that deform and retain mass that causes the most effect on tissue. This has been known for over 100 years but apparently gun people don't believe what they can't understand even though the results speak for themselves. The Army found out over 50 years ago that the 5.56 NATO at normal combat ranges does as much if not more damage as the 7.62 NATO. Both bullets must be FMJ and deformation is limited. No one is going to say the 5.56 has more energy. 120 years later people still argue that big slow bullets are better. Just not true. And many of you will refuse to believe it. Don't worry slow bullets will still kill if you put them in the right place. Much of the wildlife in the US was wiped out when we were still using muzzleloaders.
Click to expand...

I’ve shot deer with bullets ranging from 100 to 350 grains, and muzzle velocities from 1200 to 3300 FPS. I’m not a believer in the fast and light approach anymore. I do agree small fast bullets can be perfectly effective, but I prefer the results I get from larger diameter bullets hitting in the 2200-2700 FPS range or so.
 
I have killed stuff with light and slow, fast and heavy, heavy and slow and light and fast. Only problem with that last sentence is the fact that it leaves LOTS of variables out of the equation. Most importantly no qualifications for fast, slow, light or heavy.

I am pretty sure we can find someone that has killed a water buffalo with a squirt gun if we wait long enough. Over the last decade or so there has been a movement towards less powerful rounds for animals, maybe everything dies instantly on video games.

Not too long ago the 30-30 was looked at as an “OK” medium game round, despite being well above modern considerations.
 
Many, maybe even most of my likes and dislikes are not based on objective or quantitative data. They are subjective and qualitative. From reading posts on this website and others I don’t think I’m alone. And just because I or anyone else doesn’t care for a cartridge or firearms model doesn’t mean we are condemning another persons choice.

The only AR-15 cartridge I’d ever use in a caliber larger than 5.6 is a 6.5 Grendel. I also don’t live or hunt in straight wall only deer state.
My first choice if in the OP’s situation would be .223 Remington or one of the faster .224 short action cartridges. If not a .224 caliber cartridge then I’d go 6.5 Grendel. For most of my adult life I believed the .223 Remington to be inadequate for deer. I now belief it’s just fine.
 
The Ruger American ranch in 300 B-O is very light, versatile, and compact. It can be used with effective 125 grain soft points at supersonic levels, or Hornady's excellent SUB-X rounds for subsonic- I killed a deer with it last year and it performed well, along with several other critters. It is also a suppressor-ready bolt action rifle, and can be found for less than $400. Mrs. Fl-NC has basically commandeered mine for her deer rifle.
300 B-O fox.jpg
 
I think any of them will do the job within range constraints. Part of the reason I like 6.8 is I think it will be easier to shoot out to 200 or 300 yards than 300 Blackout. Cost is probably similar, but I haven't checked.

I have rifles that shoot both of them so that is also an option. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MISportsman
  • Locked
6.8 spc or .300 ham'r?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
136
Views
11K
mshootnit
M
J
  • Locked
6.8 spc ar
Replies
3
Views
380
PercyShelley
P
another pake
  • Locked
AR Hunting Platform for Kids
Replies
5
Views
569
d2wing
d2wing
T
  • Locked
6.8 spc for hunting
2
Replies
25
Views
3K
Ratdog68
R
F
  • Locked
6.8 spc any good for hunting?
2
Replies
42
Views
22K
ramacu
R
Back
Top