Please stop hunting with 220gr 300 BLK subsonic

Click Click Doh said:

Some heads do expand. For the rest, you get a good width of razor cutting that is much wider than a 30 cal bullet. Arrows wound by cutting, a completely different dynamic than bullets.

Click to expand...

The Lehigh 194gr subsonics open up very similar to a broadhead and have some cutting effect as well.

Grumulkin said:

2. The most dangerous animals in the world are hunted with bullets that don't expand.

Click to expand...

It is hard to take someone seriously when they compare a subsonic VLD bullet with something like a semi-wadcutter solid in .375 H&H Mag. It is like noting that a dump truck and a Ferrari both have four wheels and suggesting they are interchangeable. The same criticism applies to your comments on military rounds as well.

d2wing said:

Ah, the truth about slow. Many do not understand the slow bullets punch holes but do not do tissue damage. Every thumper fanboy will be on here bragging about knock down power which doesn't exist in big game cartridges.

Click to expand...

not really bashing on you but the already do not use the .223.

The 300 blk is just a necked up .223. It has half of the energy of a 44 mag and a smaller bullet. so it should be kept within range accordingly. As far as a real ethical hunter complaining about an over expanded bullet on anything but dangerous game is total b.s. Again a real hunter knows what he needs in a bullet/cartridge combo. I am in total agreement with the OP. I have tried .223 on deer this year with different heavier soft points with thicker jackets with mild success (nothing like a SGK 150gr out of a .308). I limit an average .223 in an average ar-15 with the right bullet to no more than 200 yds and you better be a good shot when it comes to hunting. I would limit the 300 blk with a cast bullet at subsonic velocity to 40 yrds. and at full velocity with a cast lead bullet to 125 yrd, again with a good shot when it comes to hunting. Also the military going to full metal jacket was a combination effort from NATO. And it was because SP or HP ammo caused more damage and often killed more. They agreed from a cost stand point and a reliability stand point and a great factor. Wounded report vs. death report (think about it). its a field proven fact fmj sucks at killing and hp and sp ammo is king at it. The OP took care of the rest of that B.S. about to fast of cartridges and muzzle loaders. but anyways. lots of magnums do not fair well because they do zip in and out, bullet jackets are harder than needed on the game they are used for. most people buy factor ammo intended for elk or bear and shoot deer with it, case and point it goes right threw like a FMJ. Muzzle loaders had a very limited range much the same as i limited the blk above and yet they had larger diameter projectiles.

.300 Blackout has been pushed by gun writers and gun builders in the last 6 yrs to make sales. But the Russian 7.62 x 39 does a better job . Stick with the SKS in hunting hogs and deer and life would be good. Or the plain ole proven 12 gauge slugs if you are just gonna hunt close range.

Pretty laughable;

An arrow cuts and a bullet out of a 300 Blackout is apparently pretty benign and doesn't do much at all.

Bullets out of other guns do "tissue damage" and apparently those out of a 300 Blackout don't do much.

And those who use subsonics in a 300 Blackout to hunt with are unethical? LOL.

We even had one guy who claims to have success with the round state that his normal MO is to put one round in the animals shoulder to knock it down and keep it from running away then a second round in the head to kill it. That's just not right.

Click to expand...

I want to first state that I do not hunt so my opinion on the cartridge really holds no value in this area. HOWEVER I must say I completely respect this guy for stating his unpopular opinion. He will likely catch flak but stands for what he agrees with.

I find hunters all too many times that will shoot bad shots or too long shots with the caliber they have just because they want to shoot something. I also know hunters who have shot something and it darted off into the woods and they refused to track it becuase it was too much work.

I do have respect for animals but I am not against hunting if you use the animal for good use, but just going out to shoot and/ or kill something is appalling. I am glad to see a hunter share that opinion!

If you have ownership of the land in question you have final say with regard to hunting and methods.

If you have issues with a particular legal method beyond your property, take take that up with your state's regulatory authority and/or lobby for a change.

I've not taken any deer with a subsonic .30 but I've killed some game with conventional handguns. I killed a hog clean with a 45 caliber 255 SWC doing barely 900 fps; it drove through the shoulders & spine and was recovered just under the skin on the off side.

Energy does not kill; internal damage kills. How fast it kills is a matter of placement and the amount of damage that results.

Grumulkin said:

Bullets out of other guns do "tissue damage" and apparently those out of a 300 Blackout don't do much.

Click to expand...

Not when they are .308 match bullets designed for long-range shooting travelling at less than 1000fps. They don't expand; because they aren't designed to expand. They don't fragment; because they are travelling half the velocity they were designed to withstand. They don't do damage by overstretching tissue because they are moving way too slow.

The only thing they let you do is lob a subsonic bullet relatively accurately at longer distances because the bullet has a good ballistic coefficient. However that combination of slow speed and very low drag means when it hits an animal, it actually makes a smaller than .30 hole (because the tissue is elastic and just stretches as the bullet passes). Fire the same bullet at 2700fps and it will do completely different damage.

By the numbers, subsonic 300 BLK is trucking along with about the same energy as a 1911 firing .45 ACP +P Gold Dots.

Click to expand...

Therein lies the problem with using energy as a gauge of a cartridge's effectiveness. It is an entirely useless number but people still cling to it.

Ah, the truth about slow. Many do not understand the slow bullets punch holes but do not do tissue damage. Every thumper fanboy will be on here bragging about knock down power which doesn't exist in big game cartridges.

Click to expand...

No one who ever used a "big and slow" LBT or SWC with a wide meplat on game will ever make that statement.


The problem with both the above statements is that they are using energy to compare things that should never be compared. You simply cannot compare a .45ACP that is already big enough to produce an effective wound channel to a friggin' 220gr spitzer that is driven too slow to expand. Nor can you conclude ANYTHING about big bores based on the effectiveness of the .300BLK.


Energy places too much importance on velocity, which is the most rapidly diminishing factor, too little on weight and none on diameter, none on bullet construction or shape. Take two loads, we'll leave diameter and construction out of it.

220gr@1100fps = 591ft-lbs

250gr@900fps = 450ft-lbs

If all we look at is energy, the 220gr load would be perceived as better. Look at what a very modest increase in velocity did to the energy figures. Only 200fps, with a 10% lighter bullet made up 140ft-lbs of energy or 25%. This is all completely bogus and useless. That is because the 220gr load is the .300BLK that uses a bullet too small to do much tissue damage on its own and a bullet that will not expand at those velocities. That load will just "poke a hole" and to use it is just a stunt as it is not even marginal. The 250gr load is the .44Spl or .45Colt using a SWC or LBT style cast bullet. It doesn't need to expand to be effective. It will penetrate any deer that walks from end to end, break bones, produce an effective wound channel and kill that deer graveyard dead in short order. This load is proven to be very effective and very consistent.

So what does that tell us about energy?

I mentioned in a post a few months ago that I thought hunting deer with a 223 was unethical, I was lambasted for my opinion. Like the OP asking to stop hunting with a ballistacally inadequate round, I agree with him. Both the subsonic 300 black out I consider the 223 an inadequate round for deer and consider both to be an unethical choice for hunting deer. If a hunter has excellent skills he can take deer with whatever he wants to, just as long as shot placement is perfect there is no problem. The problem comes when a hunter overestimates his ability to put the shot exactly where it needs to be. Just a little movement at the time the rifle is fired can cause the impact point to be off by a few inches meaning that now the animal is wounded and with the 223 there will not be much of a blood trail to follow. Common sense is becoming uncommon anymore.

ARs come in too many flavors, some of them quite effective against deer. Heck, the .223 is effective against deer in the hands of a competent shooters, but we never really know what we are getting so we don't allow it for the clients.

Click to expand...

Exactly, hence my suggestion

You could always do like Sweden and make folks pass a shooting proficiency test before being allowed to hunt, but just saying no to ARs period might be the easiest route

There's no reason to restrict all ARs, jut those chambered in marginal calibers. A 6.8, 6.5, the WSSMs, and a multitide of wildcat cartridges are perfectly capable deer killers in a totally different class from the 300BO.

I have a bud who has shot four Alabama deer with a 125 grain 300 Blackhawk and he was not able to recover the animals. He is an above the average shot, using a blind, rest, and scope, but the deer ran off and he was not able to track them.

As can be found in this thread, the 125 grain bullet is only moving around 2200 fps, lesser power than a 150 grain 30-30. My Marlin 336 moves Rem factory 150 core lokt at 2253 fps. Not exactly a huge margin, but more.

I guess I just don't understand what the fascination is that some have with using marginal cartridges for the sake of novelty. I'm pretty sure sure I could kill a deer with my '51 Navy, but to what end?

My personal philosophy is that I'm not angry at the deer, hog, whatever. It didn't steal my wallet, sleep with my girlfriend, or egg my car. More to the point, rather than holding a grudge against it for being what it is- an animal- that's doing nothing more than the Good Lord designed it to do- animal stuff- I kind of like them. Respect them, actually. And as a matter of respect, given that I'm taking its life, I try to do so in as humane and honorable a fashion as I can. In practice, this means trying to make a perfect shot, and failing that, using enough gun to still put it down if I don't. As a simple matter of decency, if a particular cartridge requires you to thread the needle with every shot, it seems to me you really ought to be using something else.

If someone's ego requires dramatically increasing the risk of inflicting a whole lot of pain and suffering on an animal for the sake of novel bragging rights, then there's something wrong at work there. Field conditions aren't the target range. Most hunters are poor shots. Most "good" marksmen aren't half as good as they think they are. And everyone misses the bullseye from time to time. Plan accordingly.

What's the difference between these:

300 Black Out pushing a 240gr SMK at 1020fps out of an AR
308 Win pushing a 220gr SMK at 1020fps out of a M700 AAC
338 Lapua Mag pushing a 185gr Hornady at 1020fps out of a Sako TRG


One cartridge is considered marginal for deer, one is considered a classic and the other is overkill. In the examples above the Blackout is carrying the most energy.

Each one can kill very efficiently with said load and at the same time wound. To me it's about knowing the capabilities of the round and your abilities where to put it where it needs to go. Just like any other cartridge.

dubbleA said:

What's the difference between these:

300 Black Out pushing a 240gr SMK at 1020fps out of an AR
308 Win pushing a 220gr SMK at 1020fps out of a M700 AAC
338 Lapua Mag pushing a 185gr Hornady at 1020fps out of a Sako TRG


One cartridge is considered marginal for deer, one is considered a classic and the other is overkill. In the examples above the Blackout is carrying the most energy.

Click to expand...

All three of those are marginal loadings for deer. Most wouldn't consider any of those classic, overkill or adequate hunting loads.

It's a simple matter really. An effective subsonic load needs to be heavy in order to make up for the lack of velocity. It needs either a nice wide meplat or good, repeatable expansion at subsonic velocities. Without one of those you can't expect to have good results. A pointy, narrow streamlined bullet like a .30 cal SMK is not even close to an appropriate choice for subsonic hunting.

I think that is the big issue with subsonic .300 - the more effective rounds have BCs that aren't any better than a .45 so you are back to square 1. The rounds with great BC don't have any decent terminal effect - they are like FMJ pistol ammo.

It is that whole trying to combine a good BC with good terminal performance and reliable feeding from an AR that is the Holy Grail right now.

That's just Deer Camp bluster.

Click to expand...

That's ironic coming from an energy clinger. Sorry but far too many head of big game have fallen to such loads. My own experience supports this beyond any doubt.

A link: http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/dissolving_the_myth.htm

And a quote:

"I have personally taken about 10 antelope and 1 mule deer with a .45 Colt. My wife has taken around 6 antelope and 5 mule deer with her .45 Colt. She uses a 4 3/4" Seville and the handload is a 260 Keith cast at 900 fps. This load will shoot lengthwise of antelope and mule deer at 100 yards. In my estimation it kills as well as the .270, 30-06 class rifles if the shots are placed properly. If I were hunting heavier game I'd step up the velocity to 1200 fps and in extreme circumstances, (elk, hogs, bear) go to the 310 gr cast slug. This load, 310 at 1200 will go through elk like so much air. These loads can be managed by anyone who is serious about handgunning big game. My wife is 5' 1" and goes about 100 lbs with her gun on. She likes the power the .45 gives her with a minimum of recoil and blast. She has hunted with me for 15 years now and is a very serious handgun shooter. I think the .45 Colt has a lot to do with this as it gives her big bore power without big bore recoil and blast. My sons also shoot the .45 Colt a lot and I had the pleasure to watch my oldest son at age 14 take a nice mule deer buck this year with a 5 1/2" Colt SAA at about 90 yards range. The load, 260 Keith at 900 fps. Its plain, no bells or whistles, but it works every time."

Energy is a critical wounding component in high velocity bullets.

Click to expand...

Utter nonsense. We have proven that energy is a meaningless number. What matters is what a specific bullet does at a specific impact velocity. How much does it expand? How deeply does it penetrate? How broad a wound channel does it create? Does it exit? The energy it produces while doing so is irrelevant. It's a simplistic crutch for those who do not understand that terminal ballistics is a terribly complicated subject that can't be explained away with a simple mathematical formula.

sfed said:

I mentioned in a post a few months ago that I thought hunting deer with a 223 was unethical, I was lambasted for my opinion. Like the OP asking to stop hunting with a ballistacally inadequate round, I agree with him. Both the subsonic 300 black out I consider the 223 an inadequate round for deer and consider both to be an unethical choice for hunting deer. If a hunter has excellent skills he can take deer with whatever he wants to, just as long as shot placement is perfect there is no problem. The problem comes when a hunter overestimates his ability to put the shot exactly where it needs to be. Just a little movement at the time the rifle is fired can cause the impact point to be off by a few inches meaning that now the animal is wounded and with the 223 there will not be much of a blood trail to follow. Common sense is becoming uncommon anymore.

Click to expand...

Agreed, but that's true of any weapon. Even a hunter armed with a 7mm Rem. Mag can overestimate both his own ability and the capabilities of his rifle. I also imagine it's pretty easy for a bow hunter to overestimate, especially when new to the sport.

For the record, I'm on board with the OP's assertion that 220 grain subsonic is a poor choice for deer due to the fact that the bullet won't expand at a distance (or probably even at close range). However, the .300 blk firing a Barnes130 TSX at 2000 f/s would be fine as long as the hunter didn't push his luck in terms of range.

Similarly, with the .223, a 55 Grain FMJ is a terrible choice, but a bonded or pre-segmented 60 grain or heavier bullet is a whole different story, once again, if ranges are kept reasonable.

I'm convinced that what I refer to as "long range mania" combined with little thought being put into bullet selection will result in more wounded game than the use of any given centerfire chambering.

For the number nerds:

300BO, 240SMK, 1050fps
Hatcher relative stopping power: 29.14
Taylor KO factor: 11.09
Thorniley stopping power: 57.26
Optimum game weight: 100.02

45 Colt, 250 WNFP, 950fps
Hatcher RSP: 33.93
Taylor KO: 15.40
TSP: 65.52
OGW: 80.38

Apparently some folks missed the entire 20th century. It was found back in the 19th century that bullet exceeding velocities not possible with black power have an effect on tissue called cavitation. The higher speed loads at different thresholds causes expanding bullets to release energy at a rate beyond that which flesh can separate causing massive damage and much larger wound cavities than the bullet diameter. I take the slow guys never took a science class. the KO factor is nonsense made up by guys that don't understand energy, wounds and anything requiring literacy. A .45 Colt is not even legal in this state for hunting. I could go on about gun mythology but I doubt I can help the deniers of science not to say deniers the vast study and experience military experts and the mainstream of bullet manufactures.
Slow big bullets work within reason because in the old days hunters were hunters and with proper placement black powder and arrows do work. Small, really slow bullets don't work well at all.