.556 vs 300BLK

[Woobie]

Do you have any proof of the above two statements in bold? From what I've read, you are making assumptions based on facts not in evidence...in other words, you're dead wrong. The 300 was designed for shooting at far greater distances than 50 meters, but not be easily identified as the source. The wound channel of the 5.56 is a function of the bullet it fires, not the MV or energy. Blame the Geneva Convention, not the cartridge.

As for the statement in red, I presume you've never heard of the Remington 30 AR, which does approximate 30/30 ballistics from a cartridge that IS fed from an AR magazine. For absolutely everything except shooting suppressed, it is superior to the 300 AAC Blackout. The simple reality here is that the 300 does suck at everything other than shooting suppressed. The numbers don't lie.

I think the 300 is COOL...I really do, but it has very little practical purpose. It is meant to kill people, at distance, without being noticed as the gun doing the killing. The idea precedes the current 300 AAC Blackout cartridge by at least 30 years (see 300 Whisper) and aside from being able to shoot the sub-sonic stuff w/o ear protection, I see little to recommend it over other designs. Once again, the very fast twist rate in the barrel makes it a one-trick pony, but apparently all the tacti-cool guys can't wrap their head around that annoying little fact.

The first quote in bold was with reference to the subsonic ammunition available. It is a denial of reality to think his was meant for even intermediate distances. If you look at what Kevin Brittingham has to say about the cartridge, he basically says as much.

If you want to know more about m855 wound channel, ask the MTU at camp Robinson in Arkansas. That's where I learned about it all. bullet design makes a huge difference.

ok, the 30 ar. We're really getting into the weeds here. You're missing the whole point of what I'm trying to tell you. The design was not for the sportsman, but the military. This is why bullet design enters the conversation. It's why bolt face uniformity matters and magazine follower uniformity.

There are better cartridges for the sportsman. I've never said anything different. All I'm saying is that as a combat cartridge, in the role it was designed to fill, it is superior to the .556. I don't even own one, I have other items higher on the agenda. All I'm saying is that you're looking at this from a point of view that never mattered to the original customer of the designers. This explains its inferiorities in the areas that matter to you, as well as its strengths in a role you don't care about.

 

[Broom_jm]

There are better cartridges for the sportsman. I've never said anything different. All I'm saying is that as a combat cartridge, in the role it was designed to fill, it is superior to the .556. I don't even own one, I have other items higher on the agenda. All I'm saying is that you're looking at this from a point of view that never mattered to the original customer of the designers. This explains its inferiorities in the areas that matter to you, as well as its strengths in a role you don't care about.

OK, and those design elements are important to the average citizen...how? I'm sure the 300 has attributes that make it valuable in combat, but how does that translate to the civilian market? Are guys really that fascinated with the idea of being able to kill other people without a lot of noise? Since that is the only thing this round really excels at, I just don't see the allure.

 

[Vamptepes]

A bullet that excells at suppression and that's about all it exceeds at. Many rounds better then the .300.. unless your using a suppressor or using an AR platform I see no real use for me. AR platform due to the barrel only change requirement. It's a quiet round but I never got bit by the blackout bug. Or seen the magical qualities that make people defend it so much.

 

[Woobie]

Ok, just to review, the op asked about 300 blk vs 556, and included certain parameters. I didn't say killing people, quietly or otherwise, is of use to anybody here, outside of some circumstances we all hope don't happen, like defend against a home invasion. But inside the parameters of the question, 300 blk is almost always superior to the 556. Is it any good against deer? I wouldn't use it, but in a theoretical world where I was forced to pick between these two, I would choose the 300 blk. Is it a better defense round? Yes. Using lighter bullets, it's ballistically almost the same as 7.62 x 39, actually a little better. Nobody is arguing the ak round is less effective at stopping people than the 556. The better varmint round? Once again there are better choices out there, but you'd have to say the 223 in this choice. All I'm saying is that we are comparing two cartridges of military origin. In the context of a sportsman, there will be obvious shortcomings. If cost and availability of ammo were not factors, and the op said they weren't, I'd go 300 blk, and I think it's pretty simple to see that. Add those factors back in and this discussion changes.

 

[shibumiseeker]

Ok, just to review, the op asked about 300 blk vs 556, and included certain parameters. I didn't say killing people, quietly or otherwise, is of use to anybody here, outside of some circumstances we all hope don't happen, like defend against a home invasion. But inside the parameters of the question, 300 blk is almost always superior to the 556. Is it any good against deer? I wouldn't use it, but in a theoretical world where I was forced to pick between these two, I would choose the 300 blk. Is it a better defense round? Yes. Using lighter bullets, it's ballistically almost the same as 7.62 x 39, actually a little better. Nobody is arguing the ak round is less effective at stopping people than the 556. The better varmint round? Once again there are better choices out there, but you'd have to say the 223 in this choice. All I'm saying is that we are comparing two cartridges of military origin. In the context of a sportsman, there will be obvious shortcomings. If cost and availability of ammo were not factors, and the op said they weren't, I'd go 300 blk, and I think it's pretty simple to see that. Add those factors back in and this discussion changes.

I said it upthread, but it seems to get ignored: for the reloader who casts their own it is very cheap shooting. It is much harder to cast for .223/5.56 than 300BLK. I am loading my 300BLK rounds for about a nickel a round, with the bulk of that cost being the primer. It's as effective as almost anything else of comparable power against varmints in my woods at the ranges I am going to shoot, it doesn't suffer from significant velocity loss out of a pistol length barrel, and it allows me the use of an AR platform round with only a barrel change, every other piece of the gun stays the same with brass being easily made from the most common brass available in the US. Hence why I like it, even though I doubt I'll ever be forced to use it in self defense and I doubt I'll ever suppress it.

 

[Woobie]

Good point on the barrel length. These two rounds definitely have different barrel length requirements with regards to efficiency. My thoughts with suppressing it is just that you can do it very well with the 300blk, and you can easily load subs to reduce noise even further. To me what this means is that it brings another level of versatility to the platform. Whether you use it or not is a matter of preference.

 

[Ericpwp]

I wanted to build an AR pistol. I had to buy a barrel. I could not find a round that appealed to me more then 300blk. I don't need an AR to shoot a pistol round, and 5.56 is wasted on a short barrel.

 

[SteveM4A1]

Ok, just to review, the op asked about 300 blk vs 556, and included certain parameters. I didn't say killing people, quietly or otherwise, is of use to anybody here, outside of some circumstances we all hope don't happen, like defend against a home invasion. But inside the parameters of the question, 300 blk is almost always superior to the 556. Is it any good against deer? I wouldn't use it, but in a theoretical world where I was forced to pick between these two, I would choose the 300 blk. Is it a better defense round? Yes. Using lighter bullets, it's ballistically almost the same as 7.62 x 39, actually a little better. Nobody is arguing the ak round is less effective at stopping people than the 556. The better varmint round? Once again there are better choices out there, but you'd have to say the 223 in this choice. All I'm saying is that we are comparing two cartridges of military origin. In the context of a sportsman, there will be obvious shortcomings. If cost and availability of ammo were not factors, and the op said they weren't, I'd go 300 blk, and I think it's pretty simple to see that. Add those factors back in and this discussion changes.

Agreed. I think broom_jm has something against the 300 blk, as I have read numerous posts by him about how 556 is better. There are many variables and situations that come into play for which caliber is best suited for a certain role. For me, I wanted a SBR with better performance than the 5.56 in supersonic velocities, with the minimal amount of change to my AR15. The 300 blk is perfect for this, and being able to suppress it in the future just makes me smile that much more. I don't ever take shots over 100 yards, either at the range or hunting yotes (or deer in the future even). For me, I couldn't find a better round than 300 blk for my application.

 

[CathyInBlue]

In my understanding, an AR-15 in .300BLK is essentially an AR-10 in AR-15 clothing, wearing its little brother's magazines.

 

[Robjps]

In my understanding, an AR-15 in .300BLK is essentially an AR-10 in AR-15 clothing, wearing its little brother's magazines.

Not at all. It' is a 30 caliber but going 1/3 to 1/4 the speed of normal 30 caliber loads.

 

[Broom_jm]

Agreed. I think broom_jm has something against the 300 blk, as I have read numerous posts by him about how 556 is better. There are many variables and situations that come into play for which caliber is best suited for a certain role. For me, I wanted a SBR with better performance than the 5.56 in supersonic velocities, with the minimal amount of change to my AR15. The 300 blk is perfect for this, and being able to suppress it in the future just makes me smile that much more. I don't ever take shots over 100 yards, either at the range or hunting yotes (or deer in the future even). For me, I couldn't find a better round than 300 blk for my application.

I don't have anything against any cartridge, but you just illustrated the proliferation of ignorance surrounding this particular round. You list all of these firearm design elements, but then state you "don't ever take shots over 100 yards, either at the range or hunting yotes..." You go on to to state you won't take more than 100 yard shots on deer, so you couldn't find a better round than the 300 AAC Blackout.

I'm not going to go into it, again, but you simply don't understand what this cartridge was designed to do. Anyone with an understanding of the military applications for this cartridge is grimacing at your reasoning for buying a 300 BLK...and so are deer hunters. Heck, even coyote hunters are puzzled.

With this kind of logic and lack of knowledge on the topic, I give up. It's a cool gun and fun to shoot. Long live the 300.

 

[SteveM4A1]

I don't have anything against any cartridge, but you just illustrated the proliferation of ignorance surrounding this particular round. You list all of these firearm design elements, but then state you "don't ever take shots over 100 yards, either at the range or hunting yotes..." You go on to to state you won't take more than 100 yard shots on deer, so you couldn't find a better round than the 300 AAC Blackout.

I'm not going to go into it, again, but you simply don't understand what this cartridge was designed to do. Anyone with an understanding of the military applications for this cartridge is grimacing at your reasoning for buying a 300 BLK...and so are deer hunters. Heck, even coyote hunters are puzzled.

With this kind of logic and lack of knowledge on the topic, I give up. It's a cool gun and fun to shoot. Long live the 300.

I've hunted coyotes for many years, so please explain to me how the 300 blk is a poor cartridge for me. I've dropped 2 just fine in the past month with it...seems to be working for me?

Edit: And just so we are clear Broom_jm, you believe the .223/5.56 is more lethal than the 300 blk at supersonic velocities, correct?

 

[Ericpwp]

150 gr are around 1900 fps. The subsonic (1100ish) are around 220-230gr.

 

[SteveM4A1]

I don't have anything against any cartridge, but you just illustrated the proliferation of ignorance surrounding this particular round. You list all of these firearm design elements, but then state you "don't ever take shots over 100 yards, either at the range or hunting yotes..." You go on to to state you won't take more than 100 yard shots on deer, so you couldn't find a better round than the 300 AAC Blackout.

I'm not going to go into it, again, but you simply don't understand what this cartridge was designed to do. Anyone with an understanding of the military applications for this cartridge is grimacing at your reasoning for buying a 300 BLK

Now that I am at a computer, let's take a look at your statements. You claim I am ignorant of the design elements of this cartridge, and that this round was only designed to launch heavy bullets quietly, from distances further than 100 yards. Well, let's look at what the designers (the company that standardized the round) say...

300 AAC BLACKOUT (300BLK)

Now, I assume that Advanced Armament operates this website and publicized this information. Are you claiming they are lying about the goals of this particular round? Or are you claiming that most of the information on the internet about the 300 blk is inaccurate? Do you have any references as to where one can find the correct information?

In reality, I couldn't care less what it is designed to do, but am more concerned on what it actually does in the field.

...and so are deer hunters. Heck, even coyote hunters are puzzled.

Why are other hunters puzzled with my decision? I haven't hunted deer with it yet, but will probably do so in the future. I only have 2 kills on coyotes with the 300 blk, but the results were outstanding compared to .223. The wound channel and the amount of energy that were dumped into those 2 coyotes was very nice and they ran no further than 10 yards when hit. I can't say the same for my kills with .223.

With this kind of logic and lack of knowledge on the topic, I give up. It's a cool gun and fun to shoot. Long live the 300.

Please enlighten us to your knowledge and provide some sources. I am here to learn.

Not at all. It' is a 30 caliber but going 1/3 to 1/4 the speed of normal 30 caliber loads.

Where are you getting this information? Are you talking about subsonic 300 blk only? You can read more here if you want. Supersonic 300 blk doesn't travel at 1/4 of the velocity as a .308, unless you have some very interesting load data you would like to share?

http://300aacblackout.com/resources/300-BLK.pdf

 

[Muzzle Flash]

Well I got one.

Long story short , I'm getting ready to retire , and decided to take a gunsmiths course (didn't want to end up all day at the legion or v). Because of my age and interest I kept to classic firearms , the closer I got to opening a shop I knew I would have to go to modern platforms. After many hours of getting advice/study ballistics I decided on 6.5 but when I was at the creek,I ended up buying a 300,I'm impressed with it.Butt I have a howa 1500 for 5.56 and the accuracy between the 300 and the 5.56 howa isn't even close. My 2 cents.

 

[Broom_jm]

@ SteveM4A1

You posted a link to the website, but I took the liberty of actually quoting from their site:

"At 300 meters, 300 BLK has 16.7% more energy than 7.62x39mm. Max effective range, using M4 military standards for hit probability, is 440 meters for a 9 inch barrel, and 460 meters for a 16 inch barrel. 300 BLK from a 9 inch barrel has the same energy at the muzzle as a 14.5 inch barrel M4, and about 5% more energy at 440 meters - even though the barrel is much shorter."

Since you have never deer hunted, and we live in a state where deer hunting cartridges are limited in range, you suppose that 100 yards is the longest shot you'll ever take. In legal terms, my friend, you are making assumptions based on facts not in evidence. If you would like to hunt deer, and Indiana finally does away with their draconian regulations, you will eventually be presented with an opportunity to shoot a deer at significantly greater distance than 100 yards. For you to claim that you would not take such a shot, having never been in that situation, is an unwitting fallacy; if you see a good buck at 200 yards, you are going to want to shoot at it. The 300 BLK is a marginal choice for such shooting.

Again, from the website YOU posted the link to:

"For hunting - think of it as like a 30-30 but from an AR. After you are done, you can remove your 5-round magazine and put in a 30 for plinking or home defense. For ammo, Remington has you covered with the Premiere AccuTip 125 grain."

Talk to any knowledgeable big game hunter about deer hunting with a 125 grain bullet from a 30-caliber rifle, or ask them about the effective range of a 30-30, with normal loads...it might be an eye-opening experience for you.

I have been loading 125 grain BT's from a 30-'06 for several years, and have harvested three deer with that load. It is launching bullets at ~2,600fps and I consider it adequate out to maybe 200 yards. The longest kill made with it thus far has been 125 yards. The above-mentioned Remington factory ammo for the 300 BLK drives a very similar bullet to a MV of 2,215fps, from what is almost certainly a 16" barrel. From your pistol-length barrel, expect perhaps as little as 2,100fps. Even if you're getting the full 2,200fps, it may be best that you limit your range to 100 yards, after all.

But, even these claims made about the 300 BLK being like a 30-30 are patently false; it is far more comparable to the 7.62x39, since both can shoot light-for-caliber bullets to a similar velocity. When you consider that a 30-30 will deliver a 170-gr bullet at 2,200fps, and that mass trumps velocity in a big game bullet, the 300 BLK is simply not as good as a 30-30 for hunting larger critters. To put it in simple numbers, the 125 grain bullet is only 73% as heavy as the 170 grain bullet, but they have essentially the same MV. Looking at it from the other side of the equation, it would be no trick at all to get 300fps more MV from a 30-30 if you were loading 125 grain bullets for it. Heck, I load 160gr FTX bullets that launch at over 2,300fps and have a BC just as good as any 125-gr tipped bullet in the same caliber.

Are you starting to get the picture? The 300 AAC Blackout is freakin' COOL...but don't try to make it into something it ain't. If you're going to hunt deer, get a gun that fires a real big game cartridge. Also, you must be a close-range coyote hunter. I grew up out west, where close shots on yotes and ground squirrels were 200 or less. We considered those chip shots, but we were firing very accurate bolt-action rifles with real, honest-to-god varmint cartridges.

The 300 AAC Blackout has basically been around for 20 years, in the form of the 300 Whisper; they're essentially the exact same cartridge, save the name stamped on the brass. A buddy of mine had one in a T/C Contender, way back when. It was fun to shoot, but since the ONLY thing it did better than my 30 Herrett was shoot heavies at sub-sonic velocity, I had little interest in it. From a practical standpoint, it was a solution to a problem that simply doesn't exist for normal civilians. I don't need to be relatively quite about delivering a lethal shot at anything hundreds of meters away. Maybe you do?

Here, go to this link and educate yourself.

Shades of Gray: .300 Whisper & .300 AAC Blackout - American Rifleman

When you understand the history of this cartridge, and stop drinking the Kool Aid, get back to me and we can have a meaningful dialog on the virtues of the 300 Whisper/300 AAC Blackout. It's a highly-specialized round that the tacti-cool crowd has decided should be pressed into duty for everything from long-range varminting, to big game, to their oft-imagined "CQB". Here in the real world, it's a ho-hum 30-caliber yawner. The only reason I would ever consider one is for the reason Shibumiseeker stated: Very cost-effective shooting with cast bullets. If it's ever needed for a worst-case scenario, God forbid, that particular use case makes a ton of sense.

For normal sporting purposes, outside of plinking, there is virtually nothing about the cartridge to recommend it. Heck, to make the low velocity palatable, you have to compare it to a 120 year-old cartridge, one of the first to use smokeless powder!

I know I come off as condescending in these posts, and I'm swimming against the tide, and some folks think I'm on a "crusade" against this cartridge. Nah...it's just about TRUTH. Let's be honest about what this cartridge is..and what it isn't. That's all.

 

[SteveM4A1]

@ SteveM4A1

You posted a link to the website, but I took the liberty of actually quoting from their site:

"At 300 meters, 300 BLK has 16.7% more energy than 7.62x39mm. Max effective range, using M4 military standards for hit probability, is 440 meters for a 9 inch barrel, and 460 meters for a 16 inch barrel. 300 BLK from a 9 inch barrel has the same energy at the muzzle as a 14.5 inch barrel M4, and about 5% more energy at 440 meters - even though the barrel is much shorter."

Since you have never deer hunted, and we live in a state where deer hunting cartridges are limited in range, you suppose that 100 yards is the longest shot you'll ever take. In legal terms, my friend, you are making assumptions based on facts not in evidence. If you would like to hunt deer, and Indiana finally does away with their draconian regulations, you will eventually be presented with an opportunity to shoot a deer at significantly greater distance than 100 yards. For you to claim that you would not take such a shot, having never been in that situation, is an unwitting fallacy; if you see a good buck at 200 yards, you are going to want to shoot at it. The 300 BLK is a marginal choice for such shooting.

You are making quite the assumptions here that I would both be presented with a shot over 200 and that I would attempt such a shot. The areas I hunt are heavily wooded and would not present a shot over 50 yards. IF I thought I would be hunting further out than even 100 yards, I wouldn't take the 300 or would at least have a bolt gun with me in a larger caliber. Try to not make so many baseless assumptions.

Again, from the website YOU posted the link to:

"For hunting - think of it as like a 30-30 but from an AR. After you are done, you can remove your 5-round magazine and put in a 30 for plinking or home defense. For ammo, Remington has you covered with the Premiere AccuTip 125 grain."

Talk to any knowledgeable big game hunter about deer hunting with a 125 grain bullet from a 30-caliber rifle, or ask them about the effective range of a 30-30, with normal loads...it might be an eye-opening experience for you.

Once again, where did I talk about extended ranges and big game? You are taking this off-topic with such statements. Are you suggesting deer cannot be taken with 300 blk and 110 gr Barnes? Or 110 gr Lehigh Defense Controlled Chaos?

I have been loading 125 grain BT's from a 30-'06 for several years, and have harvested three deer with that load. It is launching bullets at ~2,600fps and I consider it adequate out to maybe 200 yards. The longest kill made with it thus far has been 125 yards. The above-mentioned Remington factory ammo for the 300 BLK drives a very similar bullet to a MV of 2,215fps, from what is almost certainly a 16" barrel. From your pistol-length barrel, expect perhaps as little as 2,100fps. Even if you're getting the full 2,200fps, it may be best that you limit your range to 100 yards, after all.

But, even these claims made about the 300 BLK being like a 30-30 are patently false; it is far more comparable to the 7.62x39, since both can shoot light-for-caliber bullets to a similar velocity. When you consider that a 30-30 will deliver a 170-gr bullet at 2,200fps, and that mass trumps velocity in a big game bullet, the 300 BLK is simply not as good as a 30-30 for hunting larger critters. To put it in simple numbers, the 125 grain bullet is only 73% as heavy as the 170 grain bullet, but they have essentially the same MV. Looking at it from the other side of the equation, it would be no trick at all to get 300fps more MV from a 30-30 if you were loading 125 grain bullets for it. Heck, I load 160gr FTX bullets that launch at over 2,300fps and have a BC just as good as any 125-gr tipped bullet in the same caliber.

Why are we discussing 30-30? Where did I say the 300 blk is comparable? We were talking about 223/5.56 vs 300 blk, at least I thought. I think you need to go back and reread my statements. You seem to be under the illusion that I claimed 300 blk is the magical, best caliber of all, when in fact I stated no such thing.

A lot of your post really doesn't make much sense. You keep bringing up comparisons that I never made. I will not be hunting big game with 300 blk, as I know it would not be desirable. For ME and the variables of my situation, it is the perfect round. Keep ignoring the relevant information I stated if you want, and go on your crusade about how other calibers are way better for situations I will never be in.

 

[Broom_jm]

My post makes very good sense, but there is no way to dispute the facts presented. Still, that doesn't excuse me from beating this horse to death and for that, I apologize.

The 300 BLK is very good at shooting heavy-for-caliber bullets at sub-sonic velocities. That's what it was designed to do.

For pretty much anything else you would do with it, there are better options available. That's it...end of story, and I won't continue to belabor the point.

 

[cop car]

You people have way too much time on your hands lol