View Full Version : Second thoughts about my 300BLK build
shaneinhisroom
04-26-12, 20:03
I was planning on building a suppressed SBR in the very near future for home defense exclusively...but I was at a gun shop today and heard this:
"Shooting a suppressed 300BLK has the energy equivalent of shooting a suppressed .45, except with less mobility."
Sure, I can get on target faster, have a bigger magazine and can place shots on target a little quicker at home defense distances...but he has a point, and there's over a $1000 difference between a good canned .45 pistol and a good canned 330BLK rifle. Can someone reassure me?
Are you going to use subsonic or supersonic ammo?
Looking at the different loads, the subsonic ammo is about the same as the 45ACP for muzzle energy. However if you go to supersonic, you will be ~3 times the muzzle energy of a 45ACP round.
I would build it and use supersonic rounds.
Just my .02.
shaneinhisroom
04-26-12, 21:27
I was going to use subsonic, because of the noise factor if I have to use a firearm indoors. If I were going to use supersonic I would just use my suppressed AR :)
chrismartin
04-26-12, 22:22
Don't forget about the ballistic coefficient of the bullet. A subsonic 300blk bullet will fly further, faster than a .45acp. You will also have a carbine platform to shoot it out of, which will have a longer sight radius and/or better optics than a pistol and (as mentioned) the ability to go supersonic
Now, if you are just looking for subsonic, suppressed blasting, go 9mm. It'll be more quiet, cheaper and you will have tons of pistol and carbine options.
For your single use, home defense, it may be the same as a .45 acp. A .45 handgun would win in the concealment department. However, the 300 blk carbine is much more versatile than a 1911.
It all depends on what you want it for.
From the sounds of your intended purpose of home defense, I'd save the $ and get the .45 suppressed. But I'm weird like that (and I use a .45 for my bump-in-the-night gun.
What is wrong with supersonic suppressed in a 300 blk sbr? That is what I would consider darn near perfect for HD. I wouldn't go subsonic because you don't need to be that quiet and you don't want to sacrifice terminal performance.
The question I've been asking lately, and haven't found an answer yet, is whether an expanding subsonic 9mm hollowpoint has better performance in soft targets than a non-expanding 300 BLK. I honestly don't know the answer or how to figure it out, but it's an interesting question.
How about a 12ga and some ear plugs? ;-)
I think 45acp is just about the perfect choice for home defense (assuming you are staying INSIDE the house):
It's got plenty of power
It's much easier to keep safe (vs a long gun)
Unless you having training, A pistol is easier to navigate through tight corners, etc.
My glock21 holds 13rds - hard to imagine that isn't going to be enough for hom defense, but I keep a spare mag just in case.
great COMMERCIAL self defense loads are available.
I was, and I'm still, very excited about 300BLK. But I haven't bought in yet. My primary use initially would have been for fun at the range, and based on that I built a 9mm suppressed SBR instead. I don't regret that at all, it's a *really* fun setup and relatively cheap to shoot.
But, since I first heard about 300BLK I've been wondering the same thing Rob posted above. If you want to use it in an HD role with a subsonic round, is it any better or worse than the 9mm with quality expanding projectiles? I'd love to know the answer to that.
As was already mentioned, if I were to use 300BLK for HD, even suppressed, I'd probably want to use a supersonic load until I know more about the subsonic performance. That said, I'm sure there's some info out there and I haven't been looking for a while. I know there are people using subsonic 300BLK for hunting with success. For now I'm still using a short barrelled 5.56 AR loaded with barrier blind ammo for HD.
There is currently no subsonic 300 BLK I would consider for HD. Even when there is reliably expanding 300 BLK subsonic it probably won't be optimal for HD.
I see subsonic as useful for very limited MIL applications, varmints, and fun.
The question I've been asking lately, and haven't found an answer yet, is whether an expanding subsonic 9mm hollowpoint has better performance in soft targets than a non-expanding 300 BLK. I honestly don't know the answer or how to figure it out, but it's an interesting question.
Considering the over penetration issues, that should be pretty straight forward.
shaneinhisroom
04-27-12, 13:01
Thanks for all the replies- if I were going to go supersonic, I'd just use a suppressed AR. Cheaper ammunition, not much louder, and in terms of practicality, it's all there.
The 300BLK round for me is novelty now. I'd still like to get one, but I wouldn't be shooting it very much unless I reloaded, because I just can't justify a mag dump on $.80 a round.
I guess I'm going to build a suppressed 5.56 SBR and go with 147gr subsonic 9mm...
I think your last post hit it. Use an AR shooting supersonic ammo. Less over penetration issues. 300 blackout seems like a lot for home defense. Subsonic 300 blackout will go through rail road ties. I wouldn't want to shoot it in the house, terminal performance not withstanding.
I 3 loaded firearms in the house. an AR loaded with 5.56 suppressed, 9mm subsonic, and a 12 gauge. I am building a 300 blackout but i wouldn't use it in that role.
The question I've been asking lately, and haven't found an answer yet, is whether an expanding subsonic 9mm hollowpoint has better performance in soft targets than a non-expanding 300 BLK. I honestly don't know the answer or how to figure it out, but it's an interesting question.
:)
That is a good question, but I guess if you had to shoot something why would you use non-expanding 300blk ever? Is the comparison subsonic to subsonic? I'd use that 110gr hunting ammo in a second, which I think we can both agree is harder hitting than any 9mm.
Either way, since I think I'd only ever had to shoot soft targets if anything the MP5/MP5k and can makes a fine house carbine. Much more so that a sbr 223 imo (I think I'd rather shoot myself that pop off a bunch of 10" 223 inside with no plugs). Exaggerating ofcourse.
Why would you not stick to suppressed supersonic ammo? Its suppressed so you practically eliminate the muzzle blast which is what hurts your ears. At in home distances there isn't much flight time for the sonic crack to be much if an issue. I would stick to supersonic.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
Why would you not stick to suppressed supersonic ammo? Its suppressed so you practically eliminate the muzzle blast which is what hurts your ears. At in home distances there isn't much flight time for the sonic crack to be much if an issue. I would stick to supersonic.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
WINNER!
Suppressed supersonic is still MUCH quieter than nothing at all.
Which if you're fine with that, reopens any number of possibilities.
shaneinhisroom
04-27-12, 17:57
Why would you not stick to suppressed supersonic ammo? Its suppressed so you practically eliminate the muzzle blast which is what hurts your ears. At in home distances there isn't much flight time for the sonic crack to be much if an issue. I would stick to supersonic.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
Hadn't thought about that. Good point. Again, in this case, 5.56 offers more benefits than 300BLK. I'll just stick to that.
There is currently no subsonic 300 BLK I would consider for HD. Even when there is reliably expanding 300 BLK subsonic it probably won't be optimal for HD.
I see subsonic as useful for very limited MIL applications, varmints, and fun.
Exactly.
Suppressed supersonic 300 BLK is far better than subsonic.
As for someone saying a handgun is better than an AR due to more mobility - I don't buy that at all. One can generally have much better shot placement with an AR than any handgun.
I have come to the conclusion that it mght have been a mistake to release the 300blk first in subsonic. There seems to be a group of people who can not get beyond the "subsonic". I have Glock 21s that shoot a 230 grain hardball, but I don't equate that round to a 300 blk.
I am trying to fit a Palmetto upper into my budget this month and am looking for a place in SoCal to buy the ammo and none of it will be 220 grain subsonic, I want something that goes at least twice that fast!
I would absolutely choose the 300 BLK over a 45 suppressed pistol. While the pistol maybe somewhat cheaper and easier to conceal (not really an issue in this circumstance?), the lethality of the supersonic 300 is SOO much higher. I have done some testing with the 130 gr SOST and 110 gr V-max loads and both are without question extremely deadly. They also run 100% in my 300 as well, and have very low recoil.
On the side note of versatility, the 45 suppressed pistol is kinda useless outside plinking and short range work. In contrast, the 300 BLK has superior range and is actually a viable hunting weapon too, if that is a consideration.
Personally I would vastly prefer to use a rifle over a handgun any day. I tend to think of pistols as a sidearm.
I would absolutely choose the 300 BLK over a 45 suppressed pistol. While the pistol maybe somewhat cheaper and easier to conceal (not really an issue in this circumstance?), the lethality of the supersonic 300 is SOO much higher. I have done some testing with the 130 gr SOST and 110 gr V-max loads and both are without question extremely deadly.
Personally I would vastly prefer to use a rifle over a handgun any day. I tend to think of pistols as a sidearm.
No argument on lethality.
However, for home defense, I also need to consider over penetration issues (at least in my home, YMMV). Perhaps theres some 300blk rounds that don't over penetrate, but the specs I've seen show pretty awesome penetration.
If I have time to grab a long gun for HD, a 12ga is a pretty good pick....
I don't think that overpenetration will be too much of a problem with the right bullet - the 110 gr bullets (Speer, Hornady) are basically designed to be an exploding "varmint" bullet at the velocities they would be pushed from a .30-06. At 300 BLK velocities (2300-2400 fps) they expand extremely well but don't quite fragment, so they would probably still exit unless they struck bone. Whether or not this is "over" penetration is your opinion.
There is no question that over-penetration is a problem with the 220 gr subs. In my experience they zip right through 4+ inches of pine with ease and are still carrying LOTS of energy out the other side.
I have come to the conclusion that it mght have been a mistake to release the 300blk first in subsonic.
Both ammo types were being worked on at the same time, but the full power ammo just happened to take longer because it used a custom bullet while the subsonic was an existing Sierra bullet. Both ammo types were announced from the beginning.
There is no question that over-penetration is a problem with the 220 gr subs. In my experience they zip right through 4+ inches of pine with ease and are still carrying LOTS of energy out the other side.
http://www.300blktalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=128&t=65654
If you want less penetration, I would look into 110-115 grain ammo. There are plenty of bullets which will penetrate no more than 45 Auto. And if you really want, Barnes makes 300 BLK RRLP.
I was planning on building a suppressed SBR in the very near future for home defense exclusively...but I was at a gun shop today and heard this:
"Shooting a suppressed 300BLK has the energy equivalent of shooting a suppressed .45, except with less mobility."
Sure, I can get on target faster, have a bigger magazine and can place shots on target a little quicker at home defense distances...but he has a point, and there's over a $1000 difference between a good canned .45 pistol and a good canned 330BLK rifle. Can someone reassure me?
With the except of very few gun shops (like ones that are owned by members here, or who actually have *truly* knowledgeable employees--not ones who believe everything they read in Guns and Ammo), I'd ignore just about everything I hear in a gun shop. Way too much stupid in there.
I have done some testing with the 130 gr SOST and 110 gr V-max loads and both are without question extremely deadly.
I'm sorry but I find this statement to be very vague. Specifically what kind of tests did you do and what resulted in the conclusion that they are "without question extremely deadly?"
My "tests" were not scientific at all. Just shot a bunch of jugs and tried to recover bullets. The 110 V max expands very well and will make it through 2 gallon jugs, but sheds lots of fragments in the process. The SOST basically fragments/sheds its front core and the rear portion continues penetrating, similar to a Nosler Partition but without retaining the expanded front core. It zipped right through 2 jugs and left a round hole in the wood backstop.
I guess I based my "extremely deadly" off the good expansion properties of the bullets. If I was hunting, I would choose the 110 V-max but would avoid any off-angle shots.
I will try and take some pictures next time to post.
Of course this is anecdotal evidence at best. Take it worth a grain of salt.
El Cid
I take it you have zero experience shooting anything but paper? Cause if you had you'd know what a 30 caliber High powered round will do to two legged perps! The 110 Vmax will put BG's down -bet your life on it! :D The Atlanta Arms 125 gr pink tip ammo would be my second choice for Indoors SD. Next is what I use, 130 gr Speer HP's I wanted something with some barrier penertration just incase.
All supers no subs for me:D
El Cid
I take it you have zero experience shooting anything but paper? Cause if you had you'd know what a 30 caliber High powered round will do to two legged perps! The 110 Vmax will put BG's down -bet your life on it! :D The Atlanta Arms 125 gr pink tip ammo would be my second choice for Indoors SD. Next is what I use, 130 gr Speer HP's I wanted something with some barrier penertration just incase.
All supers no subs for me:D
If I have shot anyone with any caliber I would not be stupid enough to post it on the Internet. We aren't talking about any 30 caliber... We are discussing the 300 BLK. Have you, or anyone else for that matter, shot "two legged perps" with 300 BLK?
As I've said before... I may be proven wrong but I don't see the justification for the hype on this caliber. I'm open to learning more about it but I don't see how it improves my ability to stop a threat over 5.56. This is especially true for our warfighters down range as 300 BLK runs out of gas in a hurry.
I have not heard of a single use of it on a person and when people make statements that it's "extremely deadly" because they shot some water bottles it just furthers my belief that nobody knows what it will do.
I'll say it again... If I feel it's necessary to step up from 5.56 it will be to the proven 7.62x51.
There will always be caliber debates. In this case, going to 300 BLK does not reduce magazine capacity like going from 9mm to 45.
This is a fact I did not expect until I ran the math - the difference in bullet area from 9mm up to 45 is much less than the difference going from 223 up to 30 cal.
I have come to the conclusion that it mght have been a mistake to release the 300blk first in subsonic. There seems to be a group of people who can not get beyond the "subsonic". I have Glock 21s that shoot a 230 grain hardball, but I don't equate that round to a 300 blk.
This is very true to a point, especially in conjunction with it being attached to a silencer company, combines to make people think it's a subsonic suppressed only round.
It's with supersonic ammo that the terminal performance shines.
And another aspect for HD and mobility is that the 300BLK is much more efficient than 5.56 (and 6.8, etc) in short barrels, so you can build an 8" gun and not be limited in terms of terminal effects, while still maintaining a lot of mobility.
In a 16" gun, a 5.56 would serve just as well in that roll (but would still give you more muzzle blast).
I'm still amazed st the number of folks who continue to view the 300blk as worthless or a solution without a problem. Its amazing because for years I have had to listen to folks say how much they loved the ergos and modularity of the AR platform but wished it had more "punch" like an AK. Well the 300blk comes along and pretty much gives us that so now what's not to love? It was never designed to hunt with at 500+ yards nor was it designed to replace the. 7.62 NATO yet everyone tries to make such comparisons.
To me its a great cartridge for where I see my needs....300yds and under. I hate AR's because they don't fit me well and I simply shoot and handle AR's better. Now I don't have to settle for the terminal ballistic disadvantages of 5.56 as compared to 7.62x39 by using the 7.62x35 in the very AR platform that I love.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
I also agree it is at somewhat over-hyped. It's basically just a 7.62x39 packaged to fit in an AR. One of the main reasons its taken off is more so related to parts compability with a standard 5.56 AR, than some shocking revelation in cartridge design.
It's never gonna replace the 7.6x51 or 5.56, it just fills a role somewhere in between.
And I don't really understand why it won't "work." It is ballistically similar to the .30-30, and thats been killing deer for over 100 years. I would also say that the 7.62x39's combat record stands for itself as well. Its not like designing a 110-130 gr bullet that expands reliably but doesn't fragment at 2200-2300 fps is something modern manufacturers are not capable of. Despite the fact that most people here on M4C have not shot other people, I would have to think that most folks would agree that a catridge that reliably kills deer/hogs would be effective against 2-legged critters.
My personal interest in the cartridge is related to how well it lends itself to suppression. I had looking at the 300/221 for awhile, but the widespread support this cartridge has received tipped it over the edge for me.
Its silly to denounce it as an "useless" cartridge or make it sound like its barely a step above throwing stones. It just a niche cartridge that came along at the right place and the right time, with the marketing support of the big giants (AAC, Remington).
I'm still amazed st the number of folks who continue to view the 300blk as worthless or a solution without a problem. Its amazing because for years I have had to listen to folks say how much they loved the ergos and modularity of the AR platform but wished it had more "punch" like an AK. Well the 300blk comes along and pretty much gives us that so now what's not to love? It was never designed to hunt with at 500+ yards nor was it designed to replace the. 7.62 NATO yet everyone tries to make such comparisons.
To me its a great cartridge for where I see my needs....300yds and under. I hate AR's because they don't fit me well and I simply shoot and handle AR's better. Now I don't have to settle for the terminal ballistic disadvantages of 5.56 as compared to 7.62x39 by using the 7.62x35 in the very AR platform that I love.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
I think you're crossing the streams. Unlike you, I assume that all the same people that kept blathering on about wanting "7.62x39 performance in an AR package" are the same ones that can't get enough of this round. I never understood the first "problem" so I guess that's why I struggle to see the new "solution".
It is ballistically similar to the .30-30, and thats been killing deer for over 100 years.
and stones tossed from slings killed a bunch more before that. I find this argument even more confusing than the 7.62x39 argument. Are we really going to go backwards?
El Cid
I take it you have zero experience shooting anything but paper? Cause if you had you'd know what a 30 caliber High powered round will do to two legged perps!
I would be very interested to hear about "two legged perps" shot with 300 Blackout. Extra points if you did the shooting.
It's never gonna replace the 7.6x51 or 5.56, it just fills a role somewhere in between.
Okay, but what specifically does it do in between? Everyone keeps saying how great the 300 is for HD or inside 200yds. I have yet to see or hear about close range shootings in any environment where 5.56 was inadequate. I honestly don't need an AR with a bbl shorter than 11.5" for indoor work. Hell, my duty rifle has a 14.5" bbl and I make it work in cars and structures.
And I don't really understand why it won't "work." It is ballistically similar to the .30-30, and thats been killing deer for over 100 years. I would also say that the 7.62x39's combat record stands for itself as well. Its not like designing a 110-130 gr bullet that expands reliably but doesn't fragment at 2200-2300 fps is something modern manufacturers are not capable of. Despite the fact that most people here on M4C have not shot other people, I would have to think that most folks would agree that a catridge that reliably kills deer/hogs would be effective against 2-legged critters.
I don't believe I have ever suggested it won't work. I just want to see more data - the real kind, not shooting water jugs. With regard to a bullet killing hogs and deer getting an A+ for killing people... I don't see that as any more appropriate than using water for an expansion test medium. Deer and hogs do get an advantage pyschologically in that they don't know they have been shot and are supposed to stop doing what they are doing like some people. But critters also don't use cocaine, PCP, meth, etc. making them harder to put down.
Modern manufacturers can creat lots of great stuff. But for me... to spend the money on a new bbl, ammo that is significantly more expensive, and use a bullet that limits me on range significantly more than my current 5.56... it's going to have to be an amazing cartridge. I'm in the process of consolidating. For my needs, 5.56 does all I need it to do - from contact to 600yds.
If I really need to launch a big bullet at a person at close range, I already have that. It's called a shotgun with a 1oz slug. And the shotty and ammo are MUCH cheaper than the 300BLK.
Its silly to denounce it as an "useless" cartridge or make it sound like its barely a step above throwing stones. It just a niche cartridge that came along at the right place and the right time, with the marketing support of the big giants (AAC, Remington).
Again - I don't recall saying 300 is useless. Maybe you are addressing someone else. But I am extremely confident in my ability to use 5.56 to stop bad, angry people. I am not in that group who allegedly wanted "more punch" or an AK type bullet in my AR. I'm very happy with my AR and know that it will do it's part as long as I do mine.
I am not a lottery winner or a blue blood... I am therefore not willing to spend money on "niche cartridges" just to have them. I feel it's more appropriate to spend that money on more 5.56 ammo, on formal training, on range fees for competitions, etc.
El Cid
Well I haven't had the oprotunity yet? But I've seen enough folks removed from this earth with 30 caliber rounds to know what they do.
Removed enough four legged critters to further my knowledge on the matter. I have no doupt what the 300 blk will do. So yea it's just not papper holes. :D
El Cid
Well I haven't had the oprotunity yet? But I've seen enough folks removed from this earth with 30 caliber rounds to know what they do.
Removed enough four legged critters to further my knowledge on the matter. I have no doupt what the 300 blk will do. So yea it's just not papper holes. :D
Oh... got it. So, you have "seen" people killed, and killed animals with .308/7.62x51 and that directly correlates into 300BLK being equal to it? Bascially the same bullet with less powder driving it...
So then, we know .223/5.56 is effective at that task, therefore using your logic, the 5.7x28 (.224) will be just as effecitve as 5.56x45! Same bullet with a smaller shell casing and less powder. Oh wait... yea, that didn't pan out so well.
Bottom line is you are just guessing at the terminal effectiveness on humans. Until it happens, nobody really knows. If you like 300BLK, then go crazy. But don't try to push it on others as something that nobody has proof of it being. If it proves effective on the street - then great. I'm not saying it won't. I'm saying it's too early to call.
Oh... got it. So, you have "seen" people killed, and killed animals with .308/7.62x51 and that directly correlates into 300BLK being equal to it? Bascially the same bullet with less powder driving it...
So then, we know .223/5.56 is effective at that task, therefore using your logic, the 5.7x28 (.224) will be just as effecitve as 5.56x45! Same bullet with a smaller shell casing and less powder. Oh wait... yea, that didn't pan out so well.
Bottom line is you are just guessing at the terminal effectiveness on humans. Until it happens, nobody really knows. If you like 300BLK, then go crazy. But don't try to push it on others as something that nobody has proof of it being. If it proves effective on the street - then great. I'm not saying it won't. I'm saying it's too early to call.
Why too early to call? Seems to me 7.62x35 ballistics are close enough to 7.62x39 for me to have a pretty good idea as to its effectiveness since the x39 has been and continues to prove its effectiveness specifically on real humans around the globe for the past 60+ yrs.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
El Cid
Gee what you need pictures? Maybe I didn't pull the trigger but I fed the ammo. :rolleyes: How much closer do you need to be? And I never said the 300 blk was the equal to 762x51mm! It's actually very close to the 30-30. :rolleyes:
El Cid
Gee what you need pictures? Maybe I didn't pull the trigger but I fed the ammo. :rolleyes: How much closer do you need to be? And dumb ass I never said the 300 blk was the equal to 762x51mm! It's actually very close to the 30-30. :rolleyes:
It matters not whether you fed the gun or pulled the trigger. Your experience was with 7.62x51. My point is that you have not used 300blk in the manner you swear up and down it excels at.
As for the name calling it appears someone needs to take a grown-up pill. It's a sign of failure and desperation in a debate when you resort to such behavior.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.