Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 45

Thread: 300 AAC for two-legged critters?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,603
    Feedback Score
    0
    So how does the Barnes 110gr stack up against decent 5.56mm ammo lethality-wise (Mk262, Mk318, SSA 70gr "Brown Tip", Hornady Tap T-2, et al)? Let's say inside 100yds. I'll even grant the 5.56 being fired from a 14.5" or 16" barrel but the 300AAC from something short like 10.5"? Can the 300 110gr Barnes compete? I am deliberately not using the term "stopping power" as there are so many variables involved. The 110gr Barnes drops hogs at 100 (+ or-) so I doubt it would be *substandard* for personal defense.
    Last edited by ABNAK; 04-19-16 at 19:46.
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    6,162
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ABNAK View Post
    So how does the Barnes 110gr stack up against decent 5.56mm ammo lethality-wise (Mk262, Mk318, SSA 70gr "Brown Tip", Hornady Tap T-2, et al)? Let's say inside 100yds. I'll even grant the 5.56 being fired from a 14.5" or 16" barrel but the 300AAC from something short like 10.5"? Can the 300 110gr Barnes compete? I am deliberately not using the term "stopping power" as there are so many variables involved. The 110gr Barnes drops hogs at 100 (+ or-) so I doubt it would be *substandard* for personal defense.
    If we are talking purely terminal ballistics inside 100 yards, I'll take the tac-tx over the 5.56 competition seven days a week and twice on Sunday. I base this on how this round performs in gel, on white tail deer, and against hogs.

    Attachment 39061

    I can't find any 5.56 rounds that do that well across all common intermediate barriers.
    Last edited by Sensei; 04-19-16 at 20:57.
    I like my rifles like my women - short, light, fast, brown, and suppressed.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    360
    Feedback Score
    0
    I agree.

    There are some solid rounds in .223/5.56 (I'm partial to Fed. Fusion) but the .300blk with the Barnes is a better performer from the tests I've seen, depending on the criteria you pick.

    And not just inside 100 yards. I would pick the .300blk for out to 300+ yards, especially if there was concern with barriers. Around vehicles it's a no brainier.

    The biggest disadvantage is cost and availability.
    Last edited by friendlyfireisnt; 04-19-16 at 21:31.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    6,162
    Feedback Score
    0
    The big caveat of the 300blk beyond 100 yards is trajectory. Assuming a 50 yard zero and 2150 fps at the muzzle, the 300blk will drop 8" at 200 yards and 30" at 300 yards. Compare that to most good 5.56 loads zeroed at 50 yards will cross zero again between 175-200 yards and drop 10-12" at 300 yards. At 300 yards, that means you will need to hold your red dot just over the head to score a hit with 300blk, while a high center mass hold is all that is necessary with 5.56.

    So yes, the 300blk with VOR-TX load is more lethal than the 5.56 out to 300 yards, but it is also harder to score hits at ranges beyond about 200 yards.
    I like my rifles like my women - short, light, fast, brown, and suppressed.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,667
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Why would you zero at 50? To me seems like 200 makes a whole lot of sense.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    2,154
    Feedback Score
    36 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by mack7.62 View Post
    Why would you zero at 50? To me seems like 200 makes a whole lot of sense.
    It's a CQB round, why would you zero at 200?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    109
    Feedback Score
    0
    125SST is popular for hunting and might offer slightly less penetration than the Barnes 110.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,719
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by mack7.62 View Post
    Why would you zero at 50? To me seems like 200 makes a whole lot of sense.
    50 & 200 zero are the same thing for many rounds.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,603
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    50 & 200 zero are the same thing for many rounds.
    Have you run the trajectory stats on these 110gr loads to compare? I'm seriously curious.
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    360
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ABNAK View Post
    Have you run the trajectory stats on these 110gr loads to compare? I'm seriously curious.
    I've run them a few times. I'm using 2,200 fps, since I am using a 10.3" barrel, haven't put it over a chrono yet though. Also, I'm using 2,000' as my altitude, and a temp of 85f.

    36 yard zero:

    2.1" high @ 100 yards, 2.4" drop @ 200 yards, 8.8" @ 250, 18.5" @ 300 yards.

    50 yard zero:

    5.3" drop at 200 yards, 12.5" @ 250 yards, 23.0" @ 300 yards.

    100 yard zero:

    6.5" drop @ 200, 14.0" @ 250, 24.8" @ 300 yards.

    200 yard zero:

    3.4" high @ 125 yards, 5.8" drop @ 250 yards, 15.0" @ 300 yards.

    Right now, I am zero'd at 100 yards. I think I am going to change that to 36 yards though, looks like a nice compromise.
    Last edited by friendlyfireisnt; 04-20-16 at 21:37.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •