G&R Tactical
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35

Thread: 300BLK max "reasonable" range?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,845
    Feedback Score
    0

    300BLK max "reasonable" range?

    Let's say supers, like 110gr VOR-TX or 110gr GMX moving about 2100fps at the muzzle (approximately where it should be out of a 9" barrel). From a terminal ballistics aspect, what is a "reasonable" range to expect to be able to engage targets from, and expect both the trajectory and the results-on-impact to be acceptable. Maybe 200 yards?

    Not max effective range, not max range period. Max you could count on a supersonic wunder-round being able to not have to lob it in like a mortar and reasonably expect the bad guy (or critter) to be reconsidering their efforts?
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    386
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Well I wouldn't shoot a 300 BLK at game ever at a distance >200yards, but preferably >150. This is assuming I am using the 110 grain Barnes TAC-TX (or some other optimized projectile) out of a 16" barrel.

    It is just a compromise cartridge that doesn't really have much case capacity or a very good BC. I guess if you were just trying out a hole in someone 300 yards is within reason, but terminal effects will be poor, especially from an SBR.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Ohio - GO BUCKS!
    Posts
    575
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    The round (originally 300 Whisper) was designed for hunting with a Thompson Contender pistol. The region that round was designed in typically limits sight lines to 60 yards and often less d/t thick brush. There is only hypothesis on max range, as Blk was picked up as a CQB round. "Humane" kills are as dependent on the hunter as the round...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5
    Feedback Score
    0
    I was able to pull some data using a 9" barrel but a 125 grain bullet. 2240 fps at the muzzle.

    100 yards: 0", 1312 ft-lbs
    200 yards: -5.9", 1068 ft-lbs
    300 yards: -21.0, 882 ft-lbs

    While still not indirect fire mode, the drop does become more dramatic the farther you extend it. For either 4 legged critters or 2 legged predators, I wouldn't push it beyond 200 for consistent hits.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,845
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by StovePipe_Jammer View Post
    I was able to pull some data using a 9" barrel but a 125 grain bullet. 2240 fps at the muzzle.

    100 yards: 0", 1312 ft-lbs
    200 yards: -5.9", 1068 ft-lbs
    300 yards: -21.0, 882 ft-lbs

    While still not indirect fire mode, the drop does become more dramatic the farther you extend it. For either 4 legged critters or 2 legged predators, I wouldn't push it beyond 200 for consistent hits.
    So 200 yards seems a credible distance to engage targets and expect decent terminal ballistics (assuming decent ammo of course)?

    To me, the 300BLK fills a very narrow niche. Specifically PDW-sized weapons. I don't have a suppressor so I'm mainly focused on 300BLK for compactness and concealability. To have better velocity and better terminal effects I would opt for 110gr VOR-TX or GMX. They'll give me more juice for the squeeze on both the velocity side as well as the damage on target once it gets there. By "PDW-size" I'm referring to sub-10" barrels. Mine has a 9" BCM barrel on it. VERY compact little pistol that can also be used to smack stuff at 200yds. That says a lot for it's package size and capabilities.

    While most PDW applications wouldn't be stretching out to anywhere near 200yds, it is nice to have confidence in the ability to do so if necessary. Your post indicates a 5.9" drop at 200 so that is certainly manageable. And it seems that the nosedive from 200 to 300 pretty much confirms 200 as the max "reasonable" range.

    A 300BLK will never be my "go-to" weapon. I will never stock as much ammo for it as I do 5.56mm. I just have a reluctance to going below 10" on a 5.56 as it makes a HUGE muzzle flash/blast (unsuppressed of course) and guts the performance of the round. 300BLK, on the other hand, seems to flourish in those barrel lengths; in fact, it has a pistol-length gas system for short barrels, something most AR's don't. Almost like it was designed for that purpose.
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    454
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by StovePipe_Jammer View Post
    I was able to pull some data using a 9" barrel but a 125 grain bullet. 2240 fps at the muzzle.

    100 yards: 0", 1312 ft-lbs
    200 yards: -5.9", 1068 ft-lbs
    300 yards: -21.0, 882 ft-lbs

    While still not indirect fire mode, the drop does become more dramatic the farther you extend it. For either 4 legged critters or 2 legged predators, I wouldn't push it beyond 200 for consistent hits.
    Are the 3 actual chronos by you, modeled, extrapolated, other?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5
    Feedback Score
    0
    It appears to be modeled and was information pulled from a search.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ABNAK View Post
    So 200 yards seems a credible distance to engage targets and expect decent terminal ballistics (assuming decent ammo of course)?

    To me, the 300BLK fills a very narrow niche. Specifically PDW-sized weapons. I don't have a suppressor so I'm mainly focused on 300BLK for compactness and concealability. To have better velocity and better terminal effects I would opt for 110gr VOR-TX or GMX. They'll give me more juice for the squeeze on both the velocity side as well as the damage on target once it gets there. By "PDW-size" I'm referring to sub-10" barrels. Mine has a 9" BCM barrel on it. VERY compact little pistol that can also be used to smack stuff at 200yds. That says a lot for it's package size and capabilities.

    While most PDW applications wouldn't be stretching out to anywhere near 200yds, it is nice to have confidence in the ability to do so if necessary. Your post indicates a 5.9" drop at 200 so that is certainly manageable. And it seems that the nosedive from 200 to 300 pretty much confirms 200 as the max "reasonable" range.

    A 300BLK will never be my "go-to" weapon. I will never stock as much ammo for it as I do 5.56mm. I just have a reluctance to going below 10" on a 5.56 as it makes a HUGE muzzle flash/blast (unsuppressed of course) and guts the performance of the round. 300BLK, on the other hand, seems to flourish in those barrel lengths; in fact, it has a pistol-length gas system for short barrels, something most AR's don't. Almost like it was designed for that purpose.
    I've got a 9" BCM barrel on mine as well and purchased it with the PDW concept in mind. From everything I've read on the caliber, the 9" barrel allows it to gain the max effective burn time while being as short as possible. The 5.56 in short barrels does seem to waste a bunch of what that round is capable of. The massive fireball and shock wave, while awesome, would probably be better imparted on the bullet and not those next to you on the line

    One thing I have noticed while testing out different ammo and bullet weights is that the point of impact changes noticeably at just 50 yards (110gr vs 147gr). I'm not set up to reload for the 300 yet but I'd be interested to play around with loads and weights to find it's sweet spot. Regardless of factory loading the energy it imparts downrange, even at distance, for being so small is impressive.

    I have seen videos of guys with short barrels taking the caliber beyond 500 and it still is capable of it while factoring in drop. But if I'm going to be engaging something that far out, I'm guessing I'd have time to grab something better suited to the task lol

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    386
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    If you want to stretch the range out from an SBR, there are better calibers. But it is really hard to equal 300 BLK's performance from the really short barrels unless you want to step up to a big bore IE 458 SOCOM, 450 Bushmaster, etc. Those also suffer from less velocity degradation as well in short barrels.

    Also 2250 fps w/125 grain bullets out of a 9" barrel is WAY optimistic. That is what is MAYBE achievable out of a 16" barrel with max loads.

    Those videos of feats of long distance shooting with a really short barrels are nice for videos but when it comes to engaging targets quickly at unknown distances a flat trajectory is much more helpful.

    IMO one of the absolute best configurations in terms of size to range is 12.5" 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel. More frontal area, decent BC, and more muzzle energy.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,845
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mic2377 View Post
    If you want to stretch the range out from an SBR, there are better calibers. But it is really hard to equal 300 BLK's performance from the really short barrels unless you want to step up to a big bore IE 458 SOCOM, 450 Bushmaster, etc. Those also suffer from less velocity degradation as well in short barrels.

    Also 2250 fps w/125 grain bullets out of a 9" barrel is WAY optimistic. That is what is MAYBE achievable out of a 16" barrel with max loads.

    Those videos of feats of long distance shooting with a really short barrels are nice for videos but when it comes to engaging targets quickly at unknown distances a flat trajectory is much more helpful.

    IMO one of the absolute best configurations in terms of size to range is 12.5" 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel. More frontal area, decent BC, and more muzzle energy.
    Yeah I ain't seeing that with 125gr loads from a short barrel.

    I Googled around and saw some chrono data where 110gr Barnes were cruising at around 2100fps from a 9" barrel (might have been an 8", don't recall). So you get the same bullet weight with nearly 200fps more than an M1 Carbine with WAY better bullets ballistics-wise (both in-flight and terminal).
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry

Page 1 of 4 123 ... 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
  •