G&R Tactical
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: What are the pro's and cons of .300BLK vs 5.56 in a 16" non supressed upper?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    83
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)

    What are the pro's and cons of .300BLK vs 5.56 in a 16" non supressed upper?

    If I am not planning on adding a suppressor or using a barrel under 16" what are the pro's and cons of .300 AAC Blackout vs 5.56 NATO?
    Diligentia Vis Celeritas
    "No, it's just a machine. I'm the weapon." - Jack Harper in Oblivion

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    721
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackXP View Post
    If I am not planning on adding a suppressor or using a barrel under 16" what are the pro's and cons of .300 AAC Blackout vs 5.56 NATO?
    Totally depends on your intended application, but I would stick with 5.56 in a 16" if you want to stay with a 16" gun. It's cheaper to shoot, has better mid-long range capabilities, and is a lot cheaper to shoot. And you can still kill most game easily with a good bonded soft point, if you want to hunt with it.

    .300BLK really shines as a suppressed short barrel weapon because it has better ballistics in barrels shorter than 10.5", so you can run a 7-9" barrel, and they are very quiet suppressed with subs. My HD gun is a 8" suppressed 300BLK and i love it.

    If you want a .30 cal projectile in a 16" barrel, i would get an AR-10 before i got a 16" 300BLK. YMMV
    Last edited by B Cart; 09-12-19 at 16:21.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    1,851
    Feedback Score
    34 (100%)
    Unsuppressed? - Hunting is the only pro for 300 blk in a 16" barrel. 300 blk is for short guns - 6" to 9". After about 12.5" it's not really worth it in any way other than you need the 30 cal bullet for hunting because of some specific state law. Personally I would argue it's not worth it over 10" but I know there are a lot who would disagree with me on that.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    762
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I dont see 300BLK outperforming 556 in any but the most niche of applications. Definately wouldnt purchase one if you dont already have a 16" 556.

    Personally I skipped 300BLK and decided if I needed more 'power' than 556, I will be using 308.
    "Just throw Krylon on it"

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    26,041
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by turnburglar View Post
    I dont see 300BLK outperforming 556 in any but the most niche of applications. Definately wouldnt purchase one if you dont already have a 16" 556.

    Personally I skipped 300BLK and decided if I needed more 'power' than 556, I will be using 308.
    Pretty much my thoughts too... 300 has its very small niche, but I have no use for it.

    To the OP's original question... a 16" AR with no can makes no sense in 300.
    "You people have too much time on your hands." - scottryan

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    415
    Feedback Score
    0

    MRGUNSNGEAR

    The lessons that we learn are written the tomb stones of others. -Reid Henrichs

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,022
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    That MRGUNSNGEAR video is very good at splain' things. Can't wait to see the one on 300 vs 5.56. Everyone wants to compare Blk to 7.62 x 39 but it really is closer to 8 mm Kurtz, think of it as Stg 44 that is about 4 lbs lighter with better ergonomics. I am really liking the idea of a 12.5" pistol. Will it replace 5.56, no but it does have some definite advantages as a short barrel round.
    “The Trump Doctrine is ‘We’re America, Bitch.’ That’s the Trump Doctrine.”

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    5,148
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    There are no advantages to 300Blk over 5.56 in your scenario. I only see 300BLK useful in CQB subsonic suppressed for killing folks indoors very quietly. Which I would choose my MP5 or MPX 9mm subsonic suprresed for that mission. YMMV

    PB
    "Air Force / Policeman / Fireman / Man of God / Friend of mine / R.I.P. Steve Lamy"

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    415
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Pappabear View Post
    There are no advantages to 300Blk over 5.56 in your scenario. . YMMV

    PB
    However, here there is the use for it "Hunting", as we are not aloud to hunt with .223/5.56 mm, I believe it has to be over .25 caliber here in VA... Atleast this is what I've heard..

    IF I am incorrect, please site monitors, erase this reply.

    Peace
    The lessons that we learn are written the tomb stones of others. -Reid Henrichs

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    88
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    I will disagree with much of the above. In addition to being great in short barrels and with suppressors, 300BLK has better terminal ballistics than 556 in any barrel length, but limited distance. I wouldn-t use it beyond 200yrds

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •