The 300 Blackout, what's not to like?

**Benito** · 07-09-13, 20:17

Originally Posted by ccoker

It is a fun cartridge and I believe that more options are good for the consumer.

It shines running supressed subs in an SBR for close range.

If I want to run supersonic I will take the 6.8. 95g Barnes TTSX at 2850 FPS out of a 16" barrel flat out works on game.

I think the 300 BO, 6.8 and 6.5 are all niche calibers that will never replace the 5.56.

No one said the .300 BLK would replace the 5.56.
Every caliber is a niche in some sense, but the .300 BLK fills a pretty big niche compared to lots of other cartridges that the AR has been chambered in over the years. The commonalities with mags and bolts, same parent case, compatibility with short barrels and the subsonic uses combine to offer something that, to my knowledge, no other cartridge offers.

Every cartridge does some things well, and others not so well, and the .300 BLK is no different, but it has a lot going for it than most.

**ccoker** · 07-10-13, 13:00

Right.
We are agreeing with each other, they all have pros and cons.
As much as I like the 6.8 for hunting there have been fans of it pushing it should replace the 5.56 for military use.

I can't ever see that happening, same for the other calibers was my point.

**rsilvers** · 07-12-13, 20:58

Originally Posted by pinzgauer

Won't get into that debate. I think it was Rsilvers that said it best:

If you are attracted to Grendel attributes/performance you probably won't care for 300 Blackout.... and if you are attracted to 300 Blackout attributes you probably won't care for Grendel

That was not me.

Originally Posted by pinzgauer

With Blackout / Whisper what bothers me just a bit is the attitude. No acknowledgement of the original developer's role. The changes made to whisper to become blackout are very minor, enough that they interchange.

That is incorrect. My presentation, which I have given many times at NDIA, AIM, and to other groups, clearly credits the work that SSK did.

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

Also, the Wikipedia page clearly lists the predecessors. Who do you think wrote that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_AAC...7.62%C3%9735mm)

**Fox33** · 07-12-13, 22:01

Originally Posted by Benito

No one said the .300 BLK would replace the 5.56.

I am one of those that think it should. I think that this round could be the savior of the m4 platform. From my own personal experiences 5.56 does not always do the job. I am not the only one to have this experience. Why do you think controlled pairs came about? a training implement designed to over come an equipment shortcoming.

does 300 blk work out to 500m ..yes it does. For most conventional force shooters this exceeds their capacity anyway. For those that might need goto RC-E or RC-S and get busy at 800+ with a semi auto system there is the MK17/mk20/m110 anyway.

considering how much money the military wasted on the IC program and other dumb shit, they could probably convert all the mk18's in SOCOM for say 20-30 million (not including ammo) then once SF and NSW get it down it could spread to conventional units. Plus it might be more effective in central and north africa which is IMO the next hot spot to get all sticky.

once conventional units get it standardized and it goes STANAG that mean civilians will experience the positive effects of the expansion of the production base.

I think it is the best solution and can be done at 30-40 level maintenance with little effort by comparison to the alternatives.

**weggy** · 07-12-13, 22:22

I know it was designed for SBRs w/can, but since I won't be kicking in doors or clearing dens of iniquity of terrorists, I much prefer a good ol .308.

**Nightvisionary** · 07-14-13, 06:26

Originally Posted by weggy

I know it was designed for SBRs w/can, but since I won't be kicking in doors or clearing dens of iniquity of terrorists, I much prefer a good ol .308.

Why use a 5 lb sledge if you are hammering 5 penny nails all day long. The Germans figured that out in WW2.