User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 6:21:43 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: When did I say a 300 blk super sonic was not an intermediate rifle caliber? oh that is right I did not. because the 300blk supersonic is a great intermediate rifle round i will say it again, the only one equating 300blk subsonics to "rifle" rounds is you. you have clarified your position with bad information, and poor terminology. I don't doubt in any way the legitimacy of your video results. I call in to question your continued bogus comparisons. and for the record my HD AR 15 is chambered in 300blk with 110gr supersonics loaded up. an intermediate rifle cartridge on par with 7.62x39. at least until I decided to spend the money on a few mags full of a good quality expanding subsonic. or maybe I will just keep the supers Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ]No it's a pistol round in a big gun, with probably more velocity than a handgun. If you want to compare apples to apples then compare pistol rounds to pistol rounds, and rifle rounds to rifle rounds. Comparing subsonic 300blk (rifle round) to other rifle rounds is not going to be pretty. Except you are the only one that keeps calling the 300blk subs a rifle round. that single point is quite telling to me. all kinds of pistol calibers fit in rifle size firearms. what about .22lr Without a doubt a 220 gr bullet at less then 1000 fps is not traveling at what would be considered a "rifle" velocity. you in your dishonest comparison by continuing to call it a rifle round, knowing full well that anything less then 1000fps is not. And I will side with you against any fan boy who says a 300blk subsonic is comparable to a rifle round. I am fully aware of 300 blk subsonic capabilities. more so then you. you just have a youtube channel. so that makes you special and all that. When people ask me about hunting with subs I tell them flat out that they need to consider it as pistol hunting. I for one find it hilarious that someone who has only shot it at plastic or gel is going to tell me how horrible 300blk subs are. I like your videos but you are just being dishonest in your assessments. If you can't even agree that the 300blk is an intermediate rifle caliber then you're simply out of touch. When did I say a 300 blk super sonic was not an intermediate rifle caliber? oh that is right I did not. because the 300blk supersonic is a great intermediate rifle round i will say it again, the only one equating 300blk subsonics to "rifle" rounds is you. you have clarified your position with bad information, and poor terminology. I don't doubt in any way the legitimacy of your video results. I call in to question your continued bogus comparisons. and for the record my HD AR 15 is chambered in 300blk with 110gr supersonics loaded up. an intermediate rifle cartridge on par with 7.62x39. at least until I decided to spend the money on a few mags full of a good quality expanding subsonic. or maybe I will just keep the supers |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 6:23:10 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For his next video, 10mm_ will demonstrate that the BMW M6 is useless, because it can't tow a 4000lb camper.   |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 6:29:46 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thats when you said it. Also *than Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
]No it's a pistol round in a big gun, with probably more velocity than a handgun. If you want to compare apples to apples then compare pistol rounds to pistol rounds, and rifle rounds to rifle rounds. Comparing subsonic 300blk (rifle round) to other rifle rounds is not going to be pretty. Except you are the only one that keeps calling the 300blk subs a rifle round. that single point is quite telling to me. all kinds of pistol calibers fit in rifle size firearms. what about .22lr Without a doubt a 220 gr bullet at less then 1000 fps is not traveling at what would be considered a "rifle" velocity. you in your dishonest comparison by continuing to call it a rifle round, knowing full well that anything less then 1000fps is not. And I will side with you against any fan boy who says a 300blk subsonic is comparable to a rifle round. I am fully aware of 300 blk subsonic capabilities. more so then you. you just have a youtube channel. so that makes you special and all that. When people ask me about hunting with subs I tell them flat out that they need to consider it as pistol hunting. I for one find it hilarious that someone who has only shot it at plastic or gel is going to tell me how horrible 300blk subs are. I like your videos but you are just being dishonest in your assessments. If you can't even agree that the 300blk is an intermediate rifle caliber then you're simply out of touch. When did I say a 300 blk super sonic was not an intermediate rifle caliber? oh that is right I did not. because the 300blk supersonic is a great intermediate rifle round i will say it again, the only one equating 300blk subsonics to "rifle" rounds is you. you have clarified your position with bad information, and poor terminology. I don't doubt in any way the legitimacy of your video results. I call in to question your continued bogus comparisons. and for the record my HD AR 15 is chambered in 300blk with 110gr supersonics loaded up. an intermediate rifle cartridge on par with 7.62x39. at least until I decided to spend the money on a few mags full of a good quality expanding subsonic. or maybe I will just keep the supers What? now it is grammar nazi time? and it is that's
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 6:32:30 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That is a prime example of why I keep saying that subsonic 300blk is not that great, 99% of the subsonic rounds loaded for it would be a terrible HD round. Which bullet would make up the 1%? Do you plan on testing any of it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 6:36:01 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You should really look at the terminal performance of subsonic 300blk rounds and compare that to other rounds that are proven to be effective against humans and make a decision if the round you're using is a good choice. I would say it most likely is not. If you value being able to talk/hear effectively over the performance of the round then you may be onto something. Have you ever shot a gun indoors without hearing protection? I did once and although it sucked I wasn't completely deaf. Again, the switching to supers really doesn't make the subsonic round any better. If you want a gun that is quiet with low recoil and large capacity over all else then that is your choice, but if I am going to have to stop someone from hurting me or my family I want the terminal performance of the round to be at/near the top of my wish list. I didn't shit on the flexibility, I said that subsonic rounds are weak. And compared to rifle rounds, they are. They also don't expand, don't offer a substantial temporary wound cavity, and don't disrupt tissue nearly as well as other rifle options. Like the supersonic 300blk for example lol. Just because people can kill deer with them doesn't really mean shit to me honestly, people kill deer with bows too. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lol....video was retarded, not much point when your obviously biased. So armor that is supposed to protect against something did it's job and yet it's the rounds fault??? 
Try shooting a subsonic .308 at it (do they even make such a round? ) and see what happens, then report back on how it's a crap round as well.Subsonic .308 would be crap, subsonic rifles are fucking stupid. This one couldn't even knock over a piece of free standing plastic lol Sorry, but the blue statement above is bullshit. I've got 60 rounds of sub300blk in a suppressed SBR by my nightstand each night. Tell me what rifle or pistol is a better fit for SD that will allow me to communicate or hear after I pull the trigger indoors. What else is going to be that useful indoors but still allow me to engage a man sized target at 100y and provide 60 rounds with 1 mag change? I can get a rifle sling on a lot faster than I can get a holster tucked into my tighty whiteys, so it also gives me a chance to use both hands without losing control of the weapon, unlike a pistol. I totally agree that it's really a pistol round in a rifle form factor. The combination of quiet, capacity, and extremely low recoil beats the hell out of everything else I've looked at, including, ironically, my former nightstand gun which was a 10mm. =) I'm not much of a fanboy of any particular chambering, but to simply shit on the flexibility of 300blk as a useful quiet small game & SD round or convenient medium game (lots of deer taken with supers each year) is dumb. I've enjoyed all of your videos except this one. The needless commentary left a bad taste. Again, the switching to supers really doesn't make the subsonic round any better. If you want a gun that is quiet with low recoil and large capacity over all else then that is your choice, but if I am going to have to stop someone from hurting me or my family I want the terminal performance of the round to be at/near the top of my wish list. I didn't shit on the flexibility, I said that subsonic rounds are weak. And compared to rifle rounds, they are. They also don't expand, don't offer a substantial temporary wound cavity, and don't disrupt tissue nearly as well as other rifle options. Like the supersonic 300blk for example lol. Just because people can kill deer with them doesn't really mean shit to me honestly, people kill deer with bows too. Don't expand? Dafuq? Take a look starting at about 4min: 
15". Excellent expansion. And flexibility is an asset. The ability to load one round for SD and another for hunting is an asset, whether you like it or not. The idea that 1 bullet is supposed to do everything is simply stupid and myopic. I doubt you believe there is such a thing, but you're sure acting like any chambering that doesn't do it all is shit. Frankly, everything you've griped about with 300blk is true of almost every handgun too. I guess we should all get rid of those too? And yes, I have fired weapons (plural) indoors without ear pro. I'll take the suppressor, thanks. And 338LM is vastly superior to 5.56 in every way you would seem to want to measure. That's what you'd recommend for those of us too weak to carry 50BMG, right? 
Seriously. Stop taking things not made to do something (like defeat armor) and acting surprised when they *gasp* don't do it. Moreover, stop testing just one half of what the 300blk setup is supposed to do and acting like it's the end of the story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 6:45:33 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Goddamn, now the fuckers breaking into my house have riot shields? They better, because I'm shooting the Barnes 110gr supersonic ammo from my 300blk pistol. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:05:19 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the entire point of 300 AAC subs is to be fired from an AR with a CAN and have a better trajectory than .45 acp. That. I have both a .45 ACP AR and .300 BLK. If I want to shoot subsonic out of an AR platform I just shoot the .45. There are TONS of good expanding .45 bullets available. While I don't have a suppressor you could suppress the .45 AR very easily. So what does the .300 BLK subby do that the .45AR doesn't? Due to is better BC it has a flatter trajectory. Thus, at hunting distances we start to see some advantage to the subsonic .300 BLK. Great. Good for folks who hunt with it. My state limits rifle hunting of deer to certain straight-walled cartridges, so .45 ACP is legal but .300 BLK isn't. But what about HD applications? BC won't matter at across the living room distances. Neither subsonic round will do any better against armor, either. Both carbines will be equally bulky. If suppressed, they'll be equally nose-heavy. So why not just choose the .45 ACP for HD? I'm a reloader, which is another appeal of the .300 BLK. The brass and bullets are cheap and available. Of course, the lighter bullets better suited for supersonic are cheaper... I am a supersonic adherent of .300 BLK. I like the bullets from shorter barrels hitting harder at reasonable distances compared to .223. It performs as well as the .30-30 and 7.62x39 mm, both of which have decades of real world experience killing things. Subsonic is for pistols and playtime. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:15:51 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What? now it is grammar nazi time? and it is that's |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:17:24 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do you plan on testing any of it? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: That is a prime example of why I keep saying that subsonic 300blk is not that great, 99% of the subsonic rounds loaded for it would be a terrible HD round. Which bullet would make up the 1%? Do you plan on testing any of it? I do plan to test some Lehigh stuff, I was contacted by their media company to do some testing I am working out the details. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:18:11 PM EDT
[#10]
The problem with the entire analysis is the idea that shooting anything subsonic is 'stupid'. There's no basis for such a comment and my guess is, if you were in SHTF and moving through an area at night and caught a subsonic 300 to the face, you wouldn't think it was all that stupid anymore. The round has a definite purpose and just because you're not interested in said purpose doesn't mean it doesn't have one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:21:38 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don't expand? Dafuq? Take a look starting at about 4min:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgcGLi5v67s15". Excellent expansion. And flexibility is an asset. The ability to load one round for SD and another for hunting is an asset, whether you like it or not. The idea that 1 bullet is supposed to do everything is simply stupid and myopic. I doubt you believe there is such a thing, but you're sure acting like any chambering that doesn't do it all is shit. Frankly, everything you've griped about with 300blk is true of almost every handgun too. I guess we should all get rid of those too? And yes, I have fired weapons (plural) indoors without ear pro. I'll take the suppressor, thanks. And 338LM is vastly superior to 5.56 in every way you would seem to want to measure. That's what you'd recommend for those of us too weak to carry 50BMG, right? http://dillehay.org/images/mrad_supp.jpg Seriously. Stop taking things not made to do something (like defeat armor) and acting surprised when they *gasp* don't do it. Moreover, stop testing just one half of what the 300blk setup is supposed to do and acting like it's the end of the story. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Lol....video was retarded, not much point when your obviously biased. So armor that is supposed to protect against something did it's job and yet it's the rounds fault??? Try shooting a subsonic .308 at it (do they even make such a round? ) and see what happens, then report back on how it's a crap round as well.Subsonic .308 would be crap, subsonic rifles are fucking stupid. This one couldn't even knock over a piece of free standing plastic lol Sorry, but the blue statement above is bullshit. I've got 60 rounds of sub300blk in a suppressed SBR by my nightstand each night. Tell me what rifle or pistol is a better fit for SD that will allow me to communicate or hear after I pull the trigger indoors. What else is going to be that useful indoors but still allow me to engage a man sized target at 100y and provide 60 rounds with 1 mag change? I can get a rifle sling on a lot faster than I can get a holster tucked into my tighty whiteys, so it also gives me a chance to use both hands without losing control of the weapon, unlike a pistol. I totally agree that it's really a pistol round in a rifle form factor. The combination of quiet, capacity, and extremely low recoil beats the hell out of everything else I've looked at, including, ironically, my former nightstand gun which was a 10mm. =) I'm not much of a fanboy of any particular chambering, but to simply shit on the flexibility of 300blk as a useful quiet small game & SD round or convenient medium game (lots of deer taken with supers each year) is dumb. I've enjoyed all of your videos except this one. The needless commentary left a bad taste. Again, the switching to supers really doesn't make the subsonic round any better. If you want a gun that is quiet with low recoil and large capacity over all else then that is your choice, but if I am going to have to stop someone from hurting me or my family I want the terminal performance of the round to be at/near the top of my wish list. I didn't shit on the flexibility, I said that subsonic rounds are weak. And compared to rifle rounds, they are. They also don't expand, don't offer a substantial temporary wound cavity, and don't disrupt tissue nearly as well as other rifle options. Like the supersonic 300blk for example lol. Just because people can kill deer with them doesn't really mean shit to me honestly, people kill deer with bows too. Don't expand? Dafuq? Take a look starting at about 4min: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgcGLi5v67s15". Excellent expansion. And flexibility is an asset. The ability to load one round for SD and another for hunting is an asset, whether you like it or not. The idea that 1 bullet is supposed to do everything is simply stupid and myopic. I doubt you believe there is such a thing, but you're sure acting like any chambering that doesn't do it all is shit. Frankly, everything you've griped about with 300blk is true of almost every handgun too. I guess we should all get rid of those too? And yes, I have fired weapons (plural) indoors without ear pro. I'll take the suppressor, thanks. And 338LM is vastly superior to 5.56 in every way you would seem to want to measure. That's what you'd recommend for those of us too weak to carry 50BMG, right? http://dillehay.org/images/mrad_supp.jpg Seriously. Stop taking things not made to do something (like defeat armor) and acting surprised when they *gasp* don't do it. Moreover, stop testing just one half of what the 300blk setup is supposed to do and acting like it's the end of the story. The fact that it wasn't meant to defeat armor isn't relevant. I never said this was the end of the story, I said subsonic 300blk is weak compared to other rifles and doesn't do anything better than other rifles except be quiet. Ever hear me say bad things about supersonic 300blk? Didn't think so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:22:37 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That. I have both a .45 ACP AR and .300 BLK. If I want to shoot subsonic out of an AR platform I just shoot the .45. There are TONS of good expanding .45 bullets available. While I don't have a suppressor you could suppress the .45 AR very easily. So what does the .300 BLK subby do that the .45AR doesn't? Due to is better BC it has a flatter trajectory. Thus, at hunting distances we start to see some advantage to the subsonic .300 BLK. Great. Good for folks who hunt with it. My state limits rifle hunting of deer to certain straight-walled cartridges, so .45 ACP is legal but .300 BLK isn't. But what about HD applications? BC won't matter at across the living room distances. Neither subsonic round will do any better against armor, either. Both carbines will be equally bulky. If suppressed, they'll be equally nose-heavy. So why not just choose the .45 ACP for HD? I'm a reloader, which is another appeal of the .300 BLK. The brass and bullets are cheap and available. Of course, the lighter bullets better suited for supersonic are cheaper... I am a supersonic adherent of .300 BLK. I like the bullets from shorter barrels hitting harder at reasonable distances compared to .223. It performs as well as the .30-30 and 7.62x39 mm, both of which have decades of real world experience killing things. Subsonic is for pistols and playtime. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: the entire point of 300 AAC subs is to be fired from an AR with a CAN and have a better trajectory than .45 acp. That. I have both a .45 ACP AR and .300 BLK. If I want to shoot subsonic out of an AR platform I just shoot the .45. There are TONS of good expanding .45 bullets available. While I don't have a suppressor you could suppress the .45 AR very easily. So what does the .300 BLK subby do that the .45AR doesn't? Due to is better BC it has a flatter trajectory. Thus, at hunting distances we start to see some advantage to the subsonic .300 BLK. Great. Good for folks who hunt with it. My state limits rifle hunting of deer to certain straight-walled cartridges, so .45 ACP is legal but .300 BLK isn't. But what about HD applications? BC won't matter at across the living room distances. Neither subsonic round will do any better against armor, either. Both carbines will be equally bulky. If suppressed, they'll be equally nose-heavy. So why not just choose the .45 ACP for HD? I'm a reloader, which is another appeal of the .300 BLK. The brass and bullets are cheap and available. Of course, the lighter bullets better suited for supersonic are cheaper... I am a supersonic adherent of .300 BLK. I like the bullets from shorter barrels hitting harder at reasonable distances compared to .223. It performs as well as the .30-30 and 7.62x39 mm, both of which have decades of real world experience killing things. Subsonic is for pistols and playtime. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:23:15 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The problem with the entire analysis is the idea that shooting anything subsonic is 'stupid'. There's no basis for such a comment and my guess is, if you were in SHTF and moving through an area at night and caught a subsonic 300 to the face, you wouldn't think it was all that stupid anymore. The round has a definite purpose and just because you're not interested in said purpose doesn't mean it doesn't have one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:24:56 PM EDT
[#14]
now we are getting some place.
 .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:31:24 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So why not just choose the .45 ACP for HD? because it dont stand a chance against .300blk supers! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 8:44:06 PM EDT
[#16]
LoL!
300blk sub is just a pistol round. Nothing more. If you expected any different you're delusional. In other news, water is wet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 8:54:18 PM EDT
[#17]
Op, you can't make everyone happy and there is nothing wrong with presenting your own opinions in your own video.
Good video by the way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 9:15:33 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
What is the purpose? How useful is that purpose to your average person? If Lehigh Defense ammunition works as advertised, then I consider it very useful for HD. (I've seen the ballistic testing that currently exists on youtube, so far I have no reason to bet against it) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 9:17:13 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Op, you can't make everyone happy and there is nothing wrong with presenting your own opinions in your own video. Good video by the way. The problem is he's trying to make his "opinion" sound like facts or even the truth and it isn't. The .300 Blackout subsonic round wasn't meant to rival a rifle round and I don't know of anyone that would claim it would. If he thinks that by showing it wouldn't penetrate the glass proves anything he is delusional. Sure, it was cool to see what happened but who in their right mind really thought it would be effective against it? Thats like taking a hand-grenade, throwing it against a nuclear blast door and claiming a grenade is a worthless explosive devise Most of his posts actually sound pretty ignorant.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 9:30:45 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is a prime example of why I keep saying that subsonic 300blk is not that great, 99% of the subsonic rounds loaded for it would be a terrible HD round. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Goddamn, now the fuckers breaking into my house have riot shields? Do you use subsonic ammo for HD? Then get a hd round when you use it for hd. You would do the same with any other caliber. 300 blackout does not have very limited application in fact it is extremely versatile. With just accurate 1680 powder I can load rounds from 110 grains at high velocity all the way to 220 grain subs. If I need to break ballistic glass, I wil just change mags. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 9:37:16 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Then get a hd round when you use it for hd. You would do the same with any other caliber. 300 blackout does not have very limited application in fact it is extremely versatile. With just accurate 1680 powder I can load rounds from 110 grains at high velocity all the way to 220 grain subs. If I need to break ballistic glass, I wil just change mags. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Goddamn, now the fuckers breaking into my house have riot shields? Do you use subsonic ammo for HD? Then get a hd round when you use it for hd. You would do the same with any other caliber. 300 blackout does not have very limited application in fact it is extremely versatile. With just accurate 1680 powder I can load rounds from 110 grains at high velocity all the way to 220 grain subs. If I need to break ballistic glass, I wil just change mags. This. The strength of .300blk is versatility. Also, 125gr Hornady SST will expand at .300blk velocity. Bank on that. .300blk can do many jobs, in a compact, ergonomic platform, reasonably well. Arguing that it doesn't outperform more specialized rounds within the domain of their specialty is disingenuous at best. ETA: IM me your address and I will send you some 150gr FMJBT rounds and you can test them against your glass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 9:44:43 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:What is the purpose? How useful is that purpose to your average person? Delivering lethal fire, at range & suppressed, while being compatible with other AR parts/mags. I don't really care if it's beneficial to the 'average person' or not. I don't acquire things for myself with other people's purposes in mind. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 9:45:42 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL exactly! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
yeah,but what about supersonic?!!!!! This. SS def lacks the 'punch' needed for that task. Even supers will have a hard time |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 9:54:40 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The problem is he's trying to make his "opinion" sound like facts or even the truth and it isn't. The .300 Blackout subsonic round wasn't meant to rival a rifle round and I don't know of anyone that would claim it would. If he thinks that by showing it wouldn't penetrate the glass proves anything he is delusional. Sure, it was cool to see what happened but who in their right mind really thought it would be effective against it? Thats like taking a hand-grenade, throwing it against a nuclear blast door and claiming a grenade is a worthless explosive devise Most of his posts actually sound pretty ignorant.Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Op, you can't make everyone happy and there is nothing wrong with presenting your own opinions in your own video. Good video by the way. The problem is he's trying to make his "opinion" sound like facts or even the truth and it isn't. The .300 Blackout subsonic round wasn't meant to rival a rifle round and I don't know of anyone that would claim it would. If he thinks that by showing it wouldn't penetrate the glass proves anything he is delusional. Sure, it was cool to see what happened but who in their right mind really thought it would be effective against it? Thats like taking a hand-grenade, throwing it against a nuclear blast door and claiming a grenade is a worthless explosive devise Most of his posts actually sound pretty ignorant.I'm sorry but I don't I don't recall when 10mm said that 300blk was to rival a rifle round. What I saw was that the OP is and will always be skeptical of 300vlk subsonic and he presented his opinion followed by his findings. What is so ignorant about that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:15:58 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol....video was retarded, not much point when your obviously biased. So armor that is supposed to protect against something did it's job and yet it's the rounds fault???
Try shooting a subsonic .308 at it (do they even make such a round? ) and see what happens, then report back on how it's a crap round as well.Exactly |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:22:04 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Op, you can't make everyone happy and there is nothing wrong with presenting your own opinions in your own video. Good video by the way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:23:13 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sorry but I don't I don't recall when 10mm said that 300blk was to rival a rifle round. What I saw was that the OP is and will always be skeptical of 300vlk subsonic and he presented his opinion followed by his findings. What is so ignorant about that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sorry but I don't I don't recall when 10mm said that 300blk was to rival a rifle round. What I saw was that the OP is and will always be skeptical of 300vlk subsonic and he presented his opinion followed by his findings. What is so ignorant about that? Quoted:
I never tried to prove how horrible it was, I said it carries the energy of a pistol and the sectional density has limited applications where it is a benefit. Usually in soft tissue the section density leads to less tissue disruption and over penetration. If I tried to use it for something it wasn't designed for, what was it designed for? Short of AP ammo I don't see how you could say anything was "designed" to go through this window. My point was that it's a rifle round that in a lot of cases performs worse than a pistol. And that is something I see as useless. It can't even penetrate 1/8 A36 btw lol Quoted:
I always try and figure out some way to word that I think that subsonic 300blk is the birdshot of rifle rounds but it never seems to come out right lol Quoted:
You should really look at the terminal performance of subsonic 300blk rounds and compare that to other rounds that are proven to be effective against humans and make a decision if the round you're using is a good choice. I would say it most likely is not. If you value being able to talk/hear effectively over the performance of the round then you may be onto something. Have you ever shot a gun indoors without hearing protection? I did once and although it sucked I wasn't completely deaf. Again, the switching to supers really doesn't make the subsonic round any better. If you want a gun that is quiet with low recoil and large capacity over all else then that is your choice, but if I am going to have to stop someone from hurting me or my family I want the terminal performance of the round to be at/near the top of my wish list. I didn't shit on the flexibility, I said that subsonic rounds are weak. And compared to rifle rounds, they are. They also don't expand, don't offer a substantial temporary wound cavity, and don't disrupt tissue nearly as well as other rifle options. Like the supersonic 300blk for example lol. Just because people can kill deer with them doesn't really mean shit to me honestly, people kill deer with bows too. Quoted:
No it's a pistol round in a big gun, with probably more velocity than a handgun. If you want to compare apples to apples then compare pistol rounds to pistol rounds, and rifle rounds to rifle rounds. Comparing subsonic 300blk (rifle round) to other rifle rounds is not going to be pretty. yeah I can't figure for the life of me where he made that comparison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:24:27 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The problem is he's trying to make his "opinion" sound like facts or even the truth and it isn't. The .300 Blackout subsonic round wasn't meant to rival a rifle round and I don't know of anyone that would claim it would. If he thinks that by showing it wouldn't penetrate the glass proves anything he is delusional. Sure, it was cool to see what happened but who in their right mind really thought it would be effective against it? Thats like taking a hand-grenade, throwing it against a nuclear blast door and claiming a grenade is a worthless explosive devise Most of his posts actually sound pretty ignorant.Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Op, you can't make everyone happy and there is nothing wrong with presenting your own opinions in your own video. Good video by the way. The problem is he's trying to make his "opinion" sound like facts or even the truth and it isn't. The .300 Blackout subsonic round wasn't meant to rival a rifle round and I don't know of anyone that would claim it would. If he thinks that by showing it wouldn't penetrate the glass proves anything he is delusional. Sure, it was cool to see what happened but who in their right mind really thought it would be effective against it? Thats like taking a hand-grenade, throwing it against a nuclear blast door and claiming a grenade is a worthless explosive devise Most of his posts actually sound pretty ignorant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:26:36 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Then get a hd round when you use it for hd. You would do the same with any other caliber. 300 blackout does not have very limited application in fact it is extremely versatile. With just accurate 1680 powder I can load rounds from 110 grains at high velocity all the way to 220 grain subs. If I need to break ballistic glass, I wil just change mags. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Goddamn, now the fuckers breaking into my house have riot shields? Do you use subsonic ammo for HD? Then get a hd round when you use it for hd. You would do the same with any other caliber. 300 blackout does not have very limited application in fact it is extremely versatile. With just accurate 1680 powder I can load rounds from 110 grains at high velocity all the way to 220 grain subs. If I need to break ballistic glass, I wil just change mags. Like I said right in the video before I even made this thread, most of the comments will involve supersonic 300blk lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:27:53 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. The strength of .300blk is versatility. Also, 125gr Hornady SST will expand at .300blk velocity. Bank on that. .300blk can do many jobs, in a compact, ergonomic platform, reasonably well. Arguing that it doesn't outperform more specialized rounds within the domain of their specialty is disingenuous at best. ETA: IM me your address and I will send you some 150gr FMJBT rounds and you can test them against your glass. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Goddamn, now the fuckers breaking into my house have riot shields? Do you use subsonic ammo for HD? Then get a hd round when you use it for hd. You would do the same with any other caliber. 300 blackout does not have very limited application in fact it is extremely versatile. With just accurate 1680 powder I can load rounds from 110 grains at high velocity all the way to 220 grain subs. If I need to break ballistic glass, I wil just change mags. This. The strength of .300blk is versatility. Also, 125gr Hornady SST will expand at .300blk velocity. Bank on that. .300blk can do many jobs, in a compact, ergonomic platform, reasonably well. Arguing that it doesn't outperform more specialized rounds within the domain of their specialty is disingenuous at best. ETA: IM me your address and I will send you some 150gr FMJBT rounds and you can test them against your glass. I have plenty of supersonic rounds I have no doubt they would go through this glass with ease. This video and post however was about SUBSONIC 300blk, but nobody likes to talk about that. They jump right to supers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:28:28 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm sorry but I don't I don't recall when 10mm said that 300blk was to rival a rifle round. What I saw was that the OP is and will always be skeptical of 300vlk subsonic and he presented his opinion followed by his findings. What is so ignorant about that? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Op, you can't make everyone happy and there is nothing wrong with presenting your own opinions in your own video. Good video by the way. The problem is he's trying to make his "opinion" sound like facts or even the truth and it isn't. The .300 Blackout subsonic round wasn't meant to rival a rifle round and I don't know of anyone that would claim it would. If he thinks that by showing it wouldn't penetrate the glass proves anything he is delusional. Sure, it was cool to see what happened but who in their right mind really thought it would be effective against it? Thats like taking a hand-grenade, throwing it against a nuclear blast door and claiming a grenade is a worthless explosive devise Most of his posts actually sound pretty ignorant.I'm sorry but I don't I don't recall when 10mm said that 300blk was to rival a rifle round. What I saw was that the OP is and will always be skeptical of 300vlk subsonic and he presented his opinion followed by his findings. What is so ignorant about that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:28:41 PM EDT
[#32]
I'd LOVE to know what subsonic alternatives there are that are useful since .300blk is apparently useless.
9mm subsonic? .45? Nah. 5.56 subsonic? Nope, not gonna happen .308 subsonic? Still nope. Unless your conclusion is that subsonic velocities are inadequate for ANY round to defeat higher levels of armor, you're bias and disingenuous OP. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:29:45 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: yeah I can't figure for the life of me where he made that comparison. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm sorry but I don't I don't recall when 10mm said that 300blk was to rival a rifle round. What I saw was that the OP is and will always be skeptical of 300vlk subsonic and he presented his opinion followed by his findings. What is so ignorant about that? Quoted: I never tried to prove how horrible it was, I said it carries the energy of a pistol and the sectional density has limited applications where it is a benefit. Usually in soft tissue the section density leads to less tissue disruption and over penetration. If I tried to use it for something it wasn't designed for, what was it designed for? Short of AP ammo I don't see how you could say anything was "designed" to go through this window. My point was that it's a rifle round that in a lot of cases performs worse than a pistol. And that is something I see as useless. It can't even penetrate 1/8 A36 btw lol Quoted: You should really look at the terminal performance of subsonic 300blk rounds and compare that to other rounds that are proven to be effective against humans and make a decision if the round you're using is a good choice. I would say it most likely is not. If you value being able to talk/hear effectively over the performance of the round then you may be onto something. Have you ever shot a gun indoors without hearing protection? I did once and although it sucked I wasn't completely deaf. Again, the switching to supers really doesn't make the subsonic round any better. If you want a gun that is quiet with low recoil and large capacity over all else then that is your choice, but if I am going to have to stop someone from hurting me or my family I want the terminal performance of the round to be at/near the top of my wish list. I didn't shit on the flexibility, I said that subsonic rounds are weak. And compared to rifle rounds, they are. They also don't expand, don't offer a substantial temporary wound cavity, and don't disrupt tissue nearly as well as other rifle options. Like the supersonic 300blk for example lol. Just because people can kill deer with them doesn't really mean shit to me honestly, people kill deer with bows too. Quoted: No it's a pistol round in a big gun, with probably more velocity than a handgun. If you want to compare apples to apples then compare pistol rounds to pistol rounds, and rifle rounds to rifle rounds. Comparing subsonic 300blk (rifle round) to other rifle rounds is not going to be pretty. yeah I can't figure for the life of me where he made that comparison. Borderline insanity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:31:28 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'd LOVE to know what subsonic alternatives there are that are useful since .300blk is apparently useless. 9mm subsonic? .45? Nah. 5.56 subsonic? Nope, not gonna happen .308 subsonic? Still nope. Unless your conclusion is that subsonic velocities are inadequate for ANY round to defeat higher levels of armor, you're bias and disingenuous OP. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:36:06 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Missing the point, the SUBSONIC 300BLK HAS A LIMITED APPLICATION. Jesus fuck how many times do I have to say it to make myself clear, I'm not hating on all 300blk or saying its not versatile, I'm saying a subsonic bullet with that sectional density that doesn't expand reliably has really limited/specific uses. Like I said right in the video before I even made this thread, most of the comments will involve supersonic 300blk lol Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Goddamn, now the fuckers breaking into my house have riot shields? Do you use subsonic ammo for HD? Then get a hd round when you use it for hd. You would do the same with any other caliber. 300 blackout does not have very limited application in fact it is extremely versatile. With just accurate 1680 powder I can load rounds from 110 grains at high velocity all the way to 220 grain subs. If I need to break ballistic glass, I wil just change mags. Like I said right in the video before I even made this thread, most of the comments will involve supersonic 300blk lol You dont have a fucking point. You set up your argument the same as the 9mm sucks crowd. Only considering a fmj 115 grain round out of a 9mm when there are multitudes of others. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:40:04 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here's another one. I have plenty of supersonic rounds I have no doubt they would go through this glass with ease. This video and post however was about SUBSONIC 300blk, but nobody likes to talk about that. They jump right to supers. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That is a prime example of why I keep saying that subsonic 300blk is not that great, 99% of the subsonic rounds loaded for it would be a terrible HD round. Then get a hd round when you use it for hd. You would do the same with any other caliber. 300 blackout does not have very limited application in fact it is extremely versatile. With just accurate 1680 powder I can load rounds from 110 grains at high velocity all the way to 220 grain subs. If I need to break ballistic glass, I wil just change mags. This. The strength of .300blk is versatility. Also, 125gr Hornady SST will expand at .300blk velocity. Bank on that. .300blk can do many jobs, in a compact, ergonomic platform, reasonably well. Arguing that it doesn't outperform more specialized rounds within the domain of their specialty is disingenuous at best. ETA: IM me your address and I will send you some 150gr FMJBT rounds and you can test them against your glass. I have plenty of supersonic rounds I have no doubt they would go through this glass with ease. This video and post however was about SUBSONIC 300blk, but nobody likes to talk about that. They jump right to supers. Because the purpose of subsonic 300 is not to defeat armor. Your point only matters in your mind which is why its stupid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 11:17:39 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
because it dont stand a chance against .300blk supers!
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So why not just choose the .45 ACP for HD? because it dont stand a chance against .300blk supers!
I agree that .300 BLK supers beat .45 ACP. Heck, they're better than virtually any pistol round I can think of. But we're talking about .300 BLK subs at HD distances here. Once you limit the choices to subsonic only then I submit that the heaviest, largest and best expanding options are the best. Speer gold dots in .45 ACP are simply better than most .300 BLK subs by those measures. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 11:25:28 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because the purpose of subsonic 300 is not to defeat armor. Your point only matters in your mind which is why its stupid. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: That is a prime example of why I keep saying that subsonic 300blk is not that great, 99% of the subsonic rounds loaded for it would be a terrible HD round. Then get a hd round when you use it for hd. You would do the same with any other caliber. 300 blackout does not have very limited application in fact it is extremely versatile. With just accurate 1680 powder I can load rounds from 110 grains at high velocity all the way to 220 grain subs. If I need to break ballistic glass, I wil just change mags. This. The strength of .300blk is versatility. Also, 125gr Hornady SST will expand at .300blk velocity. Bank on that. .300blk can do many jobs, in a compact, ergonomic platform, reasonably well. Arguing that it doesn't outperform more specialized rounds within the domain of their specialty is disingenuous at best. ETA: IM me your address and I will send you some 150gr FMJBT rounds and you can test them against your glass. I have plenty of supersonic rounds I have no doubt they would go through this glass with ease. This video and post however was about SUBSONIC 300blk, but nobody likes to talk about that. They jump right to supers. Because the purpose of subsonic 300 is not to defeat armor. Your point only matters in your mind which is why its stupid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 12:15:41 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I never tried to prove how horrible it was, I said it carries the energy of a pistol and the sectional density has limited applications where it is a benefit. Usually in soft tissue the section density leads to less tissue disruption and over penetration. If I tried to use it for something it wasn't designed for, what was it designed for? Short of AP ammo I don't see how you could say anything was "designed" to go through this window. My point was that it's a rifle round that in a lot of cases performs worse than a pistol. And that is something I see as useless. It can't even penetrate 1/8 A36 btw lol Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I like your videos, but I am still amazed at how you started this by trying to "prove" how horrible 300blk subsonic is and it kept surprising you and yet you finally got something it "failed" at and yet that makes it completely useless? Not sure exactly how trying to do so something it was not designed to do makes it a failing at other things that it can do well. I have found subsonic great for hunting. I do not use subsonic 300 blk to try to defeat armor but that certainly does not make it useless. Anyway keep up the videos. I look forward to the one you do showing how useless it is a anything but being quite, when it fails to penetrate 3/4 cold roll steel If I tried to use it for something it wasn't designed for, what was it designed for? Short of AP ammo I don't see how you could say anything was "designed" to go through this window. My point was that it's a rifle round that in a lot of cases performs worse than a pistol. And that is something I see as useless. It can't even penetrate 1/8 A36 btw lol Did you do a test on gel penetration? If so how many inch did it penetrated? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 12:16:51 AM EDT
[#40]
The 300blk butthurt is great in this thread.
My favorite is when they advertise the subsonic loadings with the G1 ballistic coefficient! 
"Ladies and Gentlemen, step right up, feast your eyes on the wonderment of the 300 BLACKOUT! It does everything! It slices, it dices, more powerful than 5.56 out of a 9 inch barrel, as quiet as a .45acp, comparable ballistics to 7.62x39!! Folks, this is no joke...Hurry, hurry, hurry, buy your tickets to see Travis Haley shoot a 300 Blackout and hit a target at 750 yards!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 12:16:57 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I agree that .300 BLK supers beat .45 ACP. Heck, they're better than virtually any pistol round I can think of. But we're talking about .300 BLK subs at HD distances here. Once you limit the choices to subsonic only then I submit that the heaviest, largest and best expanding options are the best. Speer gold dots in .45 ACP are simply better than most .300 BLK subs by those measures. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So why not just choose the .45 ACP for HD? because it dont stand a chance against .300blk supers!
I agree that .300 BLK supers beat .45 ACP. Heck, they're better than virtually any pistol round I can think of. But we're talking about .300 BLK subs at HD distances here. Once you limit the choices to subsonic only then I submit that the heaviest, largest and best expanding options are the best. Speer gold dots in .45 ACP are simply better than most .300 BLK subs by those measures. and they are better than most other 45 acp as well, whats the point? Would a speer penetrate body armor? There are 300 subs that look nastier than a speer gold dot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 12:17:04 AM EDT
[#42]
lol trolling like a BOSS
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 12:20:50 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So the glass did what it is supposed to do ? Exactly this. The glass, and bullet worked as designed. Shouldn't it fall to reason, that you're going to need something with more power, not less, to get through any type of armor? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 12:23:39 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The 300blk butthurt is great in this thread. My favorite is when they advertise the subsonic loadings with the G1 ballistic coefficient! http://i60.tinypic.com/4tm3rs.jpg "Ladies and Gentlemen, step right up, feast your eyes on the wonderment of the 300 BLACKOUT! It does everything! It slices, it dices, more powerful than 5.56 out of a 9 inch barrel, as quiet as a .45acp, comparable ballistics to 7.62x39!! Folks, this is no joke...Hurry, hurry, hurry, buy your tickets to see Travis Haley shoot a 300 Blackout and hit a target at 750 yards!" I laughed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 12:27:03 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sorry but I don't I don't recall when 10mm said that 300blk was to rival a rifle round. What I saw was that the OP is and will always be skeptical of 300vlk subsonic and he presented his opinion followed by his findings. What is so ignorant about that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Op, you can't make everyone happy and there is nothing wrong with presenting your own opinions in your own video. Good video by the way. The problem is he's trying to make his "opinion" sound like facts or even the truth and it isn't. The .300 Blackout subsonic round wasn't meant to rival a rifle round and I don't know of anyone that would claim it would. If he thinks that by showing it wouldn't penetrate the glass proves anything he is delusional. Sure, it was cool to see what happened but who in their right mind really thought it would be effective against it? Thats like taking a hand-grenade, throwing it against a nuclear blast door and claiming a grenade is a worthless explosive devise Most of his posts actually sound pretty ignorant.I'm sorry but I don't I don't recall when 10mm said that 300blk was to rival a rifle round. What I saw was that the OP is and will always be skeptical of 300vlk subsonic and he presented his opinion followed by his findings. What is so ignorant about that? Because he keeps bashing on it trying to justify his stance by comparing it to regular rifle rounds. If anything it was meant more as a better option for suppressed 9mm or .45 performance close in while retaining the ability to quickly change into a 300+yd weapon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 12:28:11 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LMAO the 300blk subsonic round IS a rifle round. Just because it's weak (as stated and shown in the video) doesn't change the fact that its an intermediate rifle cartridge. Period. Reality hits you hard bro. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Op, you can't make everyone happy and there is nothing wrong with presenting your own opinions in your own video. Good video by the way. The problem is he's trying to make his "opinion" sound like facts or even the truth and it isn't. The .300 Blackout subsonic round wasn't meant to rival a rifle round and I don't know of anyone that would claim it would. If he thinks that by showing it wouldn't penetrate the glass proves anything he is delusional. Sure, it was cool to see what happened but who in their right mind really thought it would be effective against it? Thats like taking a hand-grenade, throwing it against a nuclear blast door and claiming a grenade is a worthless explosive devise Most of his posts actually sound pretty ignorant.I already addressed it. Like I said, ignorance is bliss. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 12:32:23 AM EDT
[#47]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 1:48:47 AM EDT
[#48]
I wonder if you could punch through a commie's coat with that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 2:44:26 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wonder if you could punch through a commie's coat with that. Only with 300blk supers, the subs bounce right off. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2015 6:53:39 AM EDT
[#50]
i thank you for the test but 2 places you went wrong. saying .300blk sub and not considering it as all rifle sub. it actually has an advantage in that it will cycle an AR platform and .308 will not. the other mistake you made was comparing a non expanding round to an expanding .45acp round. apples to apples you need to compare it to .45acp FMJ.
carry on with the pissing contest.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
