I did a lot of research on alternative caliber AR-15 platform cartridges before I decided on the 6.8 SPCII. I was looking for something nearly as capable as my .243 Winchester bolt action rifles to use on large called coyotes. It came down between the 6.8 SPCII and the 6.5 G. At the time, the 6.8 offered better ammo availability, better velocity from a 16" barrel, cheaper brass, cheaper to build uppers, and so forth. For called coyotes, which are usually taken inside 100 yards the 6.8 was perfect. I've not been disappointed at all.

You know I dont know too many people that can see a deer at 300 yards in the dark, in fact i know none.  There are a lot of people on this site that want a 300yd+ gun/round but will never take a deer out past 200.  the reality is most deer are taken with in 100yds.

people constantly knock the 300 b/c of different reasons, but the info is out there to prove the internet trolls on this site wrong.  the 300 is a great round as is the 6.5 and 6.8 but stop spewing BS all over the internet.  Mortar! My ass!

If you really gave the 300 a chance then prove it!  post a video or picks of it failing.  You sir need to get serious.

For those of us that live West of the Mississippi, we encounter longer average shots due to the topography and terrain that is so common in the Mojave Desert spread, the Rockies, the Sierra Nevadas, and the MidWest Plains.  There are plenty of forested areas on the West Coast, but the chances of getting within 100yds of a big Mule deer in the type of terrain I see happen mostly when I'm in suburban areas in the foothills or crests of ridgeline real estate developments, where I can't shoot anyway.

That being said, it makes a lot of sense for us who actually need a caliber with killing power at distance.  What often happens is you see a lot of hunters with 7mm STW's, .300 WM's, Weatherby Magnums, and cartridges that can easily generate 3200fps+ mv with 140-150gr bullets, and they blow the bullets apart on a rib or shoulder, often DRT'ing, but the hydrostatic trauma is so devastating, that no meat is usable.

This is why the Europeans have had so much success with the 6.5x55 Swede.  You push a high sectional density projectile at moderate velocities with decent hunting bullets, and they continue to plow through the game while opening, almost always with a clean pass through and very few instances where tracking is necessary.

It's also why the .270 Winchester is so popular, because you have a great flat-shooting cartridge with better sectional density than your .30's in the 150-180gr class, that has slowed down enough not to vaporize at 300-400yds, making it a favorite of many Antelope, Deer, Elk, & Moose hunters in this part of the Country for over 80 years.

For those who hunt in the sticks in the South, NorthEast, and areas where the trees and vegetation are thick, something like the 7.62x39 makes a lot of sense, so going with a .300 BLK makes even more sense since you don't have the magazine/firing pin, feed ramp issues that need to be worked through.  

If you want a hunting carbine that will do what the .30 cals will do in the sticks AND reach out in the plains and foothills, you can have both with the Grendel.  It really does have the ability to step into the shoes of the 7.62x39, the 6.8 SPC II, while coming withing the practical realm of the 6.5x55 Swede.  That is an impressive performance capability spread not to be overlooked by those who are looking for a versatile hunting caliber that is ready to drop in to the AR15 chassis.

Sure, a straw man argument when bolded as a single sentence, but not as a whole when used with: "It can do everything that 7.62x39 can, and no one wants to stand in front of that.  Also, no one debates whether or not it's an intermediate cartridge, nor whether it can take game at reasonable distances."

The simple fact is you and others are purposefully skewing the .300 BLK into something that is anemic and won't adequately do what it's supposed to do.  Here are words from JD Jones on his website, the inventor of the 300 Whisper. What you are saying is in direct opposition to the person who created the cartridge:

It is what it is, despite your incantations that it not be so.

I never said there weren't better supersonic cartridges.  I did say:

The intentional  misrepresentations of the 300 Whisper and the sister SAAMI 300 BLK are total and complete bunk for whatever devious little reasons you and 346ci have.

Seriously, this brings up connotations of a Handgun Control anti-gun advertisement. These falsehoods are pure bunk, and have NO FACTUAL DATA to back them up. Contrary, a Barnes Vortex 110 Grain 300 BLK expands to 0.60 at 300 yards from a 9 inch barrel, and penetrates 20 inches. What exactly is going to hobble off "unsportsman-like" given correct placement?

It's almost like we're at a Justin Beiber or Twilight gathering –– lots of wailing and wet panties, but not a lot of rational thought!

No one is saying the 300 BLK is god's gift to man-kind, will knock the earth off its rotational axis, nor make virgins lay in front of you begging for deflowering. It has its positives and negatives, just like every other single cartridge out there. Realize what they factually are, and choose accordingly.

You , sir, should win an award for analogies ! Classic ! LMAO !

Somewhat of a good arguement. If you would honestly take a 300yd shot with the 300wtf at those distances to take game, I don't have anything else to say. It is not meant for those distances, if you want to buy into the hype by all means do so. I will choose a round that I know has the power, the 300wtf is not it.





<User was warned for this post. Quit posting stuff like "300wtf" in order to troll and elicit a negative response. This is unacceptable in the tech forums - Z>



 

If referring to cartridges by an improper and inappropriate name is acceptable, then referring to certain posters that continue to spew misinformation to support their slanted viewpoint about a particular cartridge in thread after thread should be:





"Frequently Understating Cartridge Killing and Tactical Abilities with Ridiculous Deceit".
The correct abbreviated notation for the 300 AAC Blackout is the 300 BLK.  It is not the exact same cartridge as the .300 Whisper or .300 Fireball anymore than the 6.8 SPC is the same cartridge as the 6.8 SPCII.









 

There is no confusion on the 6.8, the good stuff is all known as SPCII.



 

I voted 6.8. I find it the gives the most performance and versatility improvements over 5.56. Truth is that many of the choices are good. .300 BLK is another good option if you need subsonic, but I wanted more of a medium range rifle. 6.8 can get over 2900 fps with the right loads. Not the highest B.C., but not bad either. I think many loads offer a reasonalbe alternative to 7.62 x 51 out to around 300 meters. Not equal, just a reasonable alternative in many situations.

Everyone complains about ammo costs, but I find them pretty much in line with any other premium round. I don't plink with my 6.8.

Technically, the 6.8  & SPCII are dimensionally the same cartridge brass. The SPC II has a little more powder & some of the manufactures have extended the COAL a little. But, still the same brass.

I find it more than a little amusing that over 85% of the posters here have said that the 6.8 is the way to go yet when you look at the poll it is obvious what most people think. I believe it just goes to show you that he who screams the loudest isn't always the best.

Just to add my recommendation. The 300BLK can do everything the 6.8 can out to 300 yards. With the 6.8 you will pay a lot in nonstandard mags, nonstandard bolts, ammo, brass just to get that extra 100 yards over the 300BLK and if longer range shots are what you are looking for then the 6.5 or the .308 would be better choices.

Since the OP specifically asked about intermediate range then the obvious choice is the one that with only a barrel change you get a SAAMI round with major industry support, cheaper ammo, standard magazines, much cheaper brass, military surplus bullets, can easily convert .223 brass to 300BLK brass so you never have to worry about running out of brass and subsonics quieter than the MP5 with more power than the MP5 with just the change of a magazine.

And that is where the misinformed spread the word. The .300 is not near the 6.5 or 6.8 in performance, that is a proven fact. The only reason the .300 got votes in here is due to linking from the .300 forum.

Yup, you are correct. However, everyone is stepping or has already has towards SPCII/6.8X43 as the common chamber. The SPC chamber is pretty much dead as it should be.

The 6.8 has been adopted by a branch of the Jordanian military.....about a year ago.  It recently came out that the Saudi military has just ordered 6.8 weapons and ammo.  I understand that Federal will make the ammo to Saudi specs.

Incorrect, but thanks for playing!

The difference lies solely in the chamber of the rifle itself....

The above is correct.  The official cartridge dimensions for the 6.8SPC have never changed.

Key to this argument is literally at what range are we talking about?  Lets be realistic for a second, we aren't in the sandbox.  I've got three calibers of ar:  5.56x45, 7.62x39, and .458 SOCOM.  How many of us have owned every round mentioned?  Point made.  What you read may not apply just because it was read on the internet.  The 5.56 works, just ask all the bad guys.  The 7.62x39 works (yes, mine goes bang every time) as history has proven.  .458 Socom is one bad dude inside of 200 yds, but if you don't reload you had better have a sponsor.  My go to right now....458 Socom w/ a Barnes TTSX pill will cure any ailment that could pose a threat with just one treatment.  

I apologize to the OP, but I for one still think the .308 is the answer as it will do everything any of these rounds will do...then quite a bit more. It's actually THE intermediate between the calibers we can own:  .223 & .50 BMG

Wilson Combat and a couple of other companies load factory ammo to longer than SAAMI length, for the combat loads. So the other poster was correct.

The industry is moving away from the SAAMI based cartridges, slowly, but it's headed that way. LWRC has just contracted with the Saudi government to provide a new rifle in 6.8 caliber.

The new rifle has a longer and wider magwell, and a P Mag designed to fit it, which will allow the longer cartridges to be utilized, and to keep soldiers from inserting standard 5.56 magazines.

Federal is contracted to load 150 million rounds per year, at least, starting this year.

The only thing left is for LWRC, Federal, or someone else with deep pockets to rename the cartridge and submit it to SAAMI. The liability riddled society we live in is the only thing that has most of the ammo companies producing the SAAMI spec ammo, which was an effort to fix a problem with a chamber drawing that Remington got wrong when it submitted it. The Remington 6.8SPC was a mistake to begin with, the 6.8x43 and Spec II chamber more in line with the actual blueprints that Chris Murray designed.

Case capacity is determined by interior brass dimensions.  Loaded/loading capacity depends on the bullet length and seating depth and powder type.  Implying that SPCII holds more powder is not technically correct as the brass has not changed.  

The same powder load with a COL of 2.25" in an SPC gun vs in a SPCII gun will still realize a measurable increase in velocity even though the rounds are the exact same.  Doesn't matter if it's a SPC vs SPCII gun with a COL of 2.30" for that matter....


SPCII type/SSA tactical loads tailored for the newer chamber can obviously hold more powder because the cartridge now takes advantage of (proper) chamber dimensions.

The new style Hornady brass has the most case capacity of the current 6.8 brass on the market, it holds .3-.5gr more powder than SSA brass and is just as tough.

SSA brass used to hold a bit more, but it has changed ever so slightly over the years....

.308 is not an intermediate cartridge.  It is a battle rifle cartridge.  An intermediate cartridge needs to provide submachinegun firepower with practical rifle engagement range.  That means high mag capacity of no less than 25rds and a 250m-500m effective range, with much less felt-recoil than a battle rifle cartridge so follow-up shots can be easily made.

.458 SOCOM & .50 Beowulf are not intermediate cartridges, as they can't meet the firepower, recoil, and effective range parameters of the intermediate cartridge concept.

Ok, please enlighten us on what the 300BLK cannot due that the 6.8 can out to 300 yards?



RIGHT! The 300BLK is just a fringe round! Never mind that there are more threads on this heavily 6.8 favored forum about the 300BLK than any other rifle cartridge. Never mind that almost every major manufacture is making or in the process of producing 300BLK barrels, uppers, ammo and brass. Never mind in less than two years on the market it is finding ammo and dies on the shelves in such places as Cabelas and Academy. Never mind that people are having to wait weeks just to get there back ordered barrel, dies, ammo, brass and bullets. Even though manufactures are pumping them out as fast as they can.

No, your right it is only because it is linked to a 300BLK website.

Truth be told I didn't think the poll would go the way it did with all the 300BLK haters on here having turned a lot of people who like this site and the 300BLK off. I guess there is enough people remaining to help push it over the top.

I know what would be even more fun would be to take this poll again in about a year when the 300BLK has become more mainstream. I would take all bets that it would be significantly higher than what it is now.

P.S. I know 346ci likes to put out misinformation and only selectively responds so I will ask again. Please educate us on what the 300BLK cannot due out to 300 yards that the 6.8 can or retract your statement that I put out misinformation because remember this is a technical forum.

I have no "hate" for any cartridge for the most part, and I find the Blk useful in some instances, but comparing it to the 6.5G and the 6.8 is not realistic.

To answer your question. The chosen " best " supersonic round for the BLK from a 16" barrel has 727ft/lbs of energy at 300 yards and is barely traveling over 1600fps which has become the minimum velocity for expansion of any kind, assuring a clean kill. Furthermore, most of the projectiles in .30 cal are designed to open at .308 battle rifle velocities which are a full 500fps more than the BLK. In fact, the BLK with all but the few specially designed loads will only expand at around 150 yards.

Now, the second part of your question.  The 6.8 with a 110gr Barnes ttsx loaded by Wilson at 2700fps has 1005ft/lbs of energy at 300 yards, and is traveling at 2028fps at that distance. It will still expand at just over 500 yards, as it is still traveling at 1639fps. It has more energy at 400 that the BLK has at 300 as well.

You want to talk about the 140gr Berger , it has 1137ft/lbs of energy at 300, over 400lbs more than the BLK, and is still going 1912fps.

How about the 120gr Hornady SST.  It has 923ft/lbs of energy at 300, and is traveling at 1862fps.

Those are the facts about supersonic performance.

The BLK has 100ft/lbs of energy more than the 7.62x39 at 300 yards, with roughly the same trajectory,  but will never be as cheap. With umpteen millions of rifles to feed, milsurp and steel case commercial ammo for the AK family will always be cheaper than the BLK, or anything else for that matter.

For subsonic performance, the BLK is a good choice. You are limited however due to the velocity of the ammunition, and aren't going to get anywhere close to 300 yards with it.

Where it is strong, is that you have basically a rifle roughly equivalent to an AK in power and range that can be suppressed without hesitation. We are talking ballistic benefits here and not commonality with 5.56 components or brass, since the question posed is regarding what it can do at 300 yards.

Also, all loads I listed are factory loads and not super duper super secret hot hand loads. It's published data , and for the BLK it comes directly from the BLK PDF and Silver's own promotional website and  literature.

As stated earlier, there is nothing wrong with the BLK, but to compare it's terminal capabilities to that of the 6.8 or the 6.5G is absurd.

[quote=pavlovwolf] The chosen " best " supersonic round for the BLK from a 16" barrel has 727ft/lbs of energy at 300 yards and is barely traveling over 1600fps which has become the minimum velocity for expansion of any kind, assuring a clean kill.[/quote]

16" Barrel 125 grain .300 AAC BLK = 2215 ft/s with 1,360 ft·lbf.

6.8 and 6.5 are still ballistically superior. But, it is usually due to their higher velocities that can only be achieved out of 16"+ barrels. As the barrel length shrinks the line between the 6.8 SPC/6.5 Grendel and the .300 BLK blurs. I don't know where the cross-over is... but its still cool that you don't have to have a different bolt and magazine to use the .300 BLK. I like the 6.8 because I have seen it in 30 magazines. I haven't seen 30 round 6.5 Grendel magazines. Really, if I get an SBR (suppressed or not) I will probably pick .300 BLK. However, 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel are clearly superior to .300 BLK in 16"+ barrels.

I'm more likely to get a .300 BLK before a 6.8 because... I already have 5.56x45 (which is inferior to 6.8 and 6.5 in performance)... but the .300 BLK offers an advantage over all three cartridges out of shorter barrels. I don't know at which barrel length it becomes more ideal to use .300 BLK vs 6.8/6.5. It would be cool if someone could provide that information (complete with muzzle velocities/ energies/ et cetera.)

110gr 6.8 is still going to be superior to the .300 in a 10.5" barrel....

A 8 or 10" 300BLK is NOT going to be faster than a 8 or 10" 6.8 or Grendel. 6" of barrel  is not going to make up for 400fps+ in velocity.  Even if it was a 16" blk and a 8" 6.8 the 300BLK would still not be faster.
The ONE thing the 300blk is good at is going slow, so if slow is what you're after the 300blk is the right choice.

No idea why that quote is jacked up.

I just ran the ballistics on the 110gr Barnes Tipped TSX at 2300fps out of a 16" barrel.  I'm not sure if that's possible with the 300, but it seemed appropriate based on the posted 125gr velocity of 2200fps.  It doesn't retain a lot of energy at distance.  For expansion threshold, you're looking at a 135-150yd max distance with that bullet, if we use a 900 ft-lb expansion threshold.  It does have a point blank zero of about 240yds with a 200yd zero, but you would have to consider the 685 ft-lb energy at that distance, with a 1674fps velocity, since you will usually hear an 1800fps/900 ft-lb expansion velocity threshold.  If there is a lower one for the TTSX 110gr .308, let me know.  I personally would feel comfortable about taking a shot at 240yds with this load, as long as the conditions were not that windy.  A slight breeze of 3-5mph would be the most wind I would want to shoot in, unless I had spent a lot of time with this load.

Of course, I would rather use a Grendel for this task, since, you have way more retained energy and way less wind drift, with bullets that don't have the breaks on regarding the meplat and ogive.

.300 BLK, 110gr Barnes TTSX, 200yd Zero, 2300fps mv, sea level

.......Range    Velocity    Energy     Trajectory         TOF          Drift

      (yards)     (fps)     (ft-lb)     (inches)         (sec)       (inches)

          0      2300        1292          -2.70         0.0000         0.00

        105      2011         988           3.00         0.1465        -1.68

        120      1972         949           3.09         0.1691        -2.22

        135      1933         912           2.99         0.1921        -2.83

        150      1894         876           2.67         0.2157        -3.53

        165      1856         841           2.14         0.2397        -4.31

        180      1819         808           1.38         0.2641        -5.18

        195      1782         775           0.39         0.2891        -6.14

        210      1745         744          -0.86         0.3147        -7.19

        225      1709         714          -2.35         0.3407        -8.33

        240      1674         685          -4.12         0.3673        -9.57

        255      1639         656          -6.17         0.3945       -10.91

        270      1605         629          -8.50         0.4222       -12.35

        285      1572         604         -11.14         0.4505       -13.89

        300      1539         579         -14.10         0.4795       -15.54

16" 6.5 Grendel, 100gr TTSX, 2650fps, 200yd zero, sea level

       Range    Velocity    Energy     Trajectory         TOF          Drift

      (yards)     (fps)     (ft-lb)     (inches)         (sec)       (inches)

          0      2650        1559          -2.70         0.0000         0.00

         50      2524        1415           0.17         0.0580        -0.25

        100      2402        1281           1.67         0.1189        -1.01

        150      2284        1158           1.67         0.1829        -2.32

        200      2168        1044           0.00         0.2503        -4.22

        240      2079         959          -2.66         0.3069        -6.20

        250      2057         939          -3.52         0.3214        -6.77

        260      2035         919          -4.46         0.3360        -7.35

        270      2013         900          -5.49         0.3509        -7.97

        300      1948         843          -9.10         0.3963       -10.00

        330      1885         789         -13.53         0.4433       -12.29

        350      1843         754         -16.96         0.4755       -13.97

        400      1743         674         -27.39         0.5592       -18.74 

LRRP, numbers don't lie. The 6.5G and the 6.8 are vastly superior at all ranges, especially once you get past 200-300 yards.

I think we are both saying that yes, in fact, the .300BLK will likely kill an animal at 300 yards, but it won't be ethical, and has a much greater chance of wounding causing the animal to suffer needlessly, or die at a greater distance from where it was hit, and thus the hunter not recovering it.

Also, when the bullet crosses that magical ( nothing really magical ) where it no longer has the velocity to expand, AND it also no longer has the energy to do the job, shot placement becomes even more critical. That is a harder task out in the field than a lot of people think, since most people can't accurately estimate range, even under ideal circumstances, much less under stress while hunting, possibly in uneven terrain, or in bad weather , or both.

The trajectory of the .300 BLK magnifies any mistakes you make in range estimation over either of the other two real options. Just missing the range estimation by 25 yards or so at that distance is an aiming error of 4 or 5 inches from the 300 BLK.

Consider that you have a target of 5 inches for a clean kill on the animal, and you are a already at a disadvantage.

Let's say you want bigger game, like elk. We know the 6.8 has taken them at 375 yards ( one example, although there are many others), dead right there, and we also know that the 6.5G has done a similar feat, within yards one way or the other, ( can't remember offhand ).

The .300 BLK isn't a good choice in that regard even at half that distance. It just doesn't have the steam.

How many people regularly shoot game animals at 300+ yards with any caliber?   Out of those, how many shoot big game over 300 yards as their primary purpose for their Intermediate Cartridge standard frame AR's?  Should we do a poll?

A lot of AR owners recreationally punch holes in paper and other non-living targets, shoot in competitions and/or keep their rifles as an emergency defensive tool as the rifle's primary purpose.  If you are "defensively" shooting a person at 300+ yards, you are going to have a lot of legal issues unless you have a badge or military ID.  Additionally the purpose of the AR and other Intermediate Round rifles is to have a semi-automatic (or fully automatic) with capacity of 10 rounds or more that can be rapidly fired and reloaded.  So if you train  "1 shot - 1 kill" at very long distances on individual targets, then a precision barreled bolt action in a magnum caliber will be the more appropriate tool for that style of defensive shooting.    

Do you need to have 25+ round rapid fire capability to shoot a deer ethically?  Can you bring another platform that is lightweight and significantly higher powered than even the 6.8 or 6.5 to ensure that you are being fair and ethical to the animal?  Is shooting a deer with an arrow that has the same kinetic energy as a small pistol or rimfire caliber ethical or do I need to exceed some cool sounding kinetic energy number that I read on a forum to be effective?

Being ethical is not just a caliber or weapon consideration, but a judgement call on the shooter's ability, the environment the animal is in  (foliage, terrain etc.) , and the position of the animal relative to the hunter.  Would I feel confident that with a 110 TTSX Black Tipped Barnes bullet and a steady rested shot that I could ethically kill an unobstructed stationary broadside facing deer (DRT) at 300 yards with a 300 BLK?  Yes.  


To correct a statement above in this thread, I have personally shot subsonics out past 250 yards and hit clay pigeons on a 1-shot/1-hit ratio when they were properly ranged. You need to understand your rifle, ballistics and have a BDC and a rangefinder or other way to determine distances in 25 yard increments or better.  Subsonic bullets for the 300 BLK have excellent ballistic coefficients that maintain velocity exceptionally well.  Also since they don't destabilize when they go transonic (because they never went over the sound barrier), the only limiting factor is drop and the shooter's ability to compensate for it.  Saying it isn't possible is ignorant and for people that shoot long distance, it is an excellent training tool since you don't need ranges beyond 300 yards.



The 6.8 bullets like the 120 SST and others specific for the 6.8 didn't arrive on the market overnight.  Last I heard, 6.8 fans are still waiting on new magazines and cheap ammo.  The 6.8 had been on the market for over 5 years when some of these magic 6.8 were released.  If you try and use traditional 140+ grain .270 bullets in your 6.8, you probably won't have the excellent terminal ballistics on game either.  Discrediting a caliber because you refuse to compare bullets specific or relevant to the platform is asinine and short-sighted.  The Speer 125 TNT and Hornady 110 V-Max have excellent lower velocity performance because they don't use overly thick or bonded jackets designed to prevent expansion in thick skinned game.  The Barnes 110 TTSX for the BLK are exceptional and more variety will be following in the next few years.

5.56 cause it just ain't right chambered with anything else...

Please read the 7-8 posts above this one, you should find your answer pretty easy. It has to do with velocity and energy.

I'm not a .300 hater, I think it is a decent choice for 100yd shots on deer and the like. A member of our hunting club uses a SKS and kills 'em just like a .30-06 does in close ranges. I know the .300 preforms best when shooting subs in a SBR. How ever much of the koolaid you drink, it isn't a 300yd gun. I see that Barnes 300yd picture posted by Robert all over the net and just think .

Read my post again without the tears in your eyes.

I said most shooters can't accurately estimate range. You can, so good for you. However, two equally skilled shooters , one with the BLK, and one with a 6.8, the 6.8 wins, every time. More power on target, every time, at every distance. Why limit yourself to less than  300 yards?

Numbers don't lie. All of your pointless meanderings about when a cartridge hit the market means nothing. It is here now, and that is all that counts.

Well at least we aren't resorting to personal attacks again.

We have mags that work, some new ones on the way as we speak. I'm all for a better cheaper mags but have enough PRIs and Barretts to keep me going. Cheap-er ammo is on the way also but we might not see it until 2013. How much of a $$ difference is cheap .300 ammo and 6.8? About $3. The good .300 ammo as you mentioned is on up there in price, some more than good 6.8 ammo. Neither would be good for blasting on a budget. I'm reloading so I get a box of the good 6.8 cheap.

Not many 6.8 users are going to shoot a 140gr .270 bullet unless it is in a bolt gun. The .270 and 6.8 have different cases and chambers. SSA has a new 140gr 6.8 in the works though, it's numbers are looking nice.

Saying it isn't possible is ignorant and for people that shoot long distance, it is an excellent training tool since you don't need ranges beyond 300 yards.

Discrediting a caliber because you refuse to compare bullets specific or relevant to the platform is asinine and short-sighted.

Yeah, at least we aren't resorting to personal attacks.

Its just blooming now, fixing to go viral. Anything here on out is going to put it closer to the top.

If surface area has anything at all to do with a round's ability to kill, then the 6.8 is NOT superior to the 300 BLK in "EVERY" way.  The 300 BLK has almost 24% more surface area than the 6.8 before any deformation takes place.  My point about the arrow is that velocity and kinetic energy are not the only means or considerations for ethical hunting kills.  

20" of ballistic gel penetration from a 9" barrel with .6" expansion at 300 yards inspires confidence in me.




Diversity of the AR platform is part of what makes it great.  Just because your purposes are 400 yard instant kill shots on elk, doesn't mean that everyone else shares the same purpose.  You can swap a .22 upper for a 9mm upper and then .223 to a 458 Socom to a  WSSM to a 5.7.  Multiple calibers for multiple purposes!

Funny times here again, lots  compairison of the 300 BLK to the 6.8 and 6.5g as being not realistic or absurd.  I'll show what I think is non realistic and absurd.

I use a 6.8 on some mule deer hunts, I like the black rifles and the 6.8 gives me a great expanding bullet at a good velocity. My 6.8s are rigged for hunting wearing 3x9 scopes and 2 pt slings.

My 300 BLKs are predator rifles, rigged with dot sites, flashlight and a sling. I reload, brass is very cheap, I convert my own. I can practice more with cheaper components.

The Blackout is still young vs the 6.8 or 6.5g, best bullet do far for hunting is the 110 Blacktip. Maybe we get more in the future.  When comparing to the 6.8 and 6.5g, the Blackout takes a SMALL hit.

110 Blacktip.  2400 fps muzzle. 300m vel.  Ft/lbs.  in drop
                                                   1619.          640.    13.04
85TSX 6.8      3000 fps
                                                     1941.          711.    8.39

I picked the 85 TSX, it's the light weight Barnes bullet, and an eairly 6.8 bullet.  The factory Blacktip load might be slower than the 2400 fps.

At 300m the 6.8 carries 10% more ft/lbs(only 10%), I don't call that absurde.

At 332m the 85tsx drops the same as the Blackout at 300m. (10% more range?).

I would wag the 110 Blacktip could have expansion to 400m. The 85tsx might expand at 400m too. With either the 300 BLK or 6.8,  300m I would be comfortable.

The AR15 platform only has so much to give, we just need to compare the 6.8 to a 308(middle of the road hunting round), a 165 BT starting at 2650 fps has the same drop as the 6.8 but 55% more energy at 300m, now I think that is an example of a not realistic or absurd comparison of rounds. LOL. Intermediate rounds are VERY dismal when stacked to regular hunting rounds in the energy dept. the 300 BLK, 6.8 , and 6.5 g on a chart with energy with the 308. They are all 3 lumped together well below the 308. When looked at on a larger scale, the differences appear very small

I always laugh when I see mortar comments or the haters, but I think we are lucky to have all the options for the platform.

The 300 is not a 6.8 or 6.5. Premium ammo for all 3 will be close, cheaper components goes to the BLK.  I'll continue to use the 6.8 on deer, why?  It does give me an edge and a reason to have another AR!!!!!!!

I still blast more with a 5.56 using wolf ammo.

I think our troops need a new round, fingers are crossed its a middle ground between the 6.8 and the 308. I think both the 6.8 and 6.5 don't offer enough for the military, although the 6.8 has lots of buzz flying around.

The 6.8 has other excellent bullets available. 95TTSX, 110AB, using these head to head to the 110 Blacktip, the gap does get bigger(not much).
Brass costs more for the 6.8 but we pay extra for the extra it brings

I'm a supersonic guy, maybe 1% of ammo is subsonic. Even with a can, supersonics rock.

I know the 6.8 and 300 BLK, not so much with the 6.5 g so I didn't throw anything up there. I would like to know where the Barnes bullets expand down to in the 6.5s.

https://sites.google.com/site/mywebphotos01/_/rsrc/1334903408774/home/Ballistics%20Chart.png

point five-oh is >

So now the 300 BLK is unsportsmanlike at 300 yards?  

Question:  What is weight, velocity and energy @ 50 yards of a traditional .45 musket ball (round ball) fired from a muzzleloader?

I think what we really should be doing is invading all the traditional muzzleloader forums and let them know just how unsportsmanlike those old timey smokepoles really are.

I think you guys are hashing crap out just to argue at this point, but comparing like rounds to like rounds, it's easy to see that some cartridges have an advantage over others.  That's just the way it is.  Get over yourselves, and use what works best for you.

And comparing modern cartridges to 400 year old weapons is just a tad disingenuous if you ask me....

Edit -

182 gr.  .50"
Muzzle 2,004 f.p.s./1,628 f.p.e.
50 yards 1,523 f.p.s./940 f.p.e.
100 yards 1,137 f.p.s./523 f.p.e.

Look up the ballistics.  Patched round ball from a 45 muzzleloader @50 yards is directly comparable to 300 BLK @300.

We are talking about similar weight projectiles, moving at similar speeds, and with expansion of the 300 a similar sized permanent wound channel.

So my question remains:  Do the same people who said 300 BLK @ 300 is unsportsmanlike also want to chime in and say muzzleloader hunting @ 50 is unsportsmanlike?

Edit: This is still correct, the ball weight was just wrong above.

Although I did not say anything about sportsmanship, I did post the ballistics just above your post. To be correct, but relying on the other figures posted in this thread, at 50 yards they are similar to a 6.5g at 300 yards, or a .300 at more like 150 yards.

That is just for a "standard" ball load now. A Brown Bess on the other hand, 545 gr. at 1000fps (!!).

So, among oranges, we have navel, tangerine, etc...., among apples, we have granny smith, pink lady, etc. etc.

I.e. you have a straw man argument going.

I was typing my post while you posted yours and I didn't see it.

I don't want to keept beating this into the ground, as I meant it to make people think about their statements not as a whole new discussion.

But you made may point - 120gr @ 1,523fps vs 110gr @ 1,600fps - not enough difference to matter provided 300BLK expands as represented.

Obviously wind drift and judging distance is a whole new ball game at 300 yards.  If you are a skilled marksman, and take appropriate shots under appropriate conditions there is nothing unsporting about it.

PS re-check your calculations because 120 at 1523 is not 940fpe.  As I checked the numbers I THINK a patched round ball from a .45 runs a little more like 130grns (because the ball is not full bore dia) but close enough.

Ug, sorry. I posted that directly from a black powder site and didn't check the calc.

Editing post.