Posted: 12/23/2013 7:45:16 PM EDT
900 or so 300 Blackout Rounds in my future?
|
nooiiiiiice
We've done 180gr, 208, 220's... 180's will occasionally go super in the 8.2" barrel. the 220's we loaded 10.2gr of 1680 will go super in a 16" barrel. I built a 16' savage with the ERshaw 300blk chamber. Enjoying that one, but the ar upper is more fun. I am looking forward to loading a 125gr soft point for whitetail and possible hog hunting. |
This is about as good as I've been able to get. This was shot with 125 gr SMK over 17.2 gr H110. I'll have to look up the COAL if anyone is interested. The gun was a 16" CMMG WASP barrel with carbine gas. Shot from a front bag and PA 4-14X44 FFP scope at 10x.
Oh, I forgot to mention . . . at 300 yards. 
100 yard groups with that load are generally less than 1". I've also worked up loads using 155gr A-Max and Hornady 150 gr FMJBT, but the best I've been able to get is about 1.5 MOA. The 125 gr Nosler Ballistic Tip gives about the same accuracy as the SMK. I like the mid-weight bullets for general purpose plinking and hunting. Two nice deer have been taken with this gun. |
|
Quoted:
Interesting. I don't have any H110, but I found a pound of Lil'Gun a while back I was going to try. Have an OAL gauge and the modified 300 brass to use with it. Lil' Gun is pretty close too H110 in burn rate and the loads are close, BUT NOT THE SAME. I've used Lil' Gun quite a bit and it gives results pretty close to H110. Both of those powders are good for bullets up to 150 gr or so, but not heavier. My 16" gun doesn't like heavier bullets at subsonic velocities so I don't have loads worked up for them. If it ever warms up I'll work up some using my 10.5" with a pistol gas system. |
|
Ok. I'll be working up normal velocity rounds soon.
I bought this with the intention of going suppressed with it at some point, but I'm still having a problem with paying the Federal government $400 for the privilege of waiting a year for permission. Sub $1000 items should not be subject to full $200 fees. I'd be much less rubbed by a "%20 purchase price with a $200 max". SBR and .22 suppressors are hard to swallow at current stamp fees, though at least we have the option I guess. |
|
Quoted:
Ok. I'll be working up normal velocity rounds soon. I bought this with the intention of going suppressed with it at some point, but I'm still having a problem with paying the Federal government $400 for the privilege of waiting a year for permission. Sub $1000 items should not be subject to full $200 fees. I'd be much less rubbed by a "%20 purchase price with a $200 max". SBR and .22 suppressors are hard to swallow at current stamp fees, though at least we have the option I guess. I think the stamps have always been 200 dollars. They were designed to be prohibitively expensive. Who would buy a Thompson for 50 bucks and then have 200 bucks to pay for the stamp. While I agree with you, this administration is not the time to attempt to get it changed. Its more likely that any change would be to make them more expensive. |
|
Quoted:
I think the stamps have always been 200 dollars. They were designed to be prohibitively expensive. Who would buy a Thompson for 50 bucks and then have 200 bucks to pay for the stamp. While I agree with you, this administration is not the time to attempt to get it changed. Its more likely that any change would be to make them more expensive. Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok. I'll be working up normal velocity rounds soon. I bought this with the intention of going suppressed with it at some point, but I'm still having a problem with paying the Federal government $400 for the privilege of waiting a year for permission. Sub $1000 items should not be subject to full $200 fees. I'd be much less rubbed by a "%20 purchase price with a $200 max". SBR and .22 suppressors are hard to swallow at current stamp fees, though at least we have the option I guess. I think the stamps have always been 200 dollars. They were designed to be prohibitively expensive. Who would buy a Thompson for 50 bucks and then have 200 bucks to pay for the stamp. While I agree with you, this administration is not the time to attempt to get it changed. Its more likely that any change would be to make them more expensive. I play hardball, 922(o) repeal would be in every bill if I had my way.. |