I don't really know anything about this round just looking for info or opinions.
It sounds pretty cool.
the price difference between 300blk and 5.56 is enough to make the 300 seem like you would never want to shoot it for training, practice, or plinking.
opinions on reloading 300blk vs. 5.56? minus the case re-sizing. I suck at 5.56 reloading.
Remington 115g training round aren't that much more. I shoot them every other weekend. Make sure you define your use for this round though. It's more of a barrier blind round and designed for short barreled rifles mainly and to be suppressed. I've got a Noveske 8" and love it. Waiting on paperwork for a SDN6 suppressor, then it'll really shine!
I'm thinking of getting the Spikes Tactical Compressor in 300blk. What do you mean by barrier blind?
Originally Posted by zhurdan
Let me google that for you
Part of what I was getting at regarding defining your use for this round. If you want it just because its the " new cool kid" gun, so be it, but it is a specialized round with a specific purpose. Sure, it can be used for hunting, training, defense, etc. but a 5.56 AR can do all that too and do it further and flatter.
so in your opinion an 8in 5.56 is better than an 8in 300blk? the 300 could take more advantage of the suppressor. and making power factor is easier with a bigger bullet if i take it into 3-gun matches.
my pluses for getting it in 5.56 is getting a 22 conversion and having a lot of super cheap fun.
give more thoughts please
I think this round is okay if you are going for a suppressor, just the basic .223/5.56 Nato will shoot flatter and if it energy you are after I think the best choice right now is the 6.5 Grendel as it holds on to it's energy very well with the High BC bullets it shoots.
Originally Posted by ponzer04
Sorry, I should have been more clear, but I was responding on my phone and that's never conducive to long posts.
300BLK is better for what it is. In a SBR configuration, it excels over 5.56 as the 300BLK was designed around shorter barrels. 5.56 loses too much poop in a shorter barrel for good ballistic terminal performance. Now, if he's getting a 16" gun in either one, 5.56 does it better when talking about longer ranges.
ETA - Interrupted though there. At work and had to go into a meeting. So, if you're going to go short (SBR) THE 300BLK will work better across a variety of different purposes like barrier blind shots, sub 200yd shots, etc. If you're going with a 16" gun, there are plenty of great 5.56 rounds out there that will work extremely well on soft targets, hunting, defense, accurate long shots, etc. The 300 BLK's main point is that you can go really short (8") and still have it perform within it's ballistic envelope, whereas, if you shorten a 5.56 gun to anything sub 10-11", it really starts to lose it's performance qualities.
Having a gun that is short falls within a very specific use profile. It's maneuverable, it's stow-able, it can carry a suppressor and still maintain its compact size. 300BLK does this in spades. Now, if you're not going to be breaching rooms or shooting from your vehicle on a regular basis, it probably isn't as advantageous to most people. Why did I buy it? Because I have an SBR'd lower and wanted it for it's compactness with a suppressor on it. Once the paper work clears on my can, it'll become the home defense gun of choice. Right now though, my 10.5" 5.56 with G5 can on it fits the bill. Mainly for the can. Shooting indoors is brutal and the 300BLK exacerbates that issues as it is friggin' LOUD (and concussive) without a can on it!!