Results 51 to 60 of 76
Thread: 5.56 vs .300blk
-
November 3rd, 2020, 12:38 AM #51
Re: 5.56 vs .300blk
Most of your man on man fighting even in wide open areas is that range or less, most engagements beyond that are via equipment(planes, APC, tanks, etc). Most firefights beyond that rely on volley or high rate of fire to raise the hit probability. A SHTF/RD thing would like have most fighting within urban areas.
Most of your deer are probably take well less than 200yrds.RIP: SFN, 1861, twoeggsup, Lambo, jamesjo, JayBell, 32 Magnum, Pro2A, mrwildroot, dregan, Frenchy, Fragger, ungawa, Mtn Jack, Grapeshot, R.W.J., PennsyPlinker, Statkowski, Deanimator, roland, aubie515
Don't end up in my signature!
-
November 3rd, 2020, 07:28 AM #52Super Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
-
Murrysville,
Pennsylvania
(Westmoreland County) - Posts
- 808
- Rep Power
- 845903
Re: 5.56 vs .300blk
I have worked up 110 gr. (Hornady GMX) loads and gotten 2460 FPS (1477 ft-lbs). That is hitting hard! I was beginning to see some pressure signs, but nothing crazy (primers just beginning to get flat, slight ejector drag marks, etc.). Not excessive, but I back off to get better brass life. So you are correct, if max energy/velocity is your goal, lighter bullets will do better.
Long term, I am going to cut down the barrel. I plan on cutting it down one or two inches at a time, shoot my max loads (already developed for 16" barrel) for all bullet weight from 110 gr. up to 250 gr. chonographing all shots. Probably end up with 10" barrel. My guess is that the lighter bullets will perform almost as well with a 10" barrel as a 16" and I do not want to give up too much supersonic performance, which is one of the great characteristics of the 300 BLK cartridge. In any event, will have good data on impact of reducing barrel lengths for the 300 BLK. The ultimate objective is to have a suppressed rifle w/ total size of a m4.Last edited by MMH; November 3rd, 2020 at 09:50 AM.
-
November 3rd, 2020, 01:06 PM #53Grand Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
- Location
-
Tioga County,
Pennsylvania
(Tioga County) - Posts
- 4,959
- Rep Power
- 21474852
Re: 5.56 vs .300blk
Yes I think I can easily reach 2400 FPS and man even where I am now I've never seen a 300 BO round hit my steel so hard. I am using Lil Gun powder but have not loaded 110g before so there will be some experimenting. Hopefully that powder works as I have 4 pounds of it. I could also try IMR 4227 as I have a pound of it and I have a small quantity of H110. I have not shopped in a gun store for a while so I am guessing powder supplies are short. Also have some CFE BLK but did not find that suited to supersonic 300 BO.
-
November 3rd, 2020, 01:13 PM #54Grand Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
- Location
-
Tioga County,
Pennsylvania
(Tioga County) - Posts
- 4,959
- Rep Power
- 21474852
Re: 5.56 vs .300blk
That's why I think 300 BO is pretty well suited in terms of what you get in the overall package. I guess people can split hairs and say well 7.62x39 is about the same, or they like 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC or even 6 ARC and I say cool.
I'm not a current fan of 5.56, but I think with the right bullet it's very effective.
-
November 3rd, 2020, 01:26 PM #55Super Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
-
Murrysville,
Pennsylvania
(Westmoreland County) - Posts
- 808
- Rep Power
- 845903
Re: 5.56 vs .300blk
I've had great results w/ H110 for lighter bullets & AA1680 for the heavier ones. Looking at the SierraPowder Burn Rate chart, here are the rankings of powders from fastest to slowest:
51 Lil'Gun
53 H110
57 IMR 4227
61 AA1680
62 CFE BLK
There are 150 powders so all of these are all close to the same burn rate. Lil'Gun is just a little faster than H110 and I would expect it to do well. CFE BLK would be better for your heavier bullets. You could use it for the lighter ones, but I would not expect the same velocity that you will get with the faster powders.
Good luck & be careful!
-
November 3rd, 2020, 04:09 PM #56Grand Member
- Join Date
- Jan 2016
- Location
-
Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania
(Allegheny County) - Posts
- 1,659
- Rep Power
- 21474846
-
November 3rd, 2020, 04:15 PM #57Super Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
-
Murrysville,
Pennsylvania
(Westmoreland County) - Posts
- 808
- Rep Power
- 845903
-
November 3rd, 2020, 04:21 PM #58Super Member
- Join Date
- May 2018
- Location
-
Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania
(Delaware County) - Posts
- 553
- Rep Power
- 11657996
Re: 5.56 vs .300blk
I can load 69gr HPBT*s to 2850fps. That puts energy approaching 1350lbs....within 130lbs or so of that 110gr 300aac load. (I mean, if you count muzzle energy for something..which I don*t). But that 223 load will also have superior Sectional Density and will put range the 110gr load by a large margin. I*m still trying to figure out the gain? Unless you want to be quit & all with your Tripple S! (super assassin silencer) But now we are talking heavier bullets and much less velocity.
Remember Biden the Pedophile! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSRqaO6DXcA
-
November 3rd, 2020, 04:39 PM #59Super Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
-
Murrysville,
Pennsylvania
(Westmoreland County) - Posts
- 808
- Rep Power
- 845903
Re: 5.56 vs .300blk
You are not getting 2850 out of a 16" barrel - definitely need a 20". With the 300 AAC I'll bet that you can get 2300 fps with a 12" barrel and not even need a 16". Lets not compare long range precision rifles to a suppressed CQB rifle. If you want to take things out of context lets compare a 5.56 to a 6.5 Creedmore.
What does the sectional density do for you? Lets keep it simple & talk about ballistic coefficient and then compare downrange retained velocity, drop, etc. I did a fairly detailed comparison of a 125 gr. 300 BLK comparing it to a 55 gr. 5.56 earlier in this thread.
-
November 3rd, 2020, 08:03 PM #60Senior Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Location
-
Moscow,
Pennsylvania
(Lackawanna County) - Posts
- 269
- Rep Power
- 21474853
Re: 5.56 vs .300blk
The most "fair" comparison would be two uppers, one in 300 BO, the other in 5.56. Both with 16" barrels and same optics. Ammo would be standard supersonic off-the-shelf ammo. Most folks would want to see these compared for defense/hunting uses.
After that, the discussion can go to sub-sonics and suppressors, or long-range challenge type stuff. Handloads are a subclass of the discussion as not everyone reloads (just trying to be fair). The 7.62x39mm comparison works best when talking reloaded 300 BO versus factory 7.62x39mm (what you can get outta 300 BO if not using factory 7.62x39mm). Plus, if there is no 7.62x39mm, you can always make 300 BO from .223/5.56mm brass (again, a reloading issue).
Similar Threads
-
300BLK Pistol
By DaveM55 in forum PistolsReplies: 1Last Post: December 31st, 2016, 05:58 PM -
300blk or 6.8
By 4tun8 in forum RiflesReplies: 28Last Post: October 14th, 2012, 09:07 PM -
Anyone reloading 300blk yet?
By fastfive0 in forum Ammunition & ReloadingReplies: 0Last Post: June 15th, 2011, 10:23 AM
Bookmarks