35R,
don't you think it is time for you to let go of this? You are not going to change anybody's mind on the subject.
regards,
Rich
Sua Sponte
Printable View
35R,
don't you think it is time for you to let go of this? You are not going to change anybody's mind on the subject.
regards,
Rich
Sua Sponte
#3, at least for me!! Then #1 and #2
Wellllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll...
I have done #'s 2 & 3 a couple times each myself.
#2. The guy (PH) I hunt plains game with in RSA shoots a Destroyer 350 and has cleanly taken game up thru the size of Kudu at up to 60 yards with his bow. Like 49 Kudu over 50 inches to date.
#3. Out to sixty yards myself, and I know people who have done it at 100yds, with iron sights. One of them is my neighbor Ross Seyfried.
#1. I don't want to kill a deer bad enough to set up a 300BLK for the job. It obviously will be done by a number of people who are willing to put in the practice. A place like Alabama, with it's 129 day deer season, and two per day limit would be a good place to try it.
The only issue I have had with this thread is one member's pompous attitude. Once I got out of Vietnam and the Army I stopped letting other people tell me what to do.
Rich
Sua Sponte
My problem is the people who get a rifle in 300 AAC and shoot at 300 without the practice.
I bet most deer "hunters" don't shoot 50 rounds a year in prep for the season.
Wounded deer are a problem. This cartridge at that ranges going to wound many, many deer. No different than the big magnums at 500.
Why not just get closer?
Absolutely!
Over the past 50 years, I have seen plenty of deer "greened" with 30-06 class weapons in the hands of people who simply couldn't shoot.
It is shooter ability that determines maximum effective range; ......And a "bigger, better, faster, flatter" cartridge won't fix that! (.....It is quite possible that the reverse is actually true: .....Many of these "hunt-one-weekend-a-year" wonders probably have a better chance with a quiet, soft-recoiling round that doesn't intimidate the hell out of them!)
Kent
rsilvers goes to various forums to promote the Blackout. That's what he does. Someone has to point out when the assertions get questionable and that guy on this thread happens to be me. "300 yard deer capable" in reference to the Blackout deserves skepticism.
Nobody believes all the car manufacturer's glowing praise about their products either, so skepticism is common. There are a lot of grounds for skepticism here.
Which is less sensible?
Setting up where you know 300 yards shots are probable....and taking a Blackout, wherein to score a hit at 300 even with an overly optimistic 200 yard zero (such a zero makes the bullet strike rather high at shorter ranges which isn't good either) you have to hold a whole deer high and then you'll strike it with a whopping 690 ft. lbs. of energy or,
Taking any medium to full size rifle round in preference to it?
That's pretty much a no brainer. If you want to argue further, contest this point in particular, please.
Idaho, I dare say that Indian didn't shoot deer at 300 yards with a 25-35. What value is your comparison then?
Feel free to let go of the subject as well. Peruse Smith and Wesson and Outdoor Life's commentary on the Blackout. Neither rate it as a 300 yard medium game caliber. I dare say consensus of informed opinion is more in my corner than yours.
I cannot understand the rush to lower the bar substantially so the Blackout can "make it" as a 300 yard deer round. Nor can I understand the comparison of a rifle to a 357 pistol (talk about really lowering the bar) and then saying it's sensible to apply low pistol energies at long range. It most certainly is not, as the long range itself is a risk, and approaching that higher risk with low performance is doubly nonsensical. We should be looking for more than bare minimums at such a range. We should be looking to maintain or raise the bar, not lower it.
The problem is not just the low energy. And the problem is not just the questionable expansion of the bullet at 300 yards in two feet of solid muscle simulant.
And yes, I did say, again, for the record, questionable expansion.
Take a look at that picture of the Barnes bullet.....again. Note how it's claimed it's "specially designed for the Blackout" yet the bullet has a lot of hollow left in the hollowpoint. It has not fully expanded down to the bottom of the hollow point in a bullet designed for "easier expansion."
That's serving notice that things are being pushed a bit too far. Energies are not high enough to peel open a bullet that's already had weakening cuts in the jacket that supposedly facilitate low speed expansion. Perhaps, just maybe, the speed is getting too darn low, even for this bullet, and especially since deer lungs are the target.
The point of hunting has never been how little gun you can use at the furthest possible range. The point is to quit before then.
At 300 yards, the Blackout qualifies as a "little gun." Energies and velocities are very substantially lower than all commonly recommended 300 yard deer cartridges.......243, 257, 7-08, 308, etc. etc.
That is not a good thing. Never have I seen, anywhere else, such low energies promoted as being "adequate" for rifles at such a distance. That's pretty much unprecedented. There's a reason why that's so. Quite frankly, such energy levels are not considered adequate for rifles even at the closer range of 200 yards.
Throwing in another 100 yards of range makes things worse. And lowering the bar by comparing a rifle to a pistol and opining new lows in energy delivery at long range are sensible is questionable as well.
Are you saying it was not designed for lower velocity expansion than their other 30 caliber bullets? Are you saying it was not designed for the BLK? Are you saying that because it expanded to the full diameter at 300 yards from a 9 inch barrel, but did not peel back as much as it would at 100 yards, then it is not suitable for 300 yards? Because anyone can see that it expanded to a full diameter.
Actually, he shot a Deer and two Elk in my presence one late fall at what my Geovids said was about 317 yards.
As far as traveling to promote a cartridge, Jack O'Connor did that for forty-plus years with his 270. And got most all of those hunts paid for.
You believe in a cartridge, you promote it.
I carry my Geovids with me when I hunt, especially Rockchuck shooting the past twenty years. You'd not likely believe some of the shots I have made in front of witnesses.
The deal is: you don't like the Blackout at 300yds. Fine, don't hunt with it. This guy, and others apparently do, so they are going to take a good shot (ranged, and a still target) at a deer with it.
I checked this morning, and nobody died and left you in charge. You have no empirical or anecdotal data to base a subjective statement on. What you have, in fact; is your opinion.
Rich
Sua Sponte
Isn't opinion all any of us have? You have made observations and extrapolated that info to form an opinion of your own.
Wile a 300 AAC CAN be used on deer at 300 yards hat doesn't mean it SHOULD.
Heck, I don't think the average deer hunter has any business shooting deer at 300 with anything!
You are extrapolating your level of ability and experience to other hunters/shooters. This may be a safe assumption if you are the worst shot of those you shoot with. Have you not seen people at the range who have a hard time hitting at 100?
I prefer to always err on the side of caution. Others don't. I can only answer for myself so I do what I feel is appropriate. That caution has served me well for many years so I have intention to change.
Can we please let this thread die? No one is going to convince anyone of anything at this point.
Moonie, we know that. It's fun to make our case sometimes.
Idaho, right back atcha. The opinion is based on solid information and comparison to other "200 yard" cartridges; that much is not in doubt. I'm not pulling it out of thin air.
I got hit with the black bug about a year ago. This caused me to build my first AR. I love the cartridge, but in my hands it is not a 300 yard hunting cartridge, notice I said in my hands. Is it capable, yes in the right hands I believe it is, just not in my hands, LOL. Expansion or not, you punch a 30 cal. whole through an animal (or person) in the right spot, it's dead or soon to be so, whether it be 100 or 500 yards. I would think this being a cast bullet site that would be obvious, LOL.
Now what I would like to know is, when are we (meaning the fine people of this site) going to create a cast bullet design specifically for the AR's chambered in the BLK? We need a CB's for the BLK that are designed for the cartridge. CB's for super and sub that sit just fine in the small neck length with the lube grooves and or gas checks contained in that area as well. We as casters could also address the mag rib problem as well, perhaps with something like a large lube groove/crimp groove at that distance on the nose of the bullet. What say yall?
There are already several cast bullets that work great in the 300 for supers one that comes to mind is the lee 155/160 if you want heavier there's the 311299 and even heavier the noe 247 or several Tom at accurate moulds has .
NOE has a GB going on now for a boolit that is alot like the RCBS 30-165 Sil, but 155gr instead. That one should work great in the Blackout. I would like also a boolit of about 135gr for the blackout.
How about the 32 Sixgun Sledgehammer boolit ?
Although it might not feed....
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/atta...0&d=1302526377
Is this the one?
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=130593
What about this one? Too many lube grooves?
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=134023