300 AAC Blackout

[crabo]

I had encouraging luck today with the Ranch Dog 165 tumble lube bullet in the plain base variant. Air cooled wheel weights, sized .310 and lubed with Recluse 45/45/10 in front of 16.0 AA data powder 2220 went into about 2.75" for 10 shots at 100 yards. That's my best luck with plain based yet.

I'm pleased that I managed to do that with a plain based bullet that can be tumble lubed and used with the push-thre sizer.

I just started casting this for a 30/30 lever gun. I have been wondering if it would feed and work in the .300. My mold is the NOE GC with traditional lube grooves.

I wonder how much it would suffer at 200 yards due to the large meplat?

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

Trajectory is a learnable thing. Just ask all the IHMSA shooters. The BLK starts out with the same velocity and ME (+/-) as the 240gr 44 magnum. Its' BC and drop are much less at 300yds.

If you are uncomfortable with the idea, then don't try it. Please allow the rest of us the freedom to do some practice shooting with it and hunt with it if we opt to do so. It is a 300yd cartridge for those of us who take the time to master it.

regards,

Rich
Sua Sponte

[A pause for the COZ]

I have a question. I have my 300 Black out upper coming.
I envision my use of the 300 Black out to be similar to a 30 carbine.
For me I know its going to be the perfect fit.

But thats not my question.

What I want to know is. Do you think the LEE C312-155-2R sized to .309 or .310 gas checked ahead of 2400 be a functional plinking load?
If so... What would be a good starting load for that? I havent seen any published loads for 2400.

I get super excellent results with that combo in my 30-30 bolt gun.


Also:
I have a big supply of 124gr .310 fmj pulls.
Can those be run through a LEE push through sizer to get them to.308?

[35remington]

There is little question here that comparing a 300 yard Blackout to a 200 yard 30-30 is erroneous and optimistic. It is notably below that level. Simply and obviously. Since the performance of the Blackout is obtained by handloading in many cases, hopefully you won't mind being reminded that the 30-30 is capable of of attaining the factory claimed ballistics with powders available to the handloader in 20 inch carbine barrels. So the quotes for the 30-30 downrange performance are just as relevant as I've stated.

Since the 7.62 X 39 is produced in .308" bores like the Mini Thirty and my Contender pistol barrel, you may also well believe that cartridge is capable of maintaining its downrange ballistic superiority over the Blackout when identical bullets are used. This really doesn't matter as it's not a 300 yard deer cartridge either.

The 2350 fps velocity I quote with my 7.62 X 39 load is with a 16.5 in barrel, by the way. I do have a short Yugo SKS.

Even if 30-30 factory loads are used, Blackout performance at 300 is still lower than the 30-30 at 200, so the comparison is still quite relevant. Pointed bullets are ill suited for low velocity impact. The gelatin bit? Let's get to that too.

"The Blackout still has full expansion at 300 yards with Barnes black tip bullets."

Yeah.........in a twenty plus inch block of gelatin. Pardon me, but the Blackout bullet pictured has hardly an impressive looking mushroom to it, even given that it struck a material that has significant resistance to bullet travel over its entire length.

Deer ribs or the very tiny thickness of skin over the lungs between ribs have entirely different expansion inducing characteristics. With such an impact, the plastic tip has little deformation of the copper jacket before it encounters the much less resistant lung tissue. Bullet expansion is occasioned by high strike velocity, especially in collision with a resistant medium. If it strikes between the ribs, which is about a fifty fifty chance, there's virtually nothing to expand a bullet that has a structurally resistant shape (sharply pointed, in other words) and relatively low velocity given the extremely low density of lung tissue. It is pretty well known that sharply pointed bullets are reaching their non expansion threshold, or have fallen below it, when velocities get this low. The streamlined shape works against it in this regard. The results shown with the Barnes bullet are an affirmation of that fact rather than a refutation of it.

Thanks for making my point nicely with the photograph of the Barnes bullet, by the way. There's not a lot to compare between a block of gelatin, homogenous and free of voids, and thin skin and airy, void filled lung tissue. If for some reason you think expansion characteristics should be comparable in these instances you've not had much hunting under your belt.

A hunter owes it to the game he hunts to be realistic, rather than optimistic in his assessment of the capabilities of the cartridge he is using.

Would I use the Blackout for deer hunting? I already have, in effect, in using a 7.62X39 pistol length barrel. Would I use it or the Blackout at 300 yards?

No. I know better than that, not any more than I would use a 30-30 for such range. The pictured Barnes bullet, any realistic assessment of ballistic performance, and the myriad of superior cartridges for such use dictate that it should be left at home should any chance of a 300 yard shot present itself.

That's also pretty darned obvious. I'm saying no more than that.

The issue isn't that the Blackout is or isn't suitable for deer hunting. It most obviously is. The issue is that there's too much optimism in what you're expecting it to do well. 300 yard deer hunting is not one of those things.

It's okay to say it. It's not exactly a planet wrecker in terms of performance.

[rsilvers]

"The Blackout still has full expansion at 300 yards with Barnes black tip bullets."

Yeah.........in a twenty plus inch block of gelatin. Pardon me, but the Blackout bullet pictured has hardly an impressive looking mushroom to it, even given that it struck a material that has significant resistance to bullet travel over its entire length.

The expansion is perfect. This is like you looking at a car that is painted red and you saying it is green - only to you. Everyone else can see that the 300 BLK made a perfect shaped expansion at 300 yards from a 9 inch barrel.

You were incorrect about 300 BLK falling short at extended range compared to 7.62x39mm, and you were incorrect about 30-30 having 400 fpe more muzzle energy - yet you just move on like it does not matter.

[35remington]

And you ignored my point that deer lung tissue is not the same as ballistic gelatin, which is a solid muscle tissue simulant. Twenty inches of solid muscle tissue simulant is comparable to thin skin and airy light lung tissue how, exactly?

Expansion in a deer's lungs will be much less than shown. And it is also fact that pointed bullets have expansion problems at impact velocities in the range the Blackout shows at 300 yards. This is very widely known and it is hardly surprising that I should point this out.

I addressed all the points you made in my last post. Please reread it and dissect it if you wish, pointing out exactly what I did not address.

It does not surpass the 7.62 X 39 when identical bullets are used, as they can be. You want to compare cartridge performance? I am doing just that.

My 7.62 results of noticeably higher velocities at the muzzle were reported from a comparably short barrel. If I had a Mini Thirty, which I do not, I have no doubt it would outrun a Blackout if both had 16 inch barrels. Larger case capacity says it will win a velocity war when both cartridges are run to their potential, and it does.

The 30-30's muzzle energy when using factory loads in a 20 inch carbine barrel common to 30-30's of the type most commonly used are very substantially higher than the Blackout's muzzle energy, again, unquestionably. It can be as high as 350 to 400 ft/lbs. more from my own chronographed results. The retained energy of 30-30 factory loads at 200 yards when shot from carbine length 30-30 barrels of 20 inches, the most common length, are substantially higher than the Blackout retains at 300 yards.

Still.

Pointed bullets are widely known for expansion failures at retained velocities similar to that the 300 Blackout produces at 300 yards when actually used on game. Again, the disconnect is assuming that a chest cavity strike produces exactly similar resistance to that found in ballistic gelatin.....and it does not. The chest cavity contains skin and organs (lungs) of far lower density and resistance than solid muscle tissue.

This is all ballistic gelatin purports to simulate, not results when shooting deer through the lungs.

If you want to complain, do it when I fail to address your points, not when I do.

[rsilvers]

And you ignored my point that deer lung tissue is not the same as ballistic gelatin, which is a solid muscle tissue simulant. Twenty inches of solid muscle tissue simulant is comparable to thin skin and airy light lung tissue how, exactly?

The field of ballistic research has evolved to use 10% calibrated gelatin because it is the same each and every time. It is the only way to get valid comparisons because the variables are controlled. There is a good reason why the FBI shoots gel and not carcasses. Yes, the lung is less dense - so the bullet will likely just make a 0.60 hole completely through the deer.

And it is also fact that pointed bullets have expansion problems at impact velocities in the range the Blackout shows at 300 yards. This is very widely known and it is hardly surprising that I should point this out.

Regular 308 bullets will have problems at these velocities but this bullet, and a bunch others, were designed for 300 BLK velocities.

It does not surpass the 7.62 X 39 when identical bullets are used, as they can be. You want to compare cartridge performance? I am doing just that.

7.62x39mm bullets are too short to be optimal for 300 BLK and the Barnes Black Tip is too long for 7.62x39mm - so I am just comparing the typical loadings for each cartridge. The fact is, the Hornady or Silvertip load are probably the two best available for 7.62x39mm - and so are good loads to compare to the best in 300 BLK.

The retained energy of 30-30 factory loads at 200 yards when shot from carbine length 30-30 barrels of 20 inches, the most common length, are substantially higher than the Blackout retains at 300 yards.

Could be. I don't really like doing the comparison with the 30-30 having four extra inches of barrel, and I would also not pick 300 BLK if I planned to hunt at 300 yards. But the fact remains, if you did shoot 300 BLK at 300 yards, it would likely make a 20-24 inch deep hole that was 0.50 to 0.60 inches in diameter if you used the Barnes Black Tip.

[35remington]

"The field of ballistic research has evolved to use 10% calibrated gelatin because it is the same each and every time. It is the only way to get valid comparisons because the variables are controlled."

That's great. You're talking about shooting jello. I'm talking about using the cartridge for shooting deer through the lungs. Now, don't tell me these are the same things, and also don't try to tell me that ballistic gelatin exactly simulates the low resistance of lung tissue.

It obviously does not........so best to figure expansion is potentially quite a bit less with actual field use, because it is.

"Yes, the lung is less dense - so the bullet will likely just make a 0.60 hole completely through the deer."

No, the likelihood is that it will make a .308" hole or smaller through the deer because the bullet did not expand at all. "Below the threshold of expansion" means the bullet doesn't expand on light resistance like lung tissues. That's why comparing a bullet from gelatin isn't relevant to the discussion. Non expanding pointed bullets often leave a hole that's smaller than even caliber diameter because the size of the crush cavity left by a pointed bullet at low speed is small.

"Regular 308 bullets will have problems at these velocities but this bullet, and a bunch others, were designed for 300 BLK velocities."

The pictured Barnes bullet, which was "supposedly designed for BLK velocities" do not do well when velocities get low and light resistance is struck. See the second paragraph above. I've shot bullets designed for low velocity pistol length barrels already (which is within the Blackout's range) and even they don't do well at low impact velocities when pointed. That's where the Blackout is at 300, sorry to say.

How many critters that you shoot through the chest are comprised of completely solid muscle tissue in that area?

Zero.

Let's help you with one thing.........the exact truth of whether the 7.62 X 39 is ahead of the Blackout or not (and it's easy to find bullets that will let it surpass the Blackout or fall behind it downrange given the many possible .308" and .311" bullets that can be used in .308" or .311" barrels) is not the relevant point. It never was.

The relevant point is this.........even if it's conceded that it could be and is in the range of the 7.62 X 39, that still isn't enough to make the Blackout a good 300 yard deer cartridge, because the 7.62 is not a 300 yard deer cartridge either.

All this spilled online ink is still unlikely to make anyone with any degree of deer hunting experience look upon it as anything more than inadequate for 300 yard deer shooting. It's very, very clear that a more suitable caliber should be carried in preference to it if a shot is likely to be taken at near that distance.

That's all I'm saying.

It's a very easy point to make and defend. As you are no doubt finding out.

I think I'm keeping up with, and refuting, your assertions pretty well, and point for point. The remaining point is that one simply does not humanely and responsibly use a cartridge when you hope it's adequate. You use it when you know it's adequate, and the Blackout's ballistics at 300 yards give room for very considerable doubt.....velocity is low, energy is low, and bullets that start to have expansion problems due to their shape are being shot.

Not a good combination. Unquestionably.

[rsilvers]

Shooting jello is not the same as shooting tissue, but it is the same each time - and that is why it is better for comparing and testing bullets.

The bullet did not take the full 20 inches to expand, by the way. It expands and then penetrates. See this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mXa5AiT0r4

You are saying that if you were to hit a deer at 300 yards with a 300 BLK black-tip bullet, it will not likely expand - and make a 0.308 or smaller hole. I don't currently have data to refute that, but I would expect it to expand. A lot of people will be deer hunting with this ammunition this season though so we will see one way or the other.

[35remington]

How many are lobbing them at deer at 300 yards?

I dare say not many. Nearly everyone, save maybe a few here, know better than that.

Further, a pointed bullet that hits light resistance at low velocity doesn't expand at all. Lung tissue is light resistance. So once again, if it doesn't expand, it doesn't matter if it's the first inch of penetration or the 20th. Nonexpansion is nonexpansion.

I'm saying that if you shoot a deer at 300 yards with a Blackout bullet, there's a very good chance it won't make much of a wound on a lung shot compared to more decisive results at closer ranges. Due to low energy and very likely little to no expansion depending upon what it hit. Why take this considerable risk when you know things are borderline? Impact energies are down to 32-20 levels, and given that the possibility of a poor shot increases as the range gets longer, why are you pushing very marginal performance at a distance?

Pick a bigger gun for longer ranges. Duh?

Better to know than guess, and a whopping 690 ft/lbs at 300 yards from a 300 Blackout does not exactly inspire confidence for deer hunting. I'm sure a 9 inch barrel would be in the, what.......550 to 600 ft/lb. range?

Saying this is adequate with a 30 caliber bullet is about like saying a 30 carbine is a good 100 yard deer hunting round. It isn't, and a Blackout isn't a 300 yard deer hunting round, applying the same criteria. The ironic thing is the carbine bullet is a bit more likely to expand at 100 yards than the Blackout's is at 300. The roundnosed shape and broader meplat of the carbine softpoint has a lower expansion threshold than the pointed bullets do.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

Ronald Reagan once said about democrats: "it's not that they are liars, it's just that they know so much that isn't true..."

35R,

I don't think very many people are "lobbing them (300BLK) at deer at 300 yards" this week. Deer seasons are a bit far away in most states.

I, for one, would like to know where you acquire all of this empirical data. You have to be spending about 12 hours a day in a ballistic lab shooting hundreds of rounds to produce this stream of:
1. "ifs"
2. "very good chance(s)"
3. "very likely(s)"
4. "compared to(s)"

You seem to have a tremendous gift for the "If..., then..." train of thought, and making unrelated and unwarranted assumptions and forming conclusions for, as is said in the legal profession; based on evidence not presented.

Nobody here shooting a 300 BLK, in any permutation, cares about your opinion.

Rich
Sua Sponte

[35remington]

I wouldn't guess that many care about my opinion because it doesn't influence how they currently behave. Was that an insult? If so, I take no offense. I think it was probably intended as such.

I would, though, guess that many agree with that opinion. That's what matters.

My results are a deliberate testing of nearly all available bullets of suitable persuasion in my Bullberry pistol barrel at ranges up to the mentioned 300 yards. This give me a great deal more insight than most about what works at 300 Blackout equivalent velocities and what does not.

If you don't want to hear me talk about it, don't ask. My opinion is worth more than most, whether you agree or not, because I've done it, not talked about it.

It ain't guessing, and the opinions presented are based on quite a lot. If you want further references from others about the abilities of pointed bullets, whether tipped or softpoint, at such speeds, I would be happy to provide them.

Sorry if it irritates you that I speak with such authority on the topic, but that's a natural byproduct of investigating it at some length. The small country range I shoot at is often poorly attended, the pistol is quite accurate, and it made the testing easy to do. So I did it.

[rsilvers]

Pick a bigger gun for longer ranges. Duh?

Better to know than guess, and a whopping 690 ft/lbs at 300 yards from a 300 Blackout does not exactly inspire confidence for deer hunting. I'm sure a 9 inch barrel would be in the, what.......550 to 600 ft/lb. range?

If you know you will be taking a 300 yard shot, then pick a full power cartridge. I don't see a problem with 550-600 ft-lbs of energy. After all, it is enough to make a 300 BLK penetrate 20-24 inches and expand to 0.50 to 0.60. So if energy is about the ability to do work, it has that ability at 300 yards. But 300 yards is a long way. I would use a 308, 243, 260, or larger.

Here is the other side of the coin - Federal rates their 357 Magnum ammo (C357E) at 539 ft-lbs at the muzzle (revolver). The 300 AAC BLACKOUT matches that at 380 yards. And people would shoot a deer with a 357 out to maybe 100 yards max. And if one were willing to do that - that is just 400 ft-lbs. 300 BLK has 400 ft-lbs at 500 yards.

Not that I would shoot that far - as the trajectory and wind would be too difficult - though I did shoot at 600 yards and hit a 3 inch / 1/2 MOA X-ring.

[35remington]

Range itself and the potential for a poorer hit is a big disqualifier for the 300 Blackout at 300 yards, as well as poor expansion of the bullet. The idealized "0.50 to 0.60" inch expansion often does not occur. The wound is small, the chance for a poorer hit greater, and the gamble with what is really pretty long range and low energy just isn't worth it.

Nobody I've seen lately promotes the .357 as a good deer cartridge to 100 yards in a revolver, and many don't like it at all at any range. I might also point out that the hollowpoint bullets have better expansion at pistol ranges because they are optimized for low velocity due to their shape, large hollowpoints, and heavy jacket skiving. The Blackout is running the sharp pointed bullet below its ideal at long range.

No matter what anyone thinks of my comments here, I'll bet any perusal of users would find the majority declining to use it at 300 yards on deer. The overwhelming weight of any learned opinion would be against such use.

[Elkins45]

I enjoy my 300 blackout and I'm having a lot of fun experimenting with cast boolets trying to find a good compromise between accuracy and reliability. I wouldn't dream of using it for hunting deer unless it happened to be the only rifle I owned or I was limited to very close range shots.

I have 300 yard visibility on my farm and I want to carry a rifle that lets me use it. I wouldn't use a 30-30 class cartridge at 300 yards unless I was in some sort of survival situation. That's especially true since I have access to a number of more powerful rifles.

The fact that those bullets expanded in ballistic gel doesn't convince me that shooting a deer with one at 300 yards would be a humane thing to do.

[rsilvers]

The idealized "0.50 to 0.60" inch expansion often does not occur. ... I might also point out that the hollowpoint bullets have better expansion at pistol ranges because they are optimized for low velocity due to their shape, large hollowpoints, and heavy jacket skiving. The Blackout is running the sharp pointed bullet below its ideal at long range.

The bullet is designed to have controlled penetration though a wide range of conditions. And while the bullet may be pointy, it is not pointy under the tip (the tip is designed to enhance the BC and feeding).

[xacex]

RSilvers,

From what I have read in other forums you have been part of some of the development of the 300 blackout, and a player in getting this out to us no? Welcome to Castboolits! Some of the ballistic data is not available to us that was done for military and law enforcement, and is only available with proper letter head from my understanding. Without going into detail I believe this is a result of some very positive results that came out of the testing. Thank you for sharing some of the new ballistic results with the bullets shown. Any new data to demonstrate the advances in bullet technology is helpful for deciding what the limitations are for any intended use. With that being said,I would not use the 300 AAC for 300 yard for animal harvest, but I would feel less confident in doing so with my 7.63x39 if expected to make that decision. But, this is just my opinion on what I feel comfortable with, and I have no doubt that in the right hands given the right conditions it is possible. I prefer 3006 for the longer shot placement with heavy bullets.

xacex

[rockrat]

I would not use my 300blk on deer at 300yds. Trajectory/range is part of it and I have other options for longer range shots. If I HAD to make a shot such as proposed and had the correct bullet, I would.

It has been an "interesting" discussion and informative. Looks like the Barnes bullets might be the thing for my 7.62 x 39 single shot, if I use it for deer.

[rsilvers]

Yes, I am the project lead for 300 BLK at AAC.

[garym1a2]

What's a good barrel for shooting cast boolits in the 150 to 200 grain size?

Yes, I am the project lead for 300 BLK at AAC.