WidenersRotoMetals2MidSouth Shooters SupplyRepackbox
Reloading EverythingLee PrecisionLoad DataInline Fabrication
Titan Reloading
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 119

Thread: Newest cartridge sensation; 8.6 Blackout.

  1. #21
    Boolit Master Jedman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Lenawee County , MI
    Posts
    1,324
    I just watched a YouTube video from the 2022 shot show and out of all of the new guns coming out this year I didn’t see a ONE that I would be interested in. Nothing I seen was walnut and blue all synthetic and cerokote.

    I will stick to buying old guns I like, none of the new cartridges do anything new so I certainly don’t need to get into one of them as I reload for 27 calibers now.

    Sorry but none of this excitement over new guns and cartridges do anything for me.

    Jedman

  2. #22
    Boolit Master trails4u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Upstate, SC
    Posts
    1,364
    I'm with you Jed.... I'll keep my 43 Spanish, my 11.15x58R Werndl, my 45-70s, my 348Wins, etc, etc... Haven't found anything new that can do better.
    "Do not follow where the path might lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail" Ralph Waldo Emerson

  3. #23
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    8,899
    Quote Originally Posted by Daekar View Post
    So... I get that the cartridge has enough volume to push meaningful power. I mean, it's not anything groundbreaking, and doesn't illustrate any principles of cartridge design which weren't known already. We already knew that long bullets can work out of small cases and that good velocity can be gotten out of short barrels with the right powder. We already knew that bullets with good drag coefficients maintained energy well. If you want a cartridge that shoots 210gr bullets at 2500fps there are plenty of options and this seems a fine example of that.

    The thing that puzzles me is that they're playing this up as a revolutionary improvement in subsonic performance. It's just not, especially if you need a 1:3 twist barrel to achieve it. There is no way you're going to be pushing bullets out of that rapid twist at 2450fps without problems... it comes out to be... what, 588,000rpm? That is just BONKERS fast. Which means you need a whole other barrel for supers or you're shooting some exotic bullet which doesn't instantly self-destruct at that rate of revolution the moment it leaves the muzzle.

    If you're shooting these things subsonic, all that case capacity (or pressure headroom, whatever) doesn't matter a hill of beans. If you can't use the same barrel for subs that you do supers, then you are far better off using a whole different cartridge which will be cheaper and more performant in subsonic applications in the real world. Joe Public is not a member of Seal Team Six who can estimate wind drift and bullet drop by dipping their finger in the blood of their vanquished foes and feeling the movement of the air... nothing subsonic is a good long-range cartridge, there are just varying degrees of awfulness. That being the case you're better off with something that doesn't have a bat-**** crazy twist rate and can take even heavier bullets with a larger diameter: a 458 SOCOM, 450 Bushmaster, 50 Beowulf, etc.

    As far as the comparison to 45ACP, obviously it only applies to the subsonic performance. It's interesting to consider, though, that 45ACP is basically identical to 300BO at realistic engagement ranges. If I were to build a rifle specifically for suppressed use, I would actually prefer the 45ACP to the 300BO. They're going to carry the same amount of energy but the 45 is going to be a lot more effective at imparting it without exotic and expensive bullet contruction.
    Sir,
    That was a most excellent rebuttal. I was going to reply to I45G but I have nothing more to add except this.

    The .338 Federal will give superior high end performance than this new offering and uses cases that are simple to make and normal bullets.

    As to sub sonic performance, I have no interest in it, but if I did, I believe there are better options.
    Don Verna


  4. #24
    Moderator
    Texas by God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    14,334
    That one in three inch twist is almost a thread
    I like my .300BO because it's lightweight and provides "30-30 light" performance with supersonic loads; but I'd rather have a slower twist than the one in seven inch that it has.
    I know a couple of hog hunters who quit using subsonic ammo due to its paltry performance past close range.

    Sent from my SM-A716U using Tapatalk

  5. #25
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Central TX
    Posts
    191
    I must be old school as I really don't get all this "new" stuff/calibers. IMO they do not do anything that has not been done before for the most part. The newest calibers I own were developed in the 1950's. Even some of those were not really new even then, the 280 Remington (1957) is pretty much a clone of the 7x64 Brenneke from 1917. One of the darlings of the PRS crowd the 6.5 Creedmoor, Swede's had that figured out in 1894. I enjoy shooting AR's and have some modern stainless/synthetic for foul weather hunting but I am partial to blued steel and walnut. I am going to stick with the tried and true, lots easier to keep fed.

  6. #26
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    8,899
    Quote Originally Posted by Sgt H View Post
    I must be old school as I really don't get all this "new" stuff/calibers. IMO they do not do anything that has not been done before for the most part. The newest calibers I own were developed in the 1950's. Even some of those were not really new even then, the 280 Remington (1957) is pretty much a clone of the 7x64 Brenneke from 1917. One of the darlings of the PRS crowd the 6.5 Creedmoor, Swede's had that figured out in 1894. I enjoy shooting AR's and have some modern stainless/synthetic for foul weather hunting but I am partial to blued steel and walnut. I am going to stick with the tried and true, lots easier to keep fed.
    You might be "old school", but you are right. At 71 I have seen too much gun rag BS and even made a few mistakes along the way. I don't see many "new and improved" cartridges worth spending money on.
    Don Verna


  7. #27
    Vendor Sponsor

    DougGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    just above Raleigh North Carolina
    Posts
    7,395
    Quote Originally Posted by todd9.3x57 View Post
    ho hum.........
    +1 yawn to that effect...
    Got a .22 .30 .32 .357 .38 .40 .41 .44 .45 .480 or .500 S&W cylinder that needs throats honed? 9mm, 10mm/40S&W, 45 ACP pistol barrel that won't "plunk" your handloads? 480 Ruger or 475 Linebaugh cylinder that needs the "step" reamed to 6° 30min chamfer? Click here to send me a PM You can also find me on Facebook Click Here.

  8. #28
    Boolit Master
    Daekar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    614
    The only thing that makes me question my own conclusions about this cartridge is this idea that terminal performance can be improved for subsonic rounds by drastically increasing the spin rate of the bullet. Supposedly there is a test video out there by Discreet Ballistics demonstrating a significantly improved wound cavity for the same bullet at the same speed with a much higher rate of spin... but I can't lay my hands on the video.

    It's not something I've ever run into before, nor is it something I have considered. It does make sense that, just like the linear kinetic energy of a bullet must be dissipated into the target, the rotational kinetic energy must also be - assuming that the bullet doesn't pass all the way through, of course. Whether that energy is meaningful in comparison to its linear cousin or if it's just marketing nonsense, I have no idea. It is an interesting idea, though. If it's true, then there is no reason it can't be applied to other cartridges and loadings as well. Perhaps even fast-twist lead boolits might benefit, in which case it would have wide and immediate implications since so many lead loads are subsonic and so many popular casting cartridges are big-bore. It stands to reason that a wider bullet would more rapidly dissipate its rotational energy, especially with a traditional meplat.

    EDIT: I busted out the spreadsheet and did some calculations. For a 300gr .338" bullet traveling at 1050fps out of a 1:3 twist barrel, you'd be looking at:
    734ft*lbs of traditional muzzle energy
    A spin rate of 252,000rpm
    Rotational kinetic energy (what they're claiming makes a difference) of 46 ft*lbs

    To me, that's not a whole lot of energy.

    Interestingly, increasing the diameter of the bullet makes a difference - I guess it's intuitive that it would since the moment of inertia is largely based on radius. A 300gr bullet fired at the same speed from a 45-70 with a 1:3 twist would have a rotational kinetic energy of 84.45 ft*lbs. That's 10.32% of the total kinetic energy (linear+rotational) the bullet would impart to the target if it doesn't pass through. A 0.338" bullet at the same weight, speed, and spin only gets 5.89% of its energy from spin, and a hypothetic 300gr 0.224" bullet would only get 2.68% of its total energy from spin.

    And yes, this was done with a monstrous conglomeration of metric and standard units that makes me loathe feet, pounds, and all of our other mongrel units.

    My issues with the US measurement units aside, this leaves us with a few possibilities:
    1. I have done the calculations wrong and there is actually more energy involved than this.
    2. The terminal effect of rotational kinetic energy on targets is out of proportion with its magnitude when considered relative to linear kinetic energy.
    3. This is all a bunch of marketing baloney and isn't worth the pixels it's printed in.
    Last edited by Daekar; 01-25-2022 at 03:04 PM. Reason: Did the math
    I'm a big fan of data-driven decisions. You want to make me smile, show me a spreadsheet! Extra points for graphs and best-fit predictive equations.

  9. #29
    Banned








    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    munising Michigan
    Posts
    17,725
    Quote Originally Posted by BK7saum View Post
    I was thinking the same in regard to twist. I haven't plugged anything into a stability calculator, but would think that a 1 in 7 or 1 in 6 would be plenty of twist. The factory twist on a Lapua is 1 in 10 or 1 in 9. 1:3 seems very excessive on twist.

    How much pressure would that fast a twist generate as you are really pushing that bullet hard into the rifling.
    yup the bo shines because it can be shot subsonic with heavys and still shoot jacketed full power loads. With a one in three twist about the only full power bullet you could use would be something like a barnes x. Any jackeded bullet would be shredded if you tried to shoot it full power with that fast of a twist. I would about insure cast bullets wouldnt survive the ride down the barrel too. Like dverna said the 45acp would be a much better choice. This one will die a fast death and im sure some internet experts will claim its the end all for something. But then they probably got a free one from the manufacturer. If you want a 12 lb gun that will only shoot 300 grain barnes bullets at pop gun velocitys that wont even have them expanding then you have more money to pee away then i do.

  10. #30
    Banned








    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    munising Michigan
    Posts
    17,725
    Quote Originally Posted by dverna View Post
    You might be "old school", but you are right. At 71 I have seen too much gun rag BS and even made a few mistakes along the way. I don't see many "new and improved" cartridges worth spending money on.
    thats the answer lets add the differnce in price between 500 45 acp bullets and brass to 500 of that brass and those expensive 338 bullets.
    Last edited by Lloyd Smale; 01-25-2022 at 03:30 PM.

  11. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    windber, pa
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by DougGuy View Post
    +1 yawn to that effect...


  12. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    windber, pa
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by Sgt H View Post
    I must be old school as I really don't get all this "new" stuff/calibers. IMO they do not do anything that has not been done before for the most part. The newest calibers I own were developed in the 1950's. Even some of those were not really new even then, the 280 Remington (1957) is pretty much a clone of the 7x64 Brenneke from 1917. One of the darlings of the PRS crowd the 6.5 Creedmoor, Swede's had that figured out in 1894. I enjoy shooting AR's and have some modern stainless/synthetic for foul weather hunting but I am partial to blued steel and walnut. I am going to stick with the tried and true, lots easier to keep fed.

    i used to be one of those creedmoor fans. in the early days, it was dang near impossible to get 6.5 cm brass. so i did the next big thing, 22-250 brass to 6.5cm brass. it came up a little short, but i didn't care. and boy, it was accurate and killed deer like a lightning bolt from the sky. back then, i was the only one that the 6.5cm. now, everybody and their brother chambers for it, so i sold it.

    my newest caliber is the 500 linebaugh(tc encore with 23" MGM barrel) but the 50-70 gov(1866 or 67?) has it figured out. the 7-08 is nothing more than a 7x57. 7.65x53 argy is a 308. and on and on. i sold my '06, mostly because everybody has them. (i have a ruger #1 in 270, that is it for '06 family)

    i do have a 1916 Oviedo in the 6.5x55 swede that will be given to my youngest son, when i finish the stock.


    somewhere down the line, i have another 1916 Oviedo that will be a 257 bob(my dream gun).

  13. #33
    Boolit Grand Master
    Mk42gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Butler, MO
    Posts
    9,020
    I don't understand the popularity of any of the "New and Better" subsonic rounds. Maybe if you want to give the Gov't $200 so you can put what is essentially a lawn mower muffler on the end of your barrel. Otherwise, why bother?

    The lowly .22 Long Rifle cartridge killed off a bunch of larger rimfire rounds when its high velocity loading became available, (not to mention some of the early .22 caliber guns that couldn't handle the stress of the hotter load).

    1:3" twist seems excessive to me, given that Winchester used to load 300 grain RN in the .338 Win Mag with a 1:10" twist. Must be a function of slow velocity and longer monolithic projectiles.

    I'll pass on this one.

    Robert

  14. #34
    Boolit Master



    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    The Lowcountry
    Posts
    1,116
    When they can shoot flying pigs out of the sky with a subsonic round at 1,000 yards. I might be interested!

  15. #35
    Boolit Grand Master


    stubshaft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Southernmost State of the Union
    Posts
    5,854
    Tactical Timmies will drool over this until the next stupid reiteration of a cartridge is announced.
    Old enough to know better, young enough to do it anyway!

    Men who don't understand women fall into two categories: bachelors and husbands!

  16. #36
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,794
    I have about zero interest in it, and that was before I saw the 1 in 3 twist! Now, that superfast twist and the resulting high RPM, will increase terminal performance via centrifugal force trying to tear the bullet apart at impact. Energy calculations aside, the result of the centrifugal force will remove the “ no expansion” part of subsonic shooting. Course it also means there won’t be any cast bullet that can accelerate to that RPM and not strip. Also suspect a supersonic cup and core would not make it to the target if pushed to the top unless it has a really thick jacket. All this means special, probably monolithic, bullets at the going high price they run.
    I tried .224 blitz bullets made for the 222 Rem in my 26 inch 22 varmiter (22-250) once. 3 of the five made it to the target and left a lead smear on the target. The other 2 opened up about 5 feet in front of the muzzle. Twist was 1 in 12 in that 22-250, centrifugal force and thin jackets don’t play well together.
    Hard pass for me, actually when I read Jedman’s post I thought I had already posted here!
    “You don’t practice until you get it right. You practice until you can’t get it wrong.” Jason Elam, All-Pro kicker, Denver Broncos

  17. #37
    Boolit Master fastdadio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Mi.
    Posts
    974
    I developed a new cartridge. I load the Lee 200gr. .30cal in my 30-30 @ 1050fps. I call it the 330 blackout schnizzle. It's all the rage at my house. You guys will catch on.
    Deplorable infidel

  18. #38
    Boolit Master
    Daekar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    614
    I developed a new cartridge too! Only mine is the 357 Blackout Shiznit. 245gr @ 1050fps for the subs and 158gr @ 1900fps for the supers, all out of a 12" barrel.

    Can I be a ballistics engineer now?
    I'm a big fan of data-driven decisions. You want to make me smile, show me a spreadsheet! Extra points for graphs and best-fit predictive equations.

  19. #39
    Boolit Master

    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fl.
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Shawlerbrook View Post
    …….but if it’s an AR thing, it’s out of my sphere of interest.
    My sentiments. It probably will catch on, if for no other reason than it’s different.

  20. #40
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    8,899
    Being cast friendly does not matter to me if a caliber is useful for my needs.

    The .223 is not cast friendly (at least for me) and I have 6 rifles in that caliber because it works!

    I cannot figure what this thing does for me or most other shooters. In a hunting application, I assume a .338 Federal or .358 Win can be used in the AR10? Both seems better options.
    Don Verna


Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check