300 BLK in California?

[RotaryRevn]

Here's my logic, worth what you're paying for it... on a new AR-type gun in CA you can go featureless or bullet button. If you go featureless you're talking a rifle with a 16" barrel. Plenty of effective rounds from a 16" barrel AR. 50gr TTSX, 75gr OTM, etc.

If you want something small, then you're talking about an AR pistol. If you want something reliable, 10.5" barrel (or 11.5" barrel) are the widely recommended minimums. For an effective round your choices are still limited, and your max range for bullet performance starts to drop. Still you could probably get away with the 50gr TTSX. And you can practice with cheap milsurp!

If you want a really short gun (<10.5" barrel) then 5.56 is almost off the table since the blast/effectiveness ratio starts to reverse. Now you've got to look at other rounds. 300BLK is attractive since it uses pistol powder and burns it all in 9" -- so much reduced blast, and you get all the benefit with a short barrel.

I wanted something small so I built an 8" folding AR pistol in 300BLK. No problems hitting a 12" disc using the aimpoint micro at 200yds with supersonic. Tried subsonic and it was like shooting a .22 -- but it wasn't 100% reliable either. (I was using old-style Magpul straight 10/20s, will try new 10/30s to see if those help.) Big downside to the 300BLK is no cheap milsurp! So it is a niche gun.

(Maxpedition pouch has a PVS-14 and Crye Night Cap, so that package would give me 0-300yds, day or night, subsonic or supersonic, in a very compact form factor. Got to like that versatility.)

That is one sweet pistol. Who makes that folding piece for the buffer tube?

[electric7]

+1 for 300blk

Great home defense AR

[triggs75]

I'm not usually into paint jobs on weapons/parts but I have to say that's really creative and useful! Bravo!

That does look pretty sweet.

Thanks guys. Gave me something to do until I complete my build.

Chad

[Mottmcfly]

Something that I haven't seen covered here (not explicitly though it was implied) is the list of reasons why the 300 Black is a nice option for a CQB type rifle.

First, lets address those that have said it's more of an SBR exclusive round. Here in California we can't own SBRs. So the 16" barreled carbine is the go to rifle for CQB type shooting. It is worth noting some CQB type guys actually prefer 16" barreled carbines in this role for a host of reasons I'd rather not go into here, lest I digress. My point is the 16" carbine often fills the CQB (or self defense) role people in free states most commonly associate with the SBR and is not just the medium range specific rifle a lot of free stater guys seem to think it is. Their access to SBRs sort of colors their view on the subject and limits what they tend to think the standard length carbine is good for. Here in CA, it's our only option so we have no trouble picturing it in that CQB role.

The 300 Black is nice in that CQB roll (even unsuppressed) because you get greater punching power in a round that is powered such that you can still hold a nice tight group during rapid fire. Turn the corner, see a bad guy (or paper version in a training course) and you can put 3-5 rounds in him in the blink of an eye without having to fight the muzzle flip of the rifle (at least not prohibitively so). This is where it outshines the other popular solution to the "not enough punch" crowd...the 6.8SPC. The 6.8SPC was all the range for a number years but has dropped off in popularity some because it just didn't live up to expectations in the CQB role. It was a nice medium-range solution. Not so great close up solution. People thought it was at first, but then fell out of love. The 6.8SPC just has too much umph. It is not nearly as controllable. You get too much felt recoil and too much muzzle flip so it slows down the amount of time it takes to put those holes in the target/bad guy. The 6.8SPC is better at long distances. So is the 5.56mm (though not by as much). But up close and personal, the 300 Black is a nice option. The fact that you can use the same magazines, same lower, etc as the 5.56mm makes the rifle and equipment cost effective. Ammo prices have actually come down some as well as popularity of the round continues to grow. Looks like this one might stick around for a while.

Don't get me wrong, I like the 5.56mm. There are a lot of arguments in its favor. People who think it just flat out sucks are not looking at the complete picture. There are times when it is the ideal round. There are times when it is not. Same goes with every caliber round. There will be lots of scenarios when it will truly shine, and odds are there are a lot more of them than you might think. So I am all for adding one to the collection. But as an addition to rather than an instead of. If not for cost of ammo alone.

+1

I own a DD M4V3 and purchased a S&W 300AAC upper with a 16" barrel and I've been having a ton of fun.

I didn't look at this as a replacement for a .556 or a 7.62, I think everyone should own all three. I just looked at it as a cost effective way to provide me with more options with little headache.

I can go super or subsonic with the change of a mag. It's good for somewhat long distance, Home defense and hunting. There are quite a few ammo choices and you can get target ammo at .72 per round.

I don't think it's any more accurate than a 7.62. I've heard this argument before and I've come to believe that any of these rounds can be placed accurately by a competent shooter.

But, when it comes to follow up shots, the 300 wins due to minimized muzzle rise over the 7.62. That being said, I saw my brand new 300 upper fail beautifully due to some unintended sand being blown into the chamber. Doubt that would happen in a good ole AK.