Hey /k/ prove to me that .300 blackout is ballisticly superior

>>31641375
Fires heavier bullets at faster velocities. How is this a question?

BC of a 208 A Max = .648
BC of whatever you fire out of a turdy turdy = turdy

>>31641375

Is this how people came to the conclusion that a 123gr 7.62x39 is exactly the same as a 160gr .30-30 because they have the same trajectory?

>>31641524
The rounds on paper preform very similarly out of carbine length rifles

>>31641375
Never really thought about this before, but will 30 carbine fit in a STANAG mag?

>>31641790
No -- which is a huge, huge part of Blackout's appeal. It's not about whether Blackout outperforms this round or that round. It's the combination of roughly 8mm Kurz performance at the low-end of bullet weights, combined with good subsonic performance in short barrels, all available in standard no-frills AR-15 pattern rifles with just a barrel swap.

>>31641774
Except 90gr .300blk is 500fps faster and stays supersonic to 600 yards vs 300 yards.

If you want to lock it into 2000 fps loads, the .300blk can shoot a 130 TSX at 2100 fps that is also supersonic past 600 yards due to a better BC.

.300blk shit's all over .30 carbine. You can chop the barrel down to 9" and still have an advantage due to better bullet selection. This thread is bad.

File: Buttheydon't.jpg (172KB, 1050x665px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1050x665px

>>31641774
90 gr loads compared with 100 yard zero.

Prove to me that .30-06 is ballisticly superior to .30 Carbine

Protip: they are ballisticly equivalent so you can't!

BC numbers, case capacity, supported bullet weights, and firearms chaimbered in said round. I don't really care but 300 blk wins just for sake of being backed and now plenty of loads to pick from over the shelf.

>>31641375
Can you use 5.56 mag lower AND bolt carrier to cycle .30 carbine?
If not then what is your point?

File: Ruger_300_Blackout_Mini-14_Tactical_F.jpg (21KB, 1200x310px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 1200x310px

>>31641375
Of course OP, pic related is exactly like an M1 carbine!

>>31641375
>ballisticly superior
>ballisticly equivalent
just fckn stop fgt pls

>>31641375
>.30 Carbine 110 grains, 1990 fps, 976 ft lbs of muzzle energy
>.300 Blackout 90 grains, 2550 fps, 1300 ft lbs of muzzle energy

They aren't balisticaly equivalent. Admittedly, there's not a ton of difference in muzzle energy, but the .30 Carbine uses a round nose pistol type bullet while .300 Blackout uses a conical bullet. Maximum effective combat range for .300 Blackout is about 500 yards while maximum combat range for .30 Carbine is advertised as 300 yards, though in truth 200 yards is more realistic.

Despite memes saying otherwise, withing its performance envelope, .30 Carbine is perfectly lethal combat cartridge. The problem with it is there are just a few platforms available for it, the original 80 year old rifle it was designed for and a couple of blowback pistol caliber carbines. All of them use M1 Carbine magazines, which can be difficult to find, and if you do, may be craptastic aftermarket versions.

By contrast, .300 Blackout is made to be used in standard AR magazines and can be used in any otherwise standard .223/5.56 rifle capable of swapping barrels.

I love .30 Carbine and wish there were more modern guns made for it, but it is not ballisticaly superior or even equal to .300 Blackout.