PDA

View Full Version : Something new is coming..... updated - 300 AAC BLACKOUT – New Caliber, New Mission?



Stickman
29 September 2010, 14:54
No updates or info yet... I'll update as soon as I can. I can say that I have one sitting in front of me, but thats it right now.



Update, I've known about this for awhile, and had an obligation to post it on Military Times first for a few kind of obvious reasons.

AAC/ Remington has released a new caliber. Its not an off the wall oddball, it appears to be a highly legit round (7.62x35) with a flexible delivery package. The caliber is only a part of the offering, the complete upper receiver, ammunition, and special suppressor round everything out.

Here were the Design Objectives for the project:


• Create a reliable compact 30-cal solution for the AR platform
• Utilize existing inventory magazines while retaining their full capacity
• Create the optimal platform for sound and flash suppressed fire
• Create compatible supersonic ammo that matches 7.62x39 ballistics
• Provide the ability to penetrate barriers with high-mass projectiles
• Provide all capabilities in a lightweight, durable, low recoiling package

Here is the intro information taken off their new website


Introducing the Advanced Armament Corp. 300 AAC BLACKOUT (300BLK). This system was developed to launch 30 caliber projectiles from the AR platform without a reduction in magazine capacity and compatible with the standard bolt. Full power 123 grain ammunition matches the ballistics of the 7.62x39mm AK, has 37% more energy than 5.56mm M855, and 9% more than 6.8 SPC TAP 110. In fact, from a 9 inch barrel, the 300BLK has more muzzle energy than 5.56mm M855 from a 16 inch barrel. When 300 BLK is used in a 16 inch barrel, it has 23% more energy than 5.56mm M855 from a 16 inch barrel - with much higher-mass projectiles for a more dramatic effect on the target. Or choose subsonic cartridges for optimal use with a sound suppressor - 220 grain Sierra OTM (open-tip match) bullets vastly outperforms a 9mm MP5-SD in penetration and long range accuracy. Due to the high efficiency of the cartridge, less powder is used than 5.56mm, which results in a rifle that is a comfortable to shoot - even with a short barrel.


MILITARY TIMES - 300 AAC BLACKOUT – New Caliber, New Mission? (http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2010/09/29/300-aac-blackout-new-caliber-new-mission/)




http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/wp-content/blogs.dir/5/files/aac-stick/868W0136-1024-Stick.jpg

oregonshooter
29 September 2010, 16:05
tease

TehLlama
29 September 2010, 16:47
"Something new is coming.....
Started by Stickman, Today 13:54"

My checkbook knows how this ends. Not well.

a308garand
29 September 2010, 17:06
OK, its been a few hours. Spill the beans.

Optimus Prime
29 September 2010, 17:12
tease

I clicked on the thread just to say that...

Stickman
29 September 2010, 19:11
OK, its been a few hours. Spill the beans.




I've been working on this thing for the past 9 hours...... [BD]



I'll change the thread title and get the info up.

Stickman
29 September 2010, 19:44
http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/wp-content/blogs.dir/5/files/aac-stick/CTML0293-1024-Stick.jpg

Aragorn
29 September 2010, 19:49
...Wow...

Optimus Prime
29 September 2010, 19:50
Consider me highly intrigued.

oregonshooter
29 September 2010, 19:50
I thought the 300 Whisper did all that? What's the effective range of this round? If it gets past 200 yards I might need to switch builds :)

Optimus Prime
29 September 2010, 20:58
http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/wp-content/blogs.dir/5/files/aac-stick/CTML0293-1024-Stick.jpg

D*%& it... you know I'm thinking about an SBR build...

Thankfully it would just be a second upper. Is there an ETA? [:D]

rob_s
30 September 2010, 05:31
I'd like to see the round, next to know rounds (5.56, 7.62x39, 6.8 SPC, 7.62 NATO) and hear about ammo cost.

IMHO on the commercial market unless there is $0.20-0.25/round ammo available it's a niche thing at best. Intellectually interesting but otherwise...

Paulo_Santos
30 September 2010, 06:23
IMHO on the commercial market unless there is $0.20-0.25/round ammo available it's a niche thing at best. Intellectually interesting but otherwise...

Yep. That's something the 6.8 manufacturers still haven't figured out and it is the reason that so many people drop out of the 6.8.

skd_tactical
30 September 2010, 06:52
Wow..... I'm already thinking about this on my MRP.

SOS

Optimus Prime
30 September 2010, 07:56
Yep. That's something the 6.8 manufacturers still haven't figured out and it is the reason that so many people drop out of the 6.8.

I really think they're on to something with this one though. No new bolt, no mag issues, just a barrel swap.

That cartridge must look interesting to work with the standard 5.56 bolt face...

rob_s
30 September 2010, 08:11
I really think they're on to something with this one though. No new bolt, no mag issues, just a barrel swap.

That cartridge must look interesting to work with the standard 5.56 bolt face...

None of which changes a 5x ammo cost, which is what exists with 6.8, FWIW.

Optimus Prime
30 September 2010, 08:19
None of which changes a 5x ammo cost, which is what exists with 6.8, FWIW.

No disagreement there, but I think it's a step in the right direction.

rob_s
30 September 2010, 08:42
Getting Wolf or Tula to produce training rounds, now THAT would be a step in the right direction! [:D]

Optimus Prime
30 September 2010, 08:51
If enough interest is generated it could happen.

Of course if the Army adopts it in large numbers (which sounds like one of Remington's hopes, and follows what the Army's been asking for) then I would imagine quite a few ammo manufacturers jumping on it. The trick is to drum up enough demand and make a market for it.

Stickman
30 September 2010, 10:01
I thought the 300 Whisper did all that? What's the effective range of this round? If it gets past 200 yards I might need to switch builds :)



Small companies or individuals inventing calibers is far different than the Freedom Group, which has everything from ammunition to accessories, to complete weapon manufacturing capabilities. The SAAMI angle simply smothers the wildcats.


Think of you and I deciding to build and sell kit cars, versus Ford introducing a new car. We might build something nice, but we can't compete.

m249saw
30 September 2010, 10:31
Well I guess Ill wait on my can to see how this thing goes. 762-SDN-6 is the same price as the M4-2000

Stickman
30 September 2010, 11:08
Well I guess Ill wait on my can to see how this thing goes. 762-SDN-6 is the same price as the M4-2000


No idea, I'm not really sure. I know that it rates a bit better than some of the other .30 cal cans, so I would imagine its going to be a bit more money. The nice thing about a 30 cal can is that you can use it on your 5.56 weapons also......

todd.k
30 September 2010, 11:24
I thought the 300 Whisper did all that?
It's a SAAMI version of the fairly popular wildcat 300/221 or 300 Fireball and the proprietary 300 Whisper(R).

There is a good customer base for ammo of people who own the above (after a gunsmith checks the chamber vs the SAAMI print) and currently handload as well as a good number of people who know of and want one but do not handload. There are already several smaller companies making the wildcat, once the ammo is available there is no good reason to keep making the wildcat.

Optimus Prime
30 September 2010, 12:08
Stick, that upper seems too short for a carbine length gas system... or is the lack of sleep messing with my head?

Stickman
30 September 2010, 12:19
Stick, that upper seems too short for a carbine length gas system... or is the lack of sleep messing with my head?


Gas port placement is going to be different as its a different caliber with very different pressure. You are correct that its not a standard carbine system.

Optimus Prime
30 September 2010, 12:35
Makes sense.

Looks like AAC put together a whole page for the new round (http://300aacblackout.com/). That sucker's beastly looking.

TehLlama
30 September 2010, 14:10
I have some hope with all of freedom group behind it, though instances like 260 Rem come to mind (great cartridge, never a match loading for such a great competition round)

Seems like something that could run well in other similar platforms, and smaller 30 Cal cans would be pretty cool too.

Wondering Beard
30 September 2010, 14:23
Ok, I see the new round but I'm a little less sure about the new mission.

What does it do that is any different ( in terms of mission not ergonomics, accuracy or any other thing related to the platform itself) that an AK won't do?

Stickman
30 September 2010, 14:36
Ok, I see the new round but I'm a little less sure about the new mission.

What does it do that is any different ( in terms of mission not ergonomics, accuracy or any other thing related to the platform itself) that an AK won't do?


M4 + MP5 + MP7 or 300AAC


I wrote "new mission" because it is capable of replacing all three of the above in their various mission capabilities.

Mike
30 September 2010, 14:56
Very interesting concept.

IMHO it may have a better future (or at least a better start to position itself) by using a commonly available bulled diameter (thus participating in the economy of scale of bullet production for 7.62x51) than other calibers developed lateley.

It also provides the usability of existing magazines to full capacity - a feature 6.8 SPC promised early on but finally never kept.

I am looking forward to see what will come out of this - interesting times indeed, these days...

Mike
30 September 2010, 15:01
What does it do that is any different ( in terms of mission not ergonomics, accuracy or any other thing related to the platform itself) that an AK won't do?

Probably nothing.

But most probably it will do everything that an AK does but just a bit better (accuracy, quality, variety of ammunition/bullet options) and while doing so in an AR-type (or any other system in 5.56 format as well, I guess) platform using existing accessoirs (starting from magazines ending with suppressors).

Wondering Beard
30 September 2010, 15:11
M4 + MP5 + MP7 or 300AAC


I wrote "new mission" because it is capable of replacing all three of the above in their various mission capabilities.

I think I understand except that I thought the short barrelled M4s (10.5" and the like) were meant to replace the MP5 and MP7 PDW type weapons.

Maybe I'm just confused (which happens easily) but aren't we basically talking about an AR/M4 platform with short or long barrels depending on use? the only difference with the original platform is then the caliber.

From what I can read and understand (and thus be easily mistaken), this new caliber is better at penetration and, with the right load, at being suppressed. How much of an improvement is that really?

On the other hand, this new caliber reminds me of the old 30-30, maybe making the M4 platform as versatile as the Winchester M94 once was, if not more.

Wondering Beard
30 September 2010, 15:16
Probably nothing.

But most probably it will do everything that an AK does but just a bit better (accuracy, quality, variety of ammunition/bullet options) and while doing so in an AR-type (or any other system in 5.56 format as well, I guess) platform using existing accessoirs (starting from magazines ending with suppressors).

Ok, I see that.

I guess that's where all the points about ammo price lead to: if it's not affordable, it's not going to worth the changes.

Paulo_Santos
30 September 2010, 15:22
The problem that a lot of these new calibers are having/going to have in beating, or trying to replace the 5.56, is that there are so many bullets available for the 5.56 to make it work from the 8"-24" barrels. Plus training ammo is very cheap and reloading is even cheaper. So these new calibers have a lot of catching up to do and they can't afford to mess it up, like the 6.8 messed it up in the beginning and it is now trying to get back on the right track.

m249saw
30 September 2010, 16:13
No idea, I'm not really sure. I know that it rates a bit better than some of the other .30 cal cans, so I would imagine its going to be a bit more money. The nice thing about a 30 cal can is that you can use it on your 5.56 weapons also......

The 762-SDN-2 was listed at $895 MSRP on one of those data sheets.

todd.k
30 September 2010, 16:34
with the right load, at being suppressed. How much of an improvement is that really?

Huge. Subsonic with a silence is very quiet.

Stickman
1 October 2010, 10:24
I think I understand except that I thought the short barrelled M4s (10.5" and the like) were meant to replace the MP5 and MP7 PDW type weapons.



You would think so, but the MP5 & MP7 are used for different missions, and very often ones that involve the use of cans.

Wondering Beard
1 October 2010, 13:57
You would think so, but the MP5 & MP7 are used for different missions, and very often ones that involve the use of cans.

I assume that you mean missions were discretion (and thus blending in) is paramount.

Size would matter in those and the M4 platform, irrelevant of caliber, would be too large, correct?

Wondering Beard
1 October 2010, 13:58
Huge. Subsonic with a silence is very quiet.

Doesn't that narrow its niche?

Stickman
1 October 2010, 14:48
I assume that you mean missions were discretion (and thus blending in) is paramount.

Size would matter in those and the M4 platform, irrelevant of caliber, would be too large, correct?



I'm sitting here with it right next to me, so from first hand experience in running a gun for a living, and having it by my side, I think I can safely say that I am comfortable with its size.

Stickman
1 October 2010, 14:49
Doesn't that narrow its niche?


It would, until you figure that by switching back to supersonic ammo, the regular game is back on.

TehLlama
1 October 2010, 15:12
And the niche widens immensely when you're in the process of rolling out modular AR uppers and conversion kits for ACR's, especially if you're also viewing this in the context of using something like a modular Colt/MGI style lower or SCAR-H w/ short conversion and being able to utilize a 30 caliber suppressor for either a small .300 round as well as 7.62x51 NATO.

I see what they're on about - it's really going to come down to the right circumstances for compatible platforms to get the round in frequent enough use that surplus ammo starts happening - something that didn't occur with 6.8 and look at how quickly it languished.

I see more potential with this than 6.8SPC honestly, but it's contingent on hardware with very little connection to the round being made and marketed correctly.

jmart
1 October 2010, 16:53
Just what we need for Afghan, a 7.62x39 in a different twist, but same ballistics.

If we're serious about changing calibers, just go all out and pick 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC. I don't care which one, but you get better velocity, better long range performance, a much more verstaile cartridge. This just doesn't pass the common sense test unless we're abandoning the 300 meter-and-out envelope for small arms and utilizing some other weapon to handle these situations.

Paulo_Santos
4 October 2010, 10:08
300 AAC BLACKOUT Trajectories with a 16" barel and using the Winchester 123 FMJ Bullet (.256 BC) with a MV of 2300 FPS and a sight height of 2.6":

Using a 100 Yard Zero:
50 Yards: -0.3" (2138 FPS)
100 Yards: 0" (1983 FPS)
200 Yards: -6.3" (1696 FPS)
300 Yards: -24.8" (1443 FPS)

Using a 50 Yard Zero:
50 Yards: 0" (2138 FPS)
100 Yards: 0.7" (1983 FPS)
200 Yards: -4.9" (1696 FPS)
300 Yards: -22.7" (1443 FPS)

Using a 200 Yard Zero:
50 Yards: 1.2" (2138 FPS)
100 Yards: 3.2" (1983 FPS)
200 Yards: 0" (1696 FPS)
300 Yards: -15.3" (1443 FPS)

Using a 25/250 Yard Zero:
50 Yards: 2.4" (2138 FPS)
100 Yards: 5.5" (1983 FPS)
200 Yards: 4.7" (1696 FPS)
300 Yards: -8.3" (1443 FPS)

Using a 275 Yard Zero:
50 Yards: 3.1" (2138 FPS)
100 Yards: 6.8" (1983 FPS)
200 Yards: 7.4" (1696 FPS)
250 Yards: 3.3" (1502 FPS)
300 Yards: -4.3" (1443 FPS)

Using a 300 Yard Zero:
50 Yards: 3.8" (2138 FPS)
100 Yards: 8.3" (1983 FPS)
200 Yards: 10.2" (1696 FPS)
300 Yards: 0" (1443 FPS)

After checking the Ballistics, I would say that if you are only shooting out to 100 Yards, I'd use the 50 or 100 Yard Zero.* I'm a big fan of the 100 Yard Zero, so I'd pick that one.

If I was shooting out to 200 Yards, then the 50 or 100 Yard Zeros would be best.* Again, I'm a fan of the 100 Yard zero, so I'd still choose the 100 yard zero as it is still pretty flat trajectory.
(Note that the 50 and 200 yard zeros do not produce the similar trajectories like in the 5.56.).

If I was shooting out to 300 yards, the 250 or 275 Yard zero offers the FLATTEST Trajectory and it is the one I would use.

B4RAZ
4 October 2010, 22:29
300 AAC=300 whisper/300 fireball. I believe it to be a mission specific weapon. I have several friends who shoot/reload 300 fireball and it is very very quiet, but in our testing we could not stabalize a 125gr bullet with a 1/8 twist with a 9'' barrel. The 190-220gr smk's shoot great at subsonic velocities but I dont see how you can expect a single twist rate to stabalize a 123gr as well as 220gr. I really dont see the purpose unless your shooting subsonic. For general military purposes Id much prefer 6.5 or 6.8. Just my 2 cents. Stick, please let us know if you get the chance to do some accuracy testing with the different bullets(123gr,155gr,220gr) that AAC/Remington says they are going to offer.

todd.k
5 October 2010, 07:21
A 125gr bullet is easily stabilized at 1/8" twist. The center of gravity being behind the nose/drag of the bullet traveling through the air is what makes a bullet want to tumble. The twist must be enough to overcome that force, there is no amount of extra twist that can make a bullet unstable.

todd.k
5 October 2010, 15:50
Noveske Rifleworks will be changing our 300 Fireball barrel production to the 300 AAC BLACKOUT.

We will also make complete rifles and uppers when ammo is available for test firing.

Paulo_Santos
5 October 2010, 15:56
Noveske Rifleworks will be changing our 300 Fireball barrel production to the 300 AAC BLACKOUT.

We will also make complete rifles and uppers when ammo is available for test firing.

That's cool. Are the chambers very similar?

todd.k
5 October 2010, 16:41
That's cool. Are the chambers very similar?
Yes, the 300 AAC BLACKOUT is a standardized/SAAMI version of the wildcat 300 Fireball or 300-221 and the proprietary 300 Whisper(R). When I get all the detailed numbers for the chamber I'll be able to say if 300 BLK ammo will be safe to use in our old 300 Fireball chambers.

I'm going to take a fresh look at barrel lengths and function, gas ports will be checked and or set for the factory ammo but not much is going to change from our 300 Fireball but the name. And we will make rifles and uppers now that there is factory ammo to test fire with.

TehLlama
5 October 2010, 17:54
Any idea what lengths will be most common in your upper builds Todd?

todd.k
6 October 2010, 08:30
I'm sure we will have a 16", for shorter barrels I'm going to test some different lengths for performance.

Stickman
6 October 2010, 08:58
The 16" upper should become a pretty popular deer slayer.

Wondering Beard
6 October 2010, 14:41
The 16" upper should become a pretty popular deer slayer.

That's what I've been thinking.

I've been reading all sorts of posts on other sites (of lower quality naturally [:)]) and a lot of arguments were about whether or not it could/would/should replace the 5.56 for the military. Putting aside whether or not the caliber could serve well in that function, I don't get the impression that the designers were at all looking to replace the 5.56 for general military purpose.

The 300 BLK seems to me to serve two different (but not necessarily seperate) customers; 1) those who have a need for a hard hitting close range suppressable weapon and 2) those who have a use for a 30 cal semi auto rifle.

The former are those whose job is to go in harms way; most likely mil/LEO but not always and the latter are just regular folks who compete and hunt.

With both those types, and so long as inexpensive ammo is availble, the 300 BLK is likely to do very well.

jmart
6 October 2010, 18:53
That's what I've been thinking.

I've been reading all sorts of posts on other sites (of lower quality naturally [:)]) and a lot of arguments were about whether or not it could/would/should replace the 5.56 for the military. Putting aside whether or not the caliber could serve well in that function, I don't get the impression that the designers were at all looking to replace the 5.56 for general military purpose.

The 300 BLK seems to me to serve two different (but not necessarily seperate) customers; 1) those who have a need for a hard hitting close range suppressable weapon and 2) those who have a use for a 30 cal semi auto rifle.

The former are those whose job is to go in harms way; most likely mil/LEO but not always and the latter are just regular folks who compete and hunt.

With both those types, and so long as inexpensive ammo is availble, the 300 BLK is likely to do very well.

If you read the press release, they're pretty clear about entering the trials for the M4 replacement. Not the M4 augmentation, but the M4 replacement (which the mil clearly states they're only interested in if something proves worthy enough and demonstrates marked perfromance increases). The scenarios with which AAC pitches the round all have a CQB slant to them, but I'm assuming evaluators will evaluate the cartridge against the same criteria they'd evaluate the 5.56/M4 combo/SCAR/whatever combo. I just don't see how this cartridge will compete at beyond-300 meter ranges. Not that that's a key criteria for LEO or civilian application, but it is for the mil.

Stickman
6 October 2010, 19:03
I'm not sure they are looking at things as a full blown M4 replacement, but I also don't see a reason why we are locked into one weapon platform.

Stickman
6 October 2010, 19:04
Here is a quick bullet picture for people to give an idea of 5.56 vs 300AAC.

http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/AAC/868W0453-1024-Stick.jpg

Magnous
7 October 2010, 12:42
Very intriguing round. Having something comparable to to the 30-30 or 7.62x39 in an AR would make a very appealing home defense gun in addition to the subsonic benefits for can users.

Wondering Beard
7 October 2010, 13:52
If you read the press release, they're pretty clear about entering the trials for the M4 replacement. .

I haven't seen the press release but I have seen the website (http://http://300aacblackout.com/) and I don't see where they might said they wanted to enter the M4 replacement trials. The Military Times article doesn't mention it either.

What am I missing?

todd.k
7 October 2010, 15:39
300 AAC BLACKOUT ammunition is safe to use in Noveske 300 FB barrels with a serial number of 290000 and higher.

Noveske 300 FB barrels with a serial number less than 290000 or without a serial number will need to be checked before using 300 AAC BLACKOUT ammunition. We will be setting up a program to send in older barrels for inspection and reaming if needed.

Stickman
7 October 2010, 16:42
That is great news, thank you for sharing the information with us.

jmart
7 October 2010, 18:07
I haven't seen the press release but I have seen the website (http://http://300aacblackout.com/) and I don't see where they might said they wanted to enter the M4 replacement trials. The Military Times article doesn't mention it either.

What am I missing?

You are correct, I read more into things that were there. Actually the Miltary Times article alludes to the timing of the release coming with the upcoming carbine trials. Read into that what you will.

Also of note is an article from Army Times about the upcoming evaluation.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/08/army-seeks-better-carbine-082810w/

Of particular note is the following:


No caliber restriction has been placed on a new design. The requirements, instead, are for the most reliable, accurate, durable, easy-to-use and easy-to-maintain weapon out there, Tamilio said.

It will be at least a 500-meter weapon and have a higher incapacitation percentage, meaning if a shot doesn’t kill the enemy, it will put a serious dent in his medical record.


I wonder if this cartridge can meet this requirement given there's likely to be some 6.8 SPC and .308s competing alongside. maybe the Army will decide in the end to keep the M4, press on with the planned improvements and perhaps offer the 7.62x35 as an augmentation capability for various missions. But that COA isn't discussed in recent press releases and announcements on what their current intent is.