Evrerything You Wanted to Know About 300 Blackout

The .300 Blackout and 7.62×39 cartridges have steadily grown in popularity in recent years. Though they are similar in many ways, each excels in certain situations. Here's what you need to know nigh the .300 Blackout vs 7.62×39.

Many shooters and hunters, peculiarly those who prefer Modern Sporting Rifles, would probably agree that the .300 Blackout and 7.62×39 are both effective cartridges that offering certain advantages over the .223 Remington. However, even though at that place is a big overlap in their capabilities, there are a few key differences between the vii.62×39 and .300 Blackout that you should be aware of. Additionally, both cartridges are surrounded by a lot of myth and misunderstanding, peculiarly with regards to their accuracy and suitability for hunting. For those reasons, the .300 Blackout vs seven.62×39 contend can be difficult to navigate.

In this post, I'k going to investigate the merits of the .300 Coma vs vii.62×39 and help y'all make up one's mind which ane yous should exist using in diverse situations.

Before nosotros become started, I have an administrative annotation:

Some of the links below are affiliate links. This means I will earn a small committee (at no extra cost to you) if y'all make a purchase. This helps support the blog and allows me to go on to create free content that'southward useful to hunters like yourself. Thanks for your support.

.300 Blackout vs 7.62×39: History

All of the major combatants used typical full-power cartridges similar the .thirty-06 Springfield, .303 British, 7.92x57mm Mauser, and vii.62x54mmR in their primary infantry rifles at the beginning of Earth State of war Two. These rifle cartridges were quite powerful and capable of engaging targets at ranges in excess of 600 meters. However, they also had a lot of recoil and were difficult to handle in a fully automatic rifle.

For that reason, the various armies supplemented the rifles the infantry carried with a number of unlike sub-machine guns chambered in pistol cartridges (like the seven.62x25mm Tokarev, 9mm Luger, and .45 ACP). Full automated burn down was much more controllable with those sub-machine guns, merely they didn't have nearly as much stopping power or equally long of an constructive range as full-powered rifle cartridges.

Since typical combat ranges were typically betwixt 100 and 300 yards, manufacturers set nearly developing intermediate-power cartridges that were more than powerful and had a longer effective range than a pistol cartridge, but had a lighter recoil than full-powered rifle cartridges. The .30 Carbine cartridge used by the United states Military machine in the M1, M2, and M3 Carbines during Earth War II and Korea was i of the outset cartridges adopted by the military to meet those specifications.

The Germans adult the StG 44 rifle and the intermediate 7.92x33mm Kurtz cartridge a few years later during Globe War II and they had a major impact on the trajectory of firearms blueprint. Indeed, the Soviets were so impressed by the capabilities of the StG 44 and 7.92x33mm Kurtz on the Eastern Front that they decided to develop a similar burglarize and cartridge.

The 7.62x39mm (M43) cartridge followed in the ensuring years. The original 7.62x39mm load used by the Soviet Army shot a .311″ 123 grain boat tail total metal jacket (FMJ) bullet at a muzzle velocity of 2,300 anxiety per 2d (ane,445 human foot pounds of free energy). With a rimless and highly tapered case to aid with reliable feeding and extraction, the vii.62x39mm apace caught on with the Soviet Regular army. They soon adopted the semi-auto SKS rifle, the RPD machine gun, and the ubiquitous AK-47 assault burglarize, which were all chambered in seven.62×39.

While the Soviets were traveling down that road, the Us Armed forces was going through a similar process in searching for a replacement for the .30-06 Springfield. They eventually settled on the Yard-xiv rifle and the 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge every bit initial replacements for the .30-06 and M-1 Garand.

Even so, many leaders weren't pleased with the Grand-14 because it was heavy and hard to control when firing in full automatic way. Essentially, it didn't really solve a lot of the issues they had identified with the .30-06 and the M-1 Garand a few years before. For those reasons, the the Us Air Force, Army, and Marine Corps eventually switched over to the M-xvi rifle and the 5.56x45mm cartridge in the 1960s.

To read a more detailed discussion on the reasons the Us made that switch, as well as the differences between the .223 Remington and .308 Winchester cartridges, read this article:

.223 vs 308: Which Is Better For You?

While the M-16 and the five.56x45mm cartridge had some major teething problems during the Vietnam War, modifications to the rifle and the cartridge itself solved many of those problems and they both remain in service with military forces all over the earth today. Even so, many Soldiers and Marines who used the M-sixteen in combat complained almost the poor stopping power of the 5.56x45mm cartridge, specially the M855 ball load.

These issues led to the development of a series of larger caliber cartridges designed to function in modified AR-xv rifles like the six.5 Grendel, 6.5 Remington SPC, .458 SOCOM, and the .fifty Beowulf.

Around the same time, leaders in the military started to look for a new cartridge that could reliably shoot .thirty caliber bullets from an M-16 or M-iv rifle while nonetheless using a standard bolt and gas organisation. Additionally, they wanted a cartridge dimensionally like plenty to the v.56x45mm that a standard M16/AR magazine could still concord xxx rounds of the new cartridge without whatsoever modifications.

They found the solution with the .300 Whisper cartridge. Designed by JD Jones of SSK Industries in the 1990s, the .300 Whisper used a .221 Remington Fireball case necked up to shoot .30 caliber projectiles. Even so, since the .300 Whisper was a wildcat cartridge, designers at Advanced Armament Corporation (AAC) made a few modifications to the cartridge and got information technology canonical by SAAMI as the .300 AAC Blackout. This allowed the cartridge to enter big scale production with the major armament manufacturers.

Also known every bit the .300 BLK or the vii.62x35mm, the .300 Blackout is available in several unlike supersonic loads. For instance, Barnes manufactures a load shooting a 110gr TAC-TX at a muzzle velocity of 2,350 feet per second (1,349 foot pounds of energy). Hornady produces a load shooting a 125gr hollow point at 2,175 anxiety per second (ane,313 foot pounds of energy).

At the same time, the .300 Blackout also functions reliably in a suppressed M-sixteen/M-iv (every bit well as with the AR platform) when using subsonic ammunition like Sellier & Bellot'south load shooting a 220 gr FMJ at 1,060 feet per 2d (549 human foot pounds of energy) from a sixteen″ barrel.

.300 Blackout vs seven.62×39: Cartridge Sizes

Yous can come across the differences between the 7.62x39mm and .300 Coma cartridges in the photos below.

I big difference between the 2 cartridges to keep in heed is that fifty-fifty though they are both classified as .thirty quotient cartridges, the vii.62×39 and .300 Blackout do not use the aforementioned bore bullets.

Like most American .30 caliber cartridges (the .30-xxx Winchester, .30-06 Springfield, .300 Win Magazine, etc.), the .300 Blackout uses .308″ bullets. Yet, depending on where the specific firearm and ammo in question where manufactured, the seven.62×39 typically uses .310″ or .311″ bullets. This is because the Russians mensurate bore diameter differently from Americans (more than details on that here).

Though they are like in overall size, the .300 Blackout has a slightly longer overall length (2.26″ vs ii.ii″), but the 7.62x39mm has a slightly longer example length (1.528″ vs 1.368″).

The picture in a higher place compares a Norinco 7.62x39mm cartridge with a 122gr FMJ bullet to a Sellier & Bellot .300 Blackout cartridge with a 220gr subsonic FMJ bullet. So, while in that location is a stark contrast in bullet size between the two cartridges in the photo, that's not the case when the .300 Coma is using a lighter 125gr bullet.

Additionally, since the .300 Coma is designed for employ with a standard Chiliad-16/M-4 commodities, it has the same size rim diameter (.378″) as the .223 Remington/v.56 NATO. The 7.62x39mm cartridge has a larger (.447″) rim diameter, only also has a highly tapered case to facilitate reliable feeding and extraction.

Even though the 7.62x39mm cartridge has a more highly tapered example (which is why AK-47 magazines have such an exaggerated bend), the larger rim diameter and longer case of the 7.62x39mm cartridge outcome in about 45% more case chapters than the .300 Coma.

Note: while the example capacity figures listed beneath do give a good indication of the differences between the two cartridges, exact case capacities vary slightly according to the brand of brass used.

seven.62×39 vs 300 Coma Ballistics

Every bit you'd expect from their similar overall size, the ballistics of the .300 Blackout and 7.62×39 are pretty like as well when using like weight bullets. In fact, they're both roughly comparable to the .30-30 Winchester.

Nevertheless, the .300 Blackout is bachelor in a wide range of bullet weights. So not all .300 BLK loads are created equal.

For instance, the vast majority of seven.62x39mm manufacturing plant loads shoot bullets in the 120-125 grain range. Of these, 122 grain and 123 grain loads are by far the nearly common. On the other manus, most .300 Blackout mill loads use bullets in the 78-226 grain range. 110 grain, 120 grain, 125 grain, 150 grain, 208 grain, and 220 grain bullets are the about popular.

As you can run into in the table below comparing the 110gr Hornady GMX (.305 BC) and 220gr Sellier & Bellot FMJ subsonic (.330 BC) loads in .300 Coma to a 123gr Hornady SST (.295 BC) load in 7.62x39mm and a Hornady 150gr RN (.186) in .30-thirty Winchester, the ballistics of the 3 cartridges are pretty similar.

The .30-30 Winchester starts off with significantly more kinetic free energy, merely the .300 Blackout and 7.62x39mm bullets accept a much higher ballistic coefficient. For that reason, the 110gr .300 Blackout and vii.62x39mm loads have a flatter trajectory and retain more than energy than the .30-30 out past 200 yards.

The seven.62×39 has a little more than kinetic energy, but the .300 Blackout has a slightly flatter trajectory due to higher ballistic coefficient of the .300 Blackout bullets. For all intents and purposes, in that location is very trivial difference in the ballistics of the .300 Blackout and 7.62×39 because the differences between them are and so small with nearly loads.

That's apparently non the case with the subsonic .300 Blackout ammo though, which has a very low muzzle velocity and therefore a quite short effective range.

Additionally, the recoil characteristics of the ii cartridges are pretty similar likewise. When fired from a Ruger Mini-xiv/Mini-30, the .300 Blackout has slightly less than recoil than the vii.62×39. That being said, both cartridges have a relatively mild recoil that most shooters should exist able to handle without any trouble.

Felt recoil will vary from shooter to shooter and rifle to rifle, simply complimentary recoil free energy is nevertheless a useful way to compare the two cartridges.The 7.62×39 has gotten a bad reputation for accuracy over the years. This is probably due to the fact that most people shooting the cartridge are using inexpensive military surplus ammo. In fact, a good quality SKS or AK is capable of surprisingly good accuracy when using quality ammunition.

That beingness said, even nether the best circumstances, the 7.62×39 is mostly at a pretty pregnant disadvantage in terms of accuracy when compared to the .300 BLK, which is popular for competition shooting in some circles.

Though information technology's easy to choose a winner when it comes to accuracy of the .300 Blackout vs 7.62×39 at brusque range, neither cartridge is actually suitable for long distance shooting.

.300 Blackout vs 7.62×39 : Ammunition Selection

Since the .300 Blackout and vii.62x39mm are relatively popular cartridges, there are a number of armament manufacturers that produce ammo for both of them like Federal, Fiocchi, Hornady, Sellier & Bellot, and Winchester.

That being said, copper done FMJ bullets with a steel instance produced by Brown Bear, Tula, or Wolf are by far the most common choices for 7.62x39mm ammo out there. These bullets apply a steel cadre and are not immune at many shooting ranges. Nonetheless, those same companies (plus others similar Federal and Hornady) practice make soft betoken or hollow point 7.62×39 hunting ammunition as well.

On the other hand, there is a much wider variety of ammunition for the .300 Blackout. This ammo ranges from plain sometime FMJ and open up tip match (OTM) best suited to work at the range on one end of the spectrum to hollow point and ballistic tip ammo designed for hunting and personal protection on the other terminate.

Prices and availability for each cartridge vary from region to region, only 7.62×39 ammo is generally much more mutual and much less expensive than .300 Blackout armament.

BUY SOME QUALITY 300 Coma AMMO Here

BUY SOME GREAT 7.62x39mm AMMO Hither

If yous're into mitt loading, then components for the .300 Blackout are much more common, though it's certainly possible to reload for the vii.62×39 likewise. Exist careful about trying to reload 7.62x39mm brass though: most of the stuff out at that place is Berdan primed, which will crave different equipment from the Boxer primed brass near American cartridges utilise. Additionally, while there are tons of good quality .308 caliber bullets to choose from for the .300 Coma, .310 and .311 bullets for the vii.62×39 aren't nearly as mutual (though they're out there).

.300 Blackout vs 7.62×39 : Rifle Selection

Both cartridges are nearly commonly chambered in semi-automatic rifles, which probably has a lot to practice with the military utilise of the two cartridges.

In item, AR-15 fashion rifles like those fabricated by Bushmaster, CMMG, Daniel Defense, DPMS, Noveske, Rock River, and Wilson Gainsay, are extremely popular with the .300 Blackout. This makes sense considering the .300 Coma was specifically designed for use with that platform. There are a few AR-15 variants chambered in 7.62×39, just it'south not most as common. This is because the farthermost taper of the cartridge necessitates the use of special magazines and the larger rim bore of the cartridge requires a new bolt, commodities carrier, firing pivot, etc.

On the other hand, the 7.62×39 is available in a number of AK clones out there also as a few other rifles like the semi-automatic Ruger Mini-Thirty.

The .300 Blackout is also available in the Ruger Mini-Fourteen and the Remington Model 700 SPS Tactical. Information technology's fifty-fifty possible to get a .300 AAC Blackout barrel for the single shot Thompson Heart Encore.

Both cartridges are bachelor in a few other rifles similar the Ruger American Ranch bolt-action burglarize.

Buy AN EXCELLENT 300 BLACKOUT Rifle HERE

Purchase A DEPENDABLE 7.62x39mm Burglarize HERE

.300 Blackout vs 7.62×39 : Which Is Right For You lot?

The 7.62×39 and .300 Blackout are both well suited for hunting medium game at short to moderate range. The .300 Blackout has a slight advantage hither because of its mostly better accurateness and larger selection of quality hunting bullets, but they'll both work for hunting game similar deer and feral hogs out to 150 yards or so with good shot placement and when using quality bullets.

Basically, if you consider the .thirty-30 Winchester adequate for the job, then the .300 Blackout and 7.62×39 should also do just fine in the aforementioned situation.

Use caution when hunting with .300 Blackout subsonic loads though. Those loads can be very accurate, but there are a lot of bad stories about poor terminal performance on deer and feral hogs when using subsonic .300 BLK ammo. Presumably, this is because those loads just don't have enough velocity for the bullets to expand on affect. Instead, they just blow straight through the animal and don't cause much damage.

That existence said, Noveske makes a 220 grain subsonic load designed specifically for hunting they claim will work very well on big game. I haven't used it myself, and so I can't comment personally on how it works, but information technology might be worth a try if yous really want to chase with subsonic ammo.

Do you want the ideal cartridge to use with a suppressor or in rifles with short barrels? The .300 Coma has a big advantage over the vii.62×39 in those areas. Because the .300 Coma is designed for use in a standard AR style rifle, information technology volition still cycle the bolt reliably when using subsonic armament and with a barrel length shorter than 16″. Additionally, it doesn't endure nigh as big of a drop off in operation as the 7.62×39 when using a shorter barrel either.

Are y'all looking for a cartridge with good prospects for widely bachelor and inexpensive ammo? The 7.62×39 wins in this area easily down. It's consistency amid the pinnacle 10 nearly popular cartridges in the United states in terms of the amount of ammo sold each yr. There's also still a lot of inexpensive military surplus ammunition available. .300 Coma ammo isn't difficult to detect, but it's a lot more expensive and not nearly as widespread as the 7.62x39mm.

Are you lot looking for an ideal cartridge to apply in an AR-15 platform? Both will work, but the .300 Blackout has a big reward here because information technology was specifically designed for optimum performance in the Chiliad-16/M-4. By the same token, if yous really like AK style rifles, and then the seven.62×39 is the obvious option.

Are you very sensitive to recoil? Both have very mild recoil, but the .300 Blackout has less than the 7.62×39.

Do y'all want a cartridge suitable for self-defense? Both will certainly work in this regard, but there are more choices of purpose congenital cocky-defense ammo for the .300 Blackout (like the Barnes TAC-TX, Lehigh Defense Close Quarters Bullet, and others) than the 7.62×39.

As I've stated multiple times: the .300 Blackout and vii.62×39 are very similar in many respects and are both very capable rifle cartridges. While they each take different strengths, the differences between them (.300 Blackout vs vii.62×39) aren't nearly as large as they're fabricated out to exist sometimes.

For a detailed discussion most another alternative to the .223 Remington in the .224 Valkyrie, six.5 Grendel, and half dozen.eight SPC, read the articles below:

224 Valkyrie: Should You Buy I?

6.8 SPC vs 6.5 Grendel: What You lot Need To Know

Enjoy this article well-nigh the .300 Blackout vs seven.62×39 debate? Please share it with your friends on Facebook and Twitter.

Nosler provided the load data used to compare trajectory, example capacity, and recoil for the cartridges (here and hither). Ballistic Studies provided information on the original M43 vii.62x39mm load. The Lyman 50th Edition (p231-233 & 270-271) and Hornady 10th Edition (p435-443 & 618-621) reloading manuals were also used equally references for this article.

Make sure yous follow The Big Game Hunting Blog on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube.

Adjacent: All-time 6.5 CREEDMOOR AMMO FOR HUNTING ELK, DEER, & OTHER BIG GAME

mcleodmaidne62.blogspot.com

Source: https://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/300-blackout-vs-7-62x39/

Share this post