PDA

View Full Version : 300 Blackout Mini 14


Montoya
April 27, 2012, 07:01 PM
Does anybody know of a Mini 14 chambered in the 300 Blackout?
I have been looking and found nothing on one being successfully converted to shoot that round. SO i challenged a buddy of mine to make one, and today he called me and said that it has been done. He has successfully made and test fired a fully functional mini 14 chambered in the 300 Blackout. i will post the pics as soon as i get them.

FrosSsT
April 27, 2012, 08:17 PM
Why would you want one chambered in 300 blackout when there are plenty of mini 30's out there. Does it really pay off putting in all that money and time into something that already comes stock in a similar cartridge?

JoshC243
April 27, 2012, 08:45 PM
wouldn't you like to have something that not one else has?

THE RAVEN
April 27, 2012, 11:03 PM
There's no logistical,cost effective reason to convert a Mini 14 to a 300 ACC....A Mini 30 is a 7.63x39 anyway....:rolleyes:

Bamashooter
April 27, 2012, 11:30 PM
Im not a big fan of the 7.62x39 but it seems like thats all the 300blackout is. Just an american version. If I wanted a 7.62 caliber semi auto it would be a .308win that way at least I could get decent velocities. I just dont get why this blackout is so popular. I think its pointless.

THE RAVEN
April 27, 2012, 11:36 PM
The reason the Blackout 300 ACC was developed is because people wanted a round similar to a 7.62x39 that would meet similar performance and fit a standard AR 15 style platform and magazine without having to jump up to a AR 10 (.308) style lower receiver and magazine...

Montoya
April 28, 2012, 10:56 AM
The reason why i challenged him to build this is because, There are some AR uppers in this round but hardly no or none Mini 14's in it. It was more of an experiment than anything else. and yes the mini 30 is in a similar round, and we thought about using that barrel but to my understanding it is a hair bigger. just a fun project. :)

rickyrick
April 28, 2012, 01:58 PM
I don't here about minis converted to anything. The 6.8 didn't pan ou

BigMikey76
April 28, 2012, 03:21 PM
It does seem like a fairly pointless project - sort of reinventing the wheel.

That being said, when someone climbs a mountain, do we give them grief because it has already been climbed by someone else?

FrosSsT
April 29, 2012, 03:01 PM
wouldn't you like to have something that not one else has?

If you want to have something that nobody else has why would you buy a mini...

Adamantium
April 29, 2012, 06:24 PM
There are gunsmiths who do caliber conversions for Mini's, but the price is near insanity and I know of no one who does 300 blackout yet.

http://www.ruger-mini-14-firearms.com/ruger_mini_prices.php

And if you think having a Mini 14 in 300 blackout is fun, try trolling other peoples threads asking stupid questions and making pointless observations :rolleyes:.

TrailBlazinMan
April 30, 2012, 12:47 AM
Yes, I'm the guy doing the conversion. The Mini-14 converted to 300 AAC Blackout will be cost prohibitive unless you already have a Mini-14 sitting in the closet to convert. By the time you buy a gun and pay a smith to rebarrel it you might as well get an AR. As for me, I am about to graduate with a gunsmithing degree and it sounded like an interesting project- you know, one with lots of problems to overcome and weird machining set ups.

For the conversion I am using a 180 series Mini. The barrel is .560" in diameter- too small for a .30 caliber. The goal of the conversion is to make the rifle look stock, so I used the factory gas block and bored it out to .700". The Douglas barrel steps down to .750" for the op rod to clear (with minor modification) and then down to .700" at the gas block and forward. I have made several new gas port bushings and a little trial and error will help me decide which one to use.

The 300 Blackout idea has been around a long time- its basically the 300 Whisper wildcat. But since the 300 Whisper is a handloader's round based of the .221 Fireball without set standards, the folks over at AAC came up with solid dimensions based of the 5.56mm and got it SAAMI recognized. Versus a 7.62x29mm is very much a matter of preference. Prices for the Blackout are very reasonable- but don't expect to find any at the local Wal-Mart.

rsilvers
April 22, 2015, 03:03 PM
http://www.ruger.com/news/2015-04-22.html

precision_shooter
April 22, 2015, 03:26 PM
So much for being the only guy with a mini in 300 Blackout...

Tom Servo
April 22, 2015, 08:12 PM
Ruger's adoption of the load is going to do a lot for it going forward. They're also doing American bolt guns for the cartridge.

suncoastarmory
April 22, 2015, 08:41 PM
Ruger's adoption of the load is going to do a lot for it going forward. They're also doing American bolt guns for the cartridge.
Agreed. The more manufacturers producing 300blk the better.

reynolds357
April 22, 2015, 08:56 PM
I have a Rem 700 in Blackout. Biggest waste of money I have ever spent. I am going to re-barrel it into something. Will eventually decide what. The performance of the cartridge is thoroughly unimpressive.

Jayhawkhuntclub
April 22, 2015, 08:59 PM
Ruger's adoption of the load is going to do a lot for it going forward. They're also doing American bolt guns for the cartridge.

Absolutely! I don't want a mini. But I like to see more attention given to the 300 BO.

BTW, I think a mini-300 makes WAY MORE SENSE than a bolt gun in 300 BO. That to me is a head scratcher. I guess the exception would be if you are going to surpress it.

Tom Servo
April 22, 2015, 09:25 PM
That to me is a head scratcher.
It's a versatile cartridge. In supersonic loadings, it's enough for medium game, has low recoil, and is generally cheap to shoot.

tjh
April 22, 2015, 10:03 PM
Wish Ruger would bring back the mini 6.8 in spc II chamber and 11-1 twist .

TMD
April 23, 2015, 06:20 AM
I have a Rem 700 in Blackout. Biggest waste of money I have ever spent. I am going to re-barrel it into something. Will eventually decide what. The performance of the cartridge is thoroughly unimpressive.

As the owner of three rifles chambered in .300bo I would have to agree with this only if you are not into suppressors or if you're not a reloader.

Skans
April 23, 2015, 08:29 AM
wouldn't you like to have something that not one else has?

I get this, and when it comes to a Mini-14 I'd answer "yes". But, there's no reason to reinvent the wheel. I'd rather take the money spent on a caliber conversion and pay for some upgrades by Accuracy Systems.

reynolds357
April 23, 2015, 07:42 PM
I definitely handload. I am "into suppressors." The blackout is anemic enough supersonic. Sub-sonic = super anemic.

superspirit
April 23, 2015, 08:34 PM
Actually the bolt gun makes a lot of since. it allows handicapped people and beginning youth enough firepower to take dear without all the recoil of a larger weapon. but some people are just blind to the needs of others. if it aint a 300 ultra mag it aint worth having is it.:D

reynolds357
April 23, 2015, 09:00 PM
Well, I wonder why I like my .308 Win. so well? It aint no ultrey mag. I have a 300 Rum. I also have a .300 Win, and .300 WBY, and .300 MTM. Shoot my .308 more than all them combined.:rolleyes:

Brotherbadger
April 24, 2015, 03:35 AM
Agreed. The more manufacturers producing 300blk the better.

Yup. If enough manufacturers make them, hopefully the cost of ammo comes down. I'm a reloader, but it would be nice to be able to pick up a box anytime I want(without it costing a ton)

I personally don't be buying a mini 14, but it's a good sign for the future of the cartridge.

NooYawkuh
April 24, 2015, 05:31 PM
There's almost no reason for Ruger NOT to offer the Mini-14 in .300 BLK. It's gaining in popularity, the caliber is being offered in more loads by more ammo manufacturers and it's only a barrel change on the rifle. It will use the same bolt and magazines as the Mini-14.

I have a Mini-14 in stainless/synthetic but I've never been interested in the Mini-30 because I'm not interested in the cartridge. I can't have the Tactical in NY because of the muzzle device but if they offer the .300 BLK in the Ranch I'll consider it.

Although, I wonder how or if it will impact Mini-30 sales. Might be interesting.

tobnpr
April 26, 2015, 09:40 AM
Not sure why Ruger would do this, as it seems to me to compete directly with the Mini-30.

Ballistics for supersonic loads are, for most intents and purposes, akin to the 7.62 x 39.

You can shoot the 7.62 x 39 FAR cheaper than the blk, even when handloaded.

Had they issued this model threaded for a suppressor, might make more sense.

Otherwise, I'm really confused as to the "why" behind this when there's the Mini-30.

COSteve
April 26, 2015, 11:20 AM
[1.] Not sure why Ruger would do this, as it seems to me to compete directly with the Mini-30.

[2.] Ballistics for supersonic loads are, for most intents and purposes, akin to the 7.62 x 39.

[3.] You can shoot the 7.62 x 39 FAR cheaper than the blk, even when handloaded.

[4.] Had they issued this model threaded for a suppressor, might make more sense.

[5.] Otherwise, I'm really confused as to the "why" behind this when there's the Mini-30.In answer to the above:

1. Why not produce a rifle in a popular caliber, especially if all it takes is a different barrel, different sized gas bushing, and tweeks to already produced magazines?

2. So what if the ballistics are near identical? The spec for a 150grn 30-06 round is 2,820fps and guess what the spec is for a 150grn .308 round is? 2,820fps! That's not to say that they can't or aren't produced in different velocities and bullet weights, they do, but the fact is the .308 is in many ways just a shorter OAL 30-06 for many applications.

3. While cheap Russki junk ammo is plentiful now, decent accuracy, reloadable ammo is expensive. In addition, it's very expensive to reload 7.62x39 ammo as the bullet size is odd because, 1) reloadable brass (Boxer primed vs the steel cased Berden primed) is expensive and uncommon and, 2) it's based on the old British 303 round so the bullet diameter is .312" vs .308 for the much more common 30 cal bullets. Adding 300BO to one's stable if one already reloads other 30 cal calibers is simple, especially because the parent brass case is the common and plentiful .223/5.56.

4. It does make sense. Check out Ruger's website, their Tactical Rifle, model 5864 comes with a threaded on flash suppressor.

5. You confusion likely results in your lack of knowledge of marketing. If there is a demand, you want to fill it. Right now the cost of introducing the Mini-14 in 300 BO is very low and the demand for this caliber is very high. This is a no brainer.

skizzums
April 26, 2015, 12:24 PM
.300BLK mini? I love it. great Idea. peple that don't have a .300 blackout always assume it's the same or worse than x39, so what's the point. the point is....for me, RELOADING!!! forming my own brass from practcally free .223.Casting free bullets from 125-240grains. and all the great bullet selections on .308. I have had several x39 gun, they are cool and I understand people affections for them, but I sold them all, cheap ammo is only fun for so long when it's inaccurate. it's a boring round, expensive to reload for and a pain to get brass, very little god bullet selection. the 300BLK ha to be the most versatile cartridge I reload for, I can't think of anything else that handle such a wide spectrum of bullets weight/velocities. good job on mini.....a picture would be nice though

T. O'Heir
April 26, 2015, 02:43 PM
$1019.00 MSRP for a 16.5" barrel in a rifle with proven poor accuracy.
"...a rifle in a popular caliber..." So popular Remington only loads it seasonally. If you opt for a .300 BO, buy as much brass as you can and dies too.

agtman
April 26, 2015, 03:09 PM
The 300 BLK, ballistically, is virtually identical to the 30-30, which is, of course, God's first rifle cartridge for the American farm or ranch, ... or even your rural "truck gun."

Here, instead of a traditional platform, like a lever action or bolt stick, Ruger took the .300 BLK and chambered it in the non-AR semi-auto platform of the Mini-30.

Don't have a problem with that, and it might prove to be more accurate than the 7.62x39 Mini, if user reports on that rifle are to be believed.

Anyway, the real virtue of the .300 BLK is its performance out of short-barrelled ARs - typical sub-12" SBRs - and the cartridge, almost from its very inception, was intended to be shot suppressed.

SBRs and cans both require BATFE tax-stamps. So the intended set-up for the .300 BLK limits itself to users in permissive jurisdictions with the time and the funds to pursue the paperwork to get both stamps.



:cool:

rickyrick
April 27, 2015, 10:55 AM
If the cartridge were called .30 POODLE we wouldn't be having this conversation

If 30/30 was called .300 Outlaw or .30TAC


What about 7.62SOCOM

skizzums
April 27, 2015, 09:06 PM
it had a big pretty big following when it was called the "whisper", so I don't see your point

people like to have different caliber AR's, they are fun. I am almost finished with my 9mm AR which is ballistically superior to NOTHING, but I am going to love it just the same or more than a .223

rickyrick
April 27, 2015, 10:17 PM
Some things have a bigger following because of the name.

Nothing wrong with owning it, or many other calibers. Just saying, marketing and names have a significant influence.

Why else would they call bullets talon.

I've heard people say they don't like lowers because of the design of the roll mark.

Many people wouldn't buy the .300 Blackout if it had a benign name.

It would still have people that want it for it's niche.

Change the high point 9mm carbine to the .357Cobra and watch it's popularity grow

reynolds357
April 30, 2015, 06:37 PM
Skizzums, the whisper had almost no popularity. It was for the most part relegated to break action pistols. Almost no autoloaders or bolt actions were built in it.

bamaranger
May 1, 2015, 02:03 AM
I think someday the availability of cheap, x39 ammo will come to an end. But the utility of a .30 cal ctg of moderate performance cannot be denied. Add the near limitless supply of brass from .223, and the myriad of .30 cal slugs available in true .308 dia barrels, and the .300 BlackO starts to make sense.

smee78
May 1, 2015, 06:48 AM
You guys know this thread was started back in 2012 right?:confused:

rickyrick
May 1, 2015, 08:07 AM
It has a new development

COSteve
May 3, 2015, 03:21 PM
The 300 BLK, ballistically, is virtually identical to the 30-30, which is, of course, God's first rifle cartridge for the American farm or ranch, ... or even your rural "truck gun."I don't know what reloading book you're looking in but NEVER, NEVER rely upon it for anything because that statement is simply not true.

Compare Nosler's 300 AAC Blackout Load Data for 125grn and 140grn bullets HERE (http://www.nosler.com/nosler-load-data/300-aac-blackout/) with Hodgdon's 30-30 Load Data for 130grn and 140grn bullets HERE (http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle) and you'll note that the 30-30 is hundreds of fps faster than the 300 AAC Blackout. It's true that the 30-30 RN suffers down range performance falloff, but with a pointy bullet like the 300 AAC Blackout out of, say a Savage 99, the 30-30 is head and shoulders better than the 300 AAC Blackout.

In fact, ballistically speaking, the 357mag loaded with anything from 90grn to 180grn bullets have higher velocity numbers out of a rifle barrel than does the 300 AAC Blackout. The 300 AAC Blackout exists simply because it's a better subsonic, suppressed round out of a short barreled AR, all it requires is a barrel change on your AR, and handloaders can make it from 5.56 brass and common sized (but uncommon weights) .308 bullets.