The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

TMD · March 19, 2015, 04:17 PM

Since you already have a can the .300 is a no brainer. Suppressed subsonics are a hoot and get plenty of looks at the range.
I current have two AR's chambered in .300 and am in the process of building a third. Also have put a few thousand rounds in this caliber down range over the past couple of years. What I do know is 8-9" barrel is ideal for heavy (208 & 220 grain) subsonic's suppressed and there is no advantage of going to a longer barrel. As for light supersonics (110 & 125 grain) you will loose about 250fps over a 16" barrel but can still achieve 2000 -2100 fps which is more than enough to drop hogs with Barns Black tips or Hornady V-Max bullets.
The other only negative I can think of is if you don't reload ammo can be a bit on the expensive side. If you do reload the cartridge has been out long enough that there is plenty of data for bullets ranging from 110 grain all the way up to 240 grain cast.

March 19, 2015, 04:17 PM	#19
TMD Senior Member Join Date: August 9, 2011 Posts: 1,293	Since you already have a can the .300 is a no brainer. Suppressed subsonics are a hoot and get plenty of looks at the range. I current have two AR's chambered in .300 and am in the process of building a third. Also have put a few thousand rounds in this caliber down range over the past couple of years. What I do know is 8-9" barrel is ideal for heavy (208 & 220 grain) subsonic's suppressed and there is no advantage of going to a longer barrel. As for light supersonics (110 & 125 grain) you will loose about 250fps over a 16" barrel but can still achieve 2000 -2100 fps which is more than enough to drop hogs with Barns Black tips or Hornady V-Max bullets. The other only negative I can think of is if you don't reload ammo can be a bit on the expensive side. If you do reload the cartridge has been out long enough that there is plenty of data for bullets ranging from 110 grain all the way up to 240 grain cast.