Top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Either or: 10mmAuto in a Carbine or .300aac. Must Choose between these 2!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Either or: 10mmAuto in a Carbine or .300aac. Must Choose between these 2!

    You have to Choose a 10mmAuto Carbine for Hunting and Home Defense. Or, an AR in .300aac same purposes. You can only choose between these 2 rounds. Any AR or MSR manufacturer is fair game for the .300aac. So far as I know, only KRISS and Hi-point make a 10mmAuto Carbine. All popular loads for each round are fair game. GO!!!

  • sporting2245
    replied
    Along the same lines but I have two toys already for a new upper or lower.

    Goal. Hunting in a mountain climate 200 yards but most likely out to a hundred. The toys

    I own Kris's Vector in 9 but looking at a 10mm lower

    I own CMMG Banshee in.22 but looking at a 300 blk upper; if I go with 10mm Vector, then I'd just purchase a .556 upper. My idea is before warnings come out is .556 upper and mags in fde and 300 blk and mags in blk

    The uppers are relatively easy to get but the kriss lower is a bit pricey

    Again mountain hunting in the pines shooting fire lanes

    Thoughts? And best regards
    Last edited by sporting2245; 03-09-2019, 09:05 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jcarlin
    replied
    Originally posted by PigHunter View Post
    There's really no contest. Both are probably equally effective at subsonic velocities. However, the available bullet selection for supersonic loads for the 300 BLk are way more extensive than those available for the 10mm

    EDIT: Because of Treestand's answer, I did a little more research...

    The 10mm Auto has a maximum load pressure of 37,500 PSI vs 55,000 PSI for the .300 BLK. Therefore, the 10mm will never be able to get to the velocities you can achieve with the 300 BLK. That means more drop and less energy downrange when hunting to 300 yards.

    To make matters worse for the 10mm, the available bullets have much lower Ballistic Coefficients than those for the .300 BLK. Again this means more drop and less energy downrange.

    As far a longevity, I disagree with Treestand and think the 300 BLK is here to stay. That's mainly because it just takes a simple barrel change to convert your standard AR-15. Case in point, the next time you go to Walmart, take a look at the ammo and you will probably see more for the .300 BLK.
    I'm with you pighunter. I've got a slight excess of complete lowers and have been debating on a .300 upper to balance it all out... and then a suppressor...
    Thing is.. I don't really neeeed any of it. and for quieter practice my CMMG .22lr conversion does just nicely.

    Leave a comment:


  • Treestand
    replied
    Originally posted by PigHunter View Post
    There's really no contest. Both are probably equally effective at subsonic velocities. However, the available bullet selection for supersonic loads for the 300 BLk are way more extensive than those available for the 10mm

    EDIT: Because of Treestand's answer, I did a little more research...

    The 10mm Auto has a maximum load pressure of 37,500 PSI vs 55,000 PSI for the .300 BLK. Therefore, the 10mm will never be able to get to the velocities you can achieve with the 300 BLK. That means more drop and less energy downrange when hunting to 300 yards.

    To make matters worse for the 10mm, the available bullets have much lower Ballistic Coefficients than those for the .300 BLK. Again this means more drop and less energy downrange.

    As far a longevity, I disagree with Treestand and think the 300 BLK is here to stay. That's mainly because it just takes a simple barrel change to convert your standard AR-15. Case in point, the next time you go to Walmart, take a look at the ammo and you will probably see more for the .300 BLK.
    I would take a 10mm carbine then an AR for home defense, but that just Me;-))

    Leave a comment:


  • PigHunter
    replied
    Originally posted by FirstBubba View Post
    From a hunting standpoint, the .300 ACC, hands down. Other than over penetration in a crowded location, there is no comparing the two that the .300 ACC doesn't win in my book.

    The .300 ACC is touted as very good in a CQB setting within single and double digit yardage.
    The .223 Rem parent case of the .300 ACC has less powder capacity than the .30-30 Win.
    How can the .300 ACC be more than a semi auto .30-30 Win at best?
    This aimed at those claiming the .300 ACC is good to 300/400 yards on deer but sneer at the .30-30 Win as a 200 yard cartridge at best.
    A 160 round bucket of 120 grain Remington HP's is going for $90 so that should be low cost enough for practice and a source of reloadable brass.

    https://www.academy.com/shop/pdp/remingtonā„¢-umc-300-aac-blackout-120-grain-rifle-ammunition

    Leave a comment:


  • FirstBubba
    replied
    Originally posted by FirstBubba View Post
    From a hunting standpoint, the .300 ACC, hands down. Other than over penetration in a crowded location, there is no comparing the two that the .300 ACC doesn't win in my book.

    The .300 ACC is touted as very good in a CQB setting within single and double digit yardage.
    The .223 Rem parent case of the .300 ACC has less powder capacity than the .30-30 Win.
    How can the .300 ACC be more than a semi auto .30-30 Win at best?
    This aimed at those claiming the .300 ACC is good to 300/400 yards on deer but sneer at the .30-30 Win as a 200 yard cartridge at best.
    Met a young man several years back who was surprisingly proficient with his Marlin 336 in .30-30 Win.
    Three to four hundred yard shots were nothing to him.
    I know the .30-30 Win is capable of shots well beyond 200 yards, but few hunters (shooters?) are willing to burn the ammo to become proficient at extended ranges.
    I can't imagine at the current price of .300 ACC ammo, that one could afford enough practice to become proficient.
    Maybe I'm wrong, too!
    I DO have OFS, you know! LOL!

    Leave a comment:


  • PigHunter
    replied
    Originally posted by FirstBubba View Post
    From a hunting standpoint, the .300 ACC, hands down. Other than over penetration in a crowded location, there is no comparing the two that the .300 ACC doesn't win in my book.

    The .300 ACC is touted as very good in a CQB setting within single and double digit yardage.
    The .223 Rem parent case of the .300 ACC has less powder capacity than the .30-30 Win.
    How can the .300 ACC be more than a semi auto .30-30 Win at best?
    This aimed at those claiming the .300 ACC is good to 300/400 yards on deer but sneer at the .30-30 Win as a 200 yard cartridge at best.
    Bubba, looking at Barnes factory loads, a 110 grain can be launched at over 2300 fps which is equivalent to a 150 grain from the 30-30. The big difference is in ballistic coefficient if you have to use a blunt bullet in a lever action.

    Leave a comment:


  • Red Angus
    replied
    If I had to pick one today it would be the .300 simply because there isn't a 1cm carbine in my price range that I like, although I am counting on Ruger to change that in the near future.

    Leave a comment:


  • FirstBubba
    replied
    From a hunting standpoint, the .300 ACC, hands down. Other than over penetration in a crowded location, there is no comparing the two that the .300 ACC doesn't win in my book.

    The .300 ACC is touted as very good in a CQB setting within single and double digit yardage.
    The .223 Rem parent case of the .300 ACC has less powder capacity than the .30-30 Win.
    How can the .300 ACC be more than a semi auto .30-30 Win at best?
    This aimed at those claiming the .300 ACC is good to 300/400 yards on deer but sneer at the .30-30 Win as a 200 yard cartridge at best.

    Leave a comment:


  • PigHunter
    replied
    Originally posted by PigHunter View Post
    There's really no contest. Both are probably equally effective at subsonic velocities. However, the available bullet selection for supersonic loads for the 300 BLk are way more extensive than those available for the 10mm

    EDIT: Because of Treestand's answer, I did a little more research...

    The 10mm Auto has a maximum load pressure of 37,500 PSI vs 55,000 PSI for the .300 BLK. Therefore, the 10mm will never be able to get to the velocities you can achieve with the 300 BLK. That means more drop and less energy downrange when hunting to 300 yards.

    To make matters worse for the 10mm, the available bullets have much lower Ballistic Coefficients than those for the .300 BLK. Again this means more drop and less energy downrange.

    As far a longevity, I disagree with Treestand and think the 300 BLK is here to stay. That's mainly because it just takes a simple barrel change to convert your standard AR-15. Case in point, the next time you go to Walmart, take a look at the ammo and you will probably see more for the .300 BLK.
    Treestand, there are now millions of AR-15's in the USA. With a simple barrel change you can make those 5.56 rifles into a 300 BLK. Associated with that will be ammo and components. Think about it. Where is the larger market between the 10mm and 300 BLK? Thus, what do you think will ultimately be the larger seller? The average man or woman in the future will most likely have at least a 9mm for sidearm and an AR for long arm. The 300 Blackout makes more sense in an AR than does the 10mm.

    Leave a comment:


  • Treestand
    replied
    Originally posted by PigHunter View Post
    There's really no contest. Both are probably equally effective at subsonic velocities. However, the available bullet selection for supersonic loads for the 300 BLk are way more extensive than those available for the 10mm

    EDIT: Because of Treestand's answer, I did a little more research...

    The 10mm Auto has a maximum load pressure of 37,500 PSI vs 55,000 PSI for the .300 BLK. Therefore, the 10mm will never be able to get to the velocities you can achieve with the 300 BLK. That means more drop and less energy downrange when hunting to 300 yards.

    To make matters worse for the 10mm, the available bullets have much lower Ballistic Coefficients than those for the .300 BLK. Again this means more drop and less energy downrange.

    As far a longevity, I disagree with Treestand and think the 300 BLK is here to stay. That's mainly because it just takes a simple barrel change to convert your standard AR-15. Case in point, the next time you go to Walmart, take a look at the ammo and you will probably see more for the .300 BLK.
    PH, I'm not knocking the 300aac, but like every new caliber it's a POPULARITY Contest. That's what Firearms mfg's look at, Will It Sell??

    Leave a comment:


  • Treestand
    replied
    Bucky! Rumor has it Ruger's New Carbine in 9mm Will soon be in 10MM!
    I would go with the 10mm over the 300 black out Their are more 10mm Handguns then 300Bk-out Rifles, Ruger & Kimber just came out with a 10mm 1911. Their is more work being done to improve 10mm ammo!! I believe the 300aac will go the way of the S&W 40Cal.

    Leave a comment:


  • PigHunter
    replied
    There's really no contest. Both are probably equally effective at subsonic velocities. However, the available bullet selection for supersonic loads for the 300 BLk are way more extensive than those available for the 10mm

    EDIT: Because of Treestand's answer, I did a little more research...

    The 10mm Auto has a maximum load pressure of 37,500 PSI vs 55,000 PSI for the .300 BLK. Therefore, the 10mm will never be able to get to the velocities you can achieve with the 300 BLK. That means more drop and less energy downrange when hunting to 300 yards.

    To make matters worse for the 10mm, the available bullets have much lower Ballistic Coefficients than those for the .300 BLK. Again this means more drop and less energy downrange.

    As far a longevity, I disagree with Treestand and think the 300 BLK is here to stay. That's mainly because it just takes a simple barrel change to convert your standard AR-15. Case in point, the next time you go to Walmart, take a look at the ammo and you will probably see more for the .300 BLK.

    Leave a comment:

Welcome!

Collapse

Welcome to Outdoor Life's Answers section. Here you will find hunting, fishing, and survival tips from the editors of Outdoor Life, as well as recommendations from readers like yourself.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ for information on posting and navigating the forums.

And don't forget to check out the latest reviews on guns and outdoor gear on outdoorlife.com.

Right Rail 1 Ad

Collapse

Top Active Users

Collapse

There are no top active users.

Right Rail 2 Ad

Collapse

Latest Topics

Collapse

  • Who is in the photo?
    by 99explorer
    A man is looking at a picture of someone. His friend asks who it is.
    The man replies, "Brothers and sisters I have none, but that man's father...
    07-13-2019, 06:36 PM
  • Red white and blue.
    by 99explorer
    I find it ironic that the colors red, white and blue stand for freedom except when they are flashing behind you.
    And I just read somewhere that...
    07-06-2019, 01:39 PM
  • I see there's another new format change
    by jcarlin
    Maybe it'll come full circle and pick back up when it starts looking like a homey outdoors page of 10 years ago instead of every other place on the i...
    06-19-2019, 11:02 AM
  • TV fishing shows
    by MattM37
    What are / were some fishing shows you like? I loved Jerry McInnis's "Fishin' Hole" when I was a teenager. Bill Dance was kind of goofy...
    06-18-2019, 06:58 PM

Right Rail 3 Ad

Collapse

Footer Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X