Ultra short barrel review NEW UPDATE: Third article page 5

Discussion about rifles in 300 AAC BLACKOUT (7.62x35mm), hosted by the creator of the cartridge.

Moderators: gds, bakerjw, renegade

Which ultra-short 300 BLK barrel would you prefer?

V7 6.5"
4
40%
R2B 6"
2
20%
Veritas Tactical 5"
3
30%
Modern Outfitters 6"
1
10%
 
Total votes: 10

User avatar
dellet
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 6967
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Ultra short barrel review

Post by dellet »

withoutremorse42 wrote:The response from Tim at SAS was to stay under 20K and/or 6" and above.

Again, I appreciate the education! That would have been an expensive mistake
A few firings, or occasional use you're probably OK.

Continued use, a mag dump or two, and it's toast.

The other thing to be aware of is heat. Shorter barrels will heat up the suppressor faster. Most generally give 800 degrees as a limit with possible damage at 1000.

Hate to see anyone do a $1000 mag dump.

Look forward to the actual results.
300 Blackout, not just for sub-sonics.
2manyToys
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:07 pm

Re: Ultra short barrel review

Post by 2manyToys »

And to add to dellet's comments, higher muzzle pressure equates to higher noise levels, reducing a suppressor's effectiveness.
10Driver
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 128
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 11:33 am

Re: Ultra short barrel review

Post by 10Driver »

Okay, I’ve assembled everything and still waiting to hear some feedback on these barrels before I commit to one.

Any updates from the “scheduled” 10-days ago :mrgreen: range trip?
hardcase
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1020
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: Ultra short barrel review

Post by hardcase »

Might find this useful. http://www.elcaudio.com/tablesforweb.pdf

I use to have a reference to a sound meter like manufacturers are trying to get used for apples-to-apples comparison and the distance in front of and to the side for db measurements. The cheap db instruments and cell phone apps are pretty useless. A good db instrument is in the $2,000.00 range. My desktop is out of service and have to use an I-pad hotspot to my cell phone and don't have access to saved information.
withoutremorse42
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:05 pm

Re: Ultra short barrel review

Post by withoutremorse42 »

10Driver wrote:Okay, I’ve assembled everything and still waiting to hear some feedback on these barrels before I commit to one.

Any updates from the “scheduled” 10-days ago :mrgreen: range trip?
Tried to post while at Triggrcon, mobile login kept kicking me off :roll:

Range day was cancelled ~95 degrees. Just got back from Triggrcon, will make it happen this week
[url=http://militarysignatures.com][img]http://militarysignatures.com/signatures/member11084.png[/img][/url]
withoutremorse42
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:05 pm

Re: Ultra short barrel review

Post by withoutremorse42 »

first range day complete. quiuck info dump, details will be in the article

at 50 yards, 4x optic, standard weight carbine buffer 3 ammo types, barnes 110 ttsx, federal copper 120 gr, fiocchi 220gr subs

R2B shot 1.3" to 2.3" groups (the 2.3" had a called flyer, would have pushed it to 3.78". I shanked it totally)

V7 shot .85" to 2.4" groups. the .85 had a called flyer, out to 1.83 if included. next best group was 1.25"

r2b preferred the federal copper for 1.3" and 1.8" groups

v7 likewise posted best groups with federal, .85" and 1.25"

r2b didnt cycle subs without can
v7 cycled subs but didnt lock last round

subs were the worst groups for both guns, by a good margin. in the article I may tally totaly for supers and subs seperately.

will try to get velocity data posted tomorrow. shot barnes rangeAR through chrono as well, not enough on hand for groups
Last edited by withoutremorse42 on Thu Aug 02, 2018 11:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[url=http://militarysignatures.com][img]http://militarysignatures.com/signatures/member11084.png[/img][/url]
withoutremorse42
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:05 pm

Re: Ultra short barrel review

Post by withoutremorse42 »

Wanted to shoot unsuppressed at first to check keyholing, then had suppressor mount issues (my fault) so only ran a couple rounds suppressed with the V7. R2B will get run suppressed with subs next range trip once the veritas/slr and mc6-sd arrive.

Also, ballistic advantage and another company released a 6" and 5.9" barrel respectively while I was at triggrcon. I cant afford to buy equal ammo for more barrels, but if I can source some from manufactures for T&E I'll try to get those barrels up too.
[url=http://militarysignatures.com][img]http://militarysignatures.com/signatures/member11084.png[/img][/url]
10Driver
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 128
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 11:33 am

Re: Ultra short barrel review

Post by 10Driver »

Thanks for the heads up on the new barrels. I see the 6” BA version, but is this the 5.9” one you mentioned?

https://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx ... oupid=6485


https://specialopstactical.com/product/ ... th-barrel/


It’s more than just another barrel. Sounds like there’s changes to how they do the gas port and possibly the tube and block. Also, I wonder what their definition of “mil-spec” buffer system means. Sounds like they may not want the Maxim PDW because of its proprietary buffer and spring.

I’m still leaning towards the 7” X-caliber , The SLR/Veritas 5” or the Ballistic Advantage 6” barrel. Based on that very old velocity versus barrel length chart, it looks like you give up a pretty good chunk of velocity for each inch below 9” so I’m looking forward to your chronograph numbers on these barrels.
withoutremorse42
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:05 pm

Re: Ultra short barrel review

Post by withoutremorse42 »

yeah that spec ops tactical barrel was the one I was mentioning, i had an email announcement but havent read the specs yet.

velocity data:
barnes rangeAR 90gr
v7 2154, 2164, 2195, 2111, 2207
r2b 2116, 2070, 2110, 2116

barnes ttsx 110gr
v7 1975, 1961, 1972, 1978, 2001
r2b 1917, 1916, 1937, 1920, 1925

Federal copper 120gr
v7 1779, 1799, 1798, 1792, 1802
r2b 1735, 1739, 1723, 1732, 1748

fiocchi 220gr
v7 797, 798, 828, 806, 824 cycled unsuppressed, no lock back
r2b 838, 828, 849, 822, 838, did not cycle unsuppressed
[url=http://militarysignatures.com][img]http://militarysignatures.com/signatures/member11084.png[/img][/url]
User avatar
dellet
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 6967
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Ultra short barrel review

Post by dellet »

withoutremorse42 wrote:
yeah that spec ops tactical barrel was the one I was mentioning, i had an email announcement but havent read the specs yet.

velocity data:
barnes rangeAR 90gr
v7 2154, 2164, 2195, 2111, 2207
r2b 2116, 2070, 2110, 2116

barnes ttsx 110gr
v7 1975, 1961, 1972, 1978, 2001
r2b 1917, 1916, 1937, 1920, 1925

Federal copper 120gr
v7 1779, 1799, 1798, 1792, 1802
r2b 1735, 1739, 1723, 1732, 1748

fiocchi 220gr
v7 797, 798, 828, 806, 824 cycled unsuppressed, no lock back
r2b 838, 828, 849, 822, 838, did not cycle unsuppressed
Based on those numbers, there will a fair amount of factory subs that will not work as designed. Hand loads can compensate, but some faster powders may have pressure problems when you get the velocity up 150 fps. to the mid/high 900's

Supers won't be as bad, but again bullet choice will be lowered.

Look forward to some more numbers.
300 Blackout, not just for sub-sonics.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 131 guests