.556 vs 300BLK

[Rookie]

DISCLAIMER: for the purpose of this discussion, cost and availability are not an issue. You have a billion rounds of each to choose from...

When does the 556 outshine the 300BLK? What are the pros and cons of each (keep in mind cost and availability are not a factor)?

.556 pros
Shoots flatter than 300BLK

.556 cons
Not deer legal in Indiana

300BLK pros
Able to shoot subsonic
Better for game hunting

300BLK cons

 

[Bigtanker]

.300 better with sub sonic loads with a can.

 

[Rookie]

That's one for 300BLK. Anyone else?

 

[Bigtanker]

Isn't the range on the 5.56 better than the .300?

 

[Rookie]

No idea...

 

[Rookie]

Question...

Is subsonic 300BLK as good as super sonic 556? I mean, a sling shot is subsonic, but it wouldn't be my first choice...

 

[Sniper 79]

Both are mid range. If cost is not an issue 300.

300 will eat up cover with the right bullet like an AK. In a defensive role I would feel better with the 300.

Be quiet and snipe time a good 223 is hard to beat. 223 shoots flatter. Think head shots. Then again a offered up 300 is a nice tool.

Like anything else IT DEPENDS ON THE MISSION

 

[Bigtanker]

A subsonic .300 is about equal to a .45 acp.

 

[Rookie]

I agree, it depends on the mission. Obviously, no one is going to shoot either round at targets a mile away. Could it be done? Sure, but not without some luck.

I'm trying to figure out if the 300BLK better than the 556 if you're comparing them to what they were designed for. Why or why not?

 

[OneBadV8]

Question...

Is subsonic 300BLK as good as super sonic 556? I mean, a sling shot is subsonic, but it wouldn't be my first choice...

When you shoot steal, Subsonic 300BLK seems to hit harder than supersonic 556

 

[Rookie]

For example, my local range won't allow anything above .556, so, for me, that's a big con towards 300BLK because it severely limits my ability to shoot. What I'm trying to figure out is, is 300BLK so much better that is overrides my biggest con? 300BLK is able to reliably shoot subsonic, so, for me, that's a huge pro, but not enough to outweigh the negative...

 

[Rookie]

When you shoot steal, Subsonic 300BLK seems to hit harder than supersonic 556

Is it noticeably different?

 

[Vamptepes]

Not sure how fast it's going but that is probably the weight and size your hearing smack it.

I've never shot 300 but what I understand is most people only like it for the subsonic with a can.

 

[iChokePeople]

I've never shot 300 but what I understand is most people only like it for the subsonic with a can.

Well... that's why it exists.

 

[One Shot One Kill]

If you hunt, supersonic .300 blk is better for large game, and legal in more states than 556 for deer.

 

[Rookie]

Well... that's why it exists.

I understand that's why it exists, but is that the only way it outshines .556?

 

[iChokePeople]

I understand that's why it exists, but is that the only way it outshines .556?

I think that's a tricky question, which is why I didn't try to answer it. For some, the heavier round would be considered a "pro", even outside the fact that it allows you to run an AR-type rifle with subsonic loads. For some purposes, heavier is better. Really, for ME, the only real advantage to 5.56/.223 is price and availability, but that's a pretty big one for most people. For some, the marginal weight diff when carrying 30 loaded mags might be a consideration. For ME, the only factor that would seem to make me go to 300blk is whether I really want to shoot hollywood quiet. If I did, that would dictate that I choose something else over 5.56, and whatever pros 5.56 might have are moot, because it will not do what I "need" it to do. But all of that is just MY $.02 -- others will have their own viewpoints that are totally valid for THEM.

 

[kludge]

Neither.

6.5 Grendel.

 

[Rookie]

Why?

 

[kludge]

Better ballistics than either 5.56 or 300BLK.