.300 AAC ? vs 7.62x39

TomkinsSP

TomkinsSP

Member
Joined
May 23, 2017
Messages
2,774
Reaction score
4,379
Location
E of America's Great Lake
Thank you in advance for your consideration and comments.
I am considering building a .300 AAC in an AR Carbine configuration to use as a defensive weapon on a homestead located thirty minutes from anywhere. There are less experienced people living here who do not handle the Remington 870 or SKS very well. I am looking for something a teen or more slightly built woman can handle. I know the 5.56 version of the AR handles straight line recoil very well. But to me the 5.56 seems better suited to military doctrine but less than ideal to defend a set point until the calvary arrives. I have handloaded 7.62 Russian Short for the SKS. (Love the Lee 312-155-2R gas checked lead on top of 2400.) Anyone reload for .300 AAC, not looking to get a can or SBR it or anything. Please don't suggest a .458 SOCOM ;-), and I am not a fan of AKs.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
I don't own one personally, but have talked with a few folks that had them at our range and they loved it. And before you state that you aren't interested in a can, you still might want to consider one down the road if you decide to go with a Blackout gun. From what I saw (both guys had AR based Blackouts), they are light recoiling and with subsonic heavy bullets with a can they are extremely quiet. With lighter bullets and a can they had the supersonic crack but were still pretty quiet when run through a can. I don't remember if the guys shot anything without their can on the gun (it's been a year or more). If 5.56 don't float your boat, the Blackout might just fit the bill for you.
 
300 has similar ballistics to x39 but it's made for use with suppressors. That's where it shines

Otherwise there isn't much of an advantage one vs the other. AR mags....sure but AK mags aren't expensive. Recoil will be relative. Some may hate it others may not mind.

I wouldn't buy a gun based on my neighbors
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
The 7.62x39 does not feed well through a AR15 unless it is specifically designed for it. It has to do with the extreme taper of the case as much as anything. If you don't want a can, forget about the .300 Blackout. Ballistically, it is worse than the Russian.

I don't understand your dislike of the 5.56 AR. A couple of 30rd mags full of hard bullets like Barnes or any other deer worthy bullet would work well while waiting for the cavalry. A 1-4 scope with a illuminated reticle would be perfect for non-gun types.
 
SMSgt said:
Range is a definite consideration.
Click to expand...

Agreed, it's no .30-06. I thought of the SKS as being equivelent to an autoloading .30-30. Interestingly my favorite 7.62x39 load is a 155gr lead bullet over the exact same amount of 2400 as my favorite 158gr lead bullet in .357 magnum. Probably very similar out of SKS/18" Lever.

Anyway range is down the list for me as we have enough tree cover I would be unlikley to have a shot exceed 100yds. More likley half that.
 
Arik said:
300 has similar ballistics to x39 but it's made for use with suppressors. That's where it shines.
Otherwise there isn't much of an advantage one vs the other. AR mags....sure but AK mags aren't expensive. Recoil will be relative. Some may hate it others may not mind.

I wouldn't buy a gun based on my neighbors
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Here is my thought process...
With .300 a 30 round AR magazine holds 30 rounds, a 40, 40, etc.. AR parts are cheap and plentiful. It seems like I could build a carbine length gas system .300 and the only non standard part would be the barrel. I likley have accumulated parts for next to nothing to build one (less that barrel). Taper case x39 can't make it up an AR mag well reliably. (I bought the aftermath of a x39 AR the builder went all Jimi Hendrix on after too many jams.) Someone makes highly modified AR lowers that take AK mags. But while the mags are cheap, that specialty lower is not. Plus bolts have a habit of coming apart. Recoil is relative, but will be less than buckshot in a 870 or the SKS.
 
MichiganScott said:
The 7.62x39 does not feed well through a AR15 unless it is specifically designed for it. It has to do with the extreme taper of the case as much as anything. If you don't want a can, forget about the .300 Blackout. Ballistically, it is worse than the Russian.

I don't understand your dislike of the 5.56 AR. A couple of 30rd mags full of hard bullets like Barnes or any other deer worthy bullet would work well while waiting for the cavalry. A 1-4 scope with a illuminated reticle would be perfect for non-gun types.
Click to expand...

I don't dislike the 5.56 AR. And I may be wrong here, but I thought the primary wounding mechanism on the 5.56 was yaw induced disintigration. Works great in a 20" rifle barrel, especially with trained riflemen. Shorter barrels or lighter loads may decrease velocity below the critical threshold. I know those 30 cal 150-160 grain loads do terminal damage at much lower velocities. Terrain has something to do with it as well. With tree cover I doubt I would be engaging a target at much range. They aren't so much non-gun types as M22/32 or Marlin 60 types who haven't seen what I have seen, and think 'that stuff' only happens in movies. Like the 1-4 IR suggestion, thanks.
 
Still.... wouldn't buy based on neighbors. Also wouldn't build since cheap parts are cheap for a reason..... same reason x 39 didn't work in an AR. Cheap = cheap.

Forgetting all that AR works fine with 556 and ammo is plentiful. If I can stash thousands of rounds for under $300/1000rnds I would but since I can't and since I don't have a suppressor I have no interest in 300blk. My AKs are accurate, reliable and ammo is stacked by the thousands without the need to reload

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
I have an upper in both calibers. It's a tough call for the application described. Both have their +/-.
Here is my input based on MY experience only:

The 300 has slightly less recoil and bark than the 7.62x39 in the 127/147 gr I shoot. It has notably more than the 5.56 but it's not bad. I don't know if your clients would be OK with it.

The 300 can be more expensive to feed (as compared to the 5.56 and 7.62). This can inhibit regular proficiency/practice.

The 300 uses EVERYTHING from the 5.56 parts bin but the barrel. This makes it cheap to build and allows conversion to 5.56 if the experiment doesn't work out.


The 7.62x39 enjoys cheap and common ammo.
Can take some work to get them to feed 100%. 7.62 Ar's have a reliability reputation for a reason.
It can be finicky with mags . Especially as those those mags get higher in capacity. Mags are unique and require an investment . (FWIW, I read that only ASC mags should be counted on. I use them in 10 rnd only).
Soft point / steel cased ammo should be avoided for reliability. You need to find ammo it likes and buy allot of (and only) it.
More recoil than the 300 and 5.56 in my experience.


Personally, I would stick with the 5.65 flavor and be done with it. Low recoil, cheap to feed, ammo is everywhere, flat shooting, reliable and plenty powerful to stop most critters of man sized and below.
 
Last edited:
TomkinsSP said:
And I may be wrong here, but I thought the primary wounding mechanism on the 5.56 was yaw induced disintigration. Works great in a 20" rifle barrel, especially with trained riflemen. Shorter barrels or lighter loads may decrease velocity below the critical threshold.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct, but as a civilian you are not forced to use FMJ ammunition. You can use whatever you want. That is why I suggest deer capable ammunition whenever someone considers an AR for self defense. Even when fired from a 16" barrel most will expand well past any distance that would be justifiable in a court of law.

As an aside, I'm 6-3 and my wife barely make 5 ft. Because of the collapsible stock on M4 style carbines and the shorter barrel, we can shoot the same rifle.
 
MichiganScott said:
Absolutely correct, but as a civilian you are not forced to use FMJ ammunition. You can use whatever you want. That is why I suggest deer capable ammunition whenever someone considers an AR for self defense. Even when fired from a 16" barrel most will expand well past any distance that would be justifiable in a court of law.

As an aside, I'm 6-3 and my wife barely make 5 ft. Because of the collapsible stock on M4 style carbines and the shorter barrel, we can shoot the same rifle.
Click to expand...

Great points. Definitly putting a CTR on a six stop tube, Daughter-in-law isn't growing but grandson is. Going with a carbine lenth gas system so I can just swap the barrel if .300 doesn't live up to expectations.
 
Wee Hooker said:
I have an upper in both calibers. It's a tough call for the application described. Both have their +/-.
Here is my input based on MY experience only:

The 300 has slightly less recoil and bark than the 7.62x39 in the 127/147 gr I shoot. It has notably more than the 5.56 but it's not bad. I don't know if your clients would be OK with it.

The 300 can be more expensive to feed (as compared to the 5.56 and 7.62). This can inhibit regular proficiency/practice.

The 300 uses EVERYTHING from the 5.56 parts bin but the barrel. This makes it cheap to build and allows conversion to 5.56 if the experiment doesn't work out.


The 7.62x39 enjoys cheap and common ammo.
Can take some work to get them to feed 100%. 7.62 Ar's have a reliability reputation for a reason.
It can be finicky with mags . Especially as those those mags get higher in capacity. Mags are unique and require an investment . (FWIW, I read that only ASC mags should be counted on. I use them in 10 rnd only).
Soft point / steel cased ammo should be avoided for reliability. You need to find ammo it likes and buy allot of (and only) it.
More recoil than the 300 and 5.56 in my experience.


Personally, I would stick with the 5.65 flavor and be done with it. Low recoil, cheap to feed, ammo is everywhere, flat shooting, reliable and plenty powerful to stop most critters of man sized and below.
Click to expand...

I probably wasn't clear on my IP, The reason I am considering .300 is from looking at load data it appears to be a straight wall (reliable in AR mags) 5.56 based (so you use a tried and true AR bolt & carrier (eliminating sheared lugs) copy of 7.62x39. I have loaded lots of that caliber, and like shooting a mid range (155 to 158 depeding on alloy used) gas checked lead 2R projectile in an old SKS. ( Used to live in a magazine ban jurisdiction.) What I want to do is duplicate that load in a different platform.
 
Arik said:
Still.... wouldn't buy based on neighbors. Also wouldn't build since cheap parts are cheap for a reason..... same reason x 39 didn't work in an AR. Cheap = cheap.

Forgetting all that AR works fine with 556 and ammo is plentiful. If I can stash thousands of rounds for under $300/1000rnds I would but since I can't and since I don't have a suppressor I have no interest in 300blk. My AKs are accurate, reliable and ammo is stacked by the thousands without the need to reload

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I am glad you like your AKs, getting shot at by gang-bangers armed with them may have something to do with my not caring for them. (Experience/practice will get you past the lack of a bolt stop and the unique magazine latching.) Guy here has a Sagia in each flavor, makes custom wood hardware for them, nice. I was.really just looking to see if anyone had experience handloading the .300. I handload 7.62x39, great bullets are 0.12 in quantity, primers 0.025, powder 0.035. Great rounds (That wont prematurly age my bore) for 18 cents a pop. I'm old I have brass a progressive and time to play with it.
 
So if you got shot at by an AR you'd drop the idea of having an AR? No different the anti gun people blaming the gun!

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
I have adopted the .357 lever rifle as my anybody-any situation rifle; woman-kid, whoever. I load it with hard cast RNFP led bullets, and I like nickel cases, as they process through the gun better than plain brass. Rifles typically hold 10 rounds-no magazines-top up any time, and have practically no recoil as compared to .44 mag lever guns that kick hard enough to induce flinch. Companion revolvers in the same caliber are a good back up, and only one kind of interchangeable ammo is needed. Caution should be taken when loading these rounds, as a 16 inch barrel can increase velocity by as much as 40%. I prefer my earlier Winchester, but other reliable, reasonably priced alternatives are available. Easy to shoot-load, and operate. Light weight and reduced overall length. Red dot sights are available.
 
A 300 Blackout in any subsonic loading has the same or less energy as a 45 ACP. For a light carbine, easy to handle for women or teens try a Marlin Camp 45. Proven ammo and reloads. Uses standard 1911 mags, and easy to put optics or red dots on. I have mine 2.5" high at 50 yards, easily good to go at 100 yards.

Too bad they can't use the SKS.

Another alternative is a M-1 Carbine with Winchester 110gr. soft hollow points. (about like a 357 lever gun.)

Ivan
 
My choice in a similar situation would be a .30 Carbine over any AK, AR, or SKS. However, I already have a couple of those, and finding one of the originals at a reasonable price is difficult today. Lightweight, high magazine capacity, low recoil, reliable, not too noisy, and it's no trick to hit a man-sized target out to 200 yards. Expanding bullet ammo would be preferable to GI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BC38
Loading 7.62x39 Russian
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
3K
alwslate
A
biku324
Does Anyone Have Old Reloder 12 Data for 7.62x39?
Replies
0
Views
259
biku324
biku324
I
300 Norma Mag
Replies
5
Views
419
DHernandez
D
M
7.62x39 Handload Suggestions? (Bolt action)
Replies
12
Views
712
Mike SC Hunter
M
S
300 Grain Swift A-Frame & .44 Rem Mag
Replies
5
Views
519
Ivan the Butcher
I

Latest posts

Back
Top