NO, from what I have seen it is not even a 75 yd. deer killer.

Will it kill a deer? Yes

Should you expect good results? No

Is it irresponsible? Yes

With good bullet placement, yes.

No. But a guy i know says they are developing better ammo.

Stupid!

No...

300blk subsonic is worthless for hunting. There are some high end bullet mfg that claim subsonic lethality with their $4/per bullet but I will just kill stuff with my regular cheap supersonic 6.5 bullets and not have to try and hit something with the mortar trajectory subs.

This.

.300BO subs are good ONLY for shooting hogs up close. IMO.

Or people if you are in close quarters combat.

I have been thinking about getting a 300 BLK or swapping a bolt action rifle for one. How is the 300 BLK for a brush gun? I may just stick to a . 223.

.300BO supersonics are very decent. Good for close range shots on moderate sized deer, similar to a 7.62x39, IMO. But with improved bullet performance.

It's a good cartridge, within it's capabilities.

What's the ballistics?

Todd Huey on Youtube's LoneStar Boars has some great videos showing penetration and expansion of super vs subsonic 300blk. Check those out and report back.

The 300 Black Out is a great Texas hunting cartridge, IMO. I have been using it almost exclusively for the last 4 or 5 years. I hunt with the 125 grain full power loads, 125 SST and 125 Ballistic Tip. They provide perfect mushroom shaped expansion, and good penetration. I get pass throughs on all deer. Big pigs will catch the bullet. I've had customers send me pictures of recovered bullets that have worked perfectly.

As far as subsonics, most use them less than 100 yards, due to drop. With a 100 yard zero on a sub, you will be about 3.5" high at 50, 12"-15" low at 150 yards, and about 3 feet low at 200. Most shooters/hunters can not account for the exact drop during field conditions with a round that drops this much. A 200 yard subsonic drop is about equal to a 500 yard shot with a common 270 Win and 130 grain bullet. We have plinked with subs out to 500 and 600 yards, but that's at the range with multiple rounds and adjustments. The subs simply aren't consistent enough to make those kinds of shots reliably in a 300 blk out.

Nice video but, IMO you haven't proved anything until you have consistently DRT'd deer with it at 200 yards.

And knowing all the weapons you have to hunt deer with my question is why?

I hunt with the 125 grain full power loads, 125 SST and 125 Ballistic Tip. They provide perfect mushroom shaped expansion, and good penetration. I get pass throughs on all deer. Big pigs will catch the bullet. I've had customers send me pictures of recovered bullets that have worked perfectly.

Good to know. I have been using the 110gn Nosler Varmageddons with great results on deer and feral dogs. Also have a box of the Sierra 135gn Varminter Hp's (Sierra Part # 2124) when I have some time to fiddle, but they are on the back burner with how well the Nosler 110's shoot. Running Lil Gun to light the fires. [/u]

.300 blackout is a lousy round PERIOD

For close quarter combat in Afghanistan, Im sure its GREAT! But for hunting, its a lousy round, when compared to other cartridges. Doesn't hold a candle to a .243, much less a .270 or .308

.300 blackout - 115 gr UMC 2,295 ft/s (700 m/s) 1,344 ft·lbf (1,822 J)

.308 - 125 gr (8 g) Spitzer 3,100 ft/s (940 m/s) 2,668 ft·lbf (3,617 J)

308 has twice the energy and almost 1,000 more fps with a heavier bullet. My point being, why even screw with it when you can get a .308?

The trend now seems to be " what's the lowest power round I can kill a deer with"


Complete 180 from 30 years ago

EXACTLY! What is the deal? When I was a kid it was either man up to the .243 or 30-06 or don't hunt. Grow some shoulders....

But all the rounds you speak of will not fit in an AR-15. And if a round is great for killing 2 legged critters, why wouldn't it work for the 4 legged one's? I have been hunting with a Rem 700 in 300 blk out for about 3 or 4 years now. I'm pushing a 125 grain bullet at 2300+ in a suppressed 16" barrel. Low recoil, great bullet performance, easy to handle, kills crap great. It has killed as effective as any 270 or other standard cartridge I've shot. Plus, the low recoil makes it VERY easy to shoot, and you don't get the flinch a lot of shooters get when shooting too big of a gun. You don't need a big magnum to kill a deer or pig for Texas hunting.

Not saying it was right, but in most of the camps I hunted in as a kid, a .243 was regarded as a ladies caliber.

I am a subscriber to the "use enough gun" philosophy

Very true. That's why I use a 223.

Now you done it

When I was growing up, I was told that if you couldn't handle the recoil of an actual deer hunting round, it helps to put kerosene around the outsides of your shoes. That keeps the sugar ants from crawling up your legs and biting you in the butt.

Pretty much anything will take down a deer, even a Kia.
So yeah, you can kill a deer with a 300BO.

They are sooo illusive around here, a 16oz claw-hammer would work....

If you want a low recoiling round with the trajectory of a thrown rock, what's wrong with the .357, .44 special, 44-40, 38-40 or 25-35?

My 300blkout bolt is all i hunt deer with now. Usi g barnes tripleshok i had complete passthru and deer ran 30yds blew out both ribs and the lungs looked like a bomb went off. Not much different results than my 7 mag. But not shooting subs at deer still... might as well try and head shoot it while your at it

Hell no. The retained energy at 200 yards is pathetic.

Same bullet, 220 ELD X, from a 300 WinMag....

I agree with most its silly to think about or attempt for no reason... but on the other hand it retains a large amount of its velocity and energy down range. Essentially it will kill anything at 200 yards equally as well as it did at the muzzle... as long as you can put the bullet where you need it to go. Not something I would do, but I bet the experienced long range shooters here could pull it off with ease if they put their minds to it.

I have to ask why? Why shoot a $4 per round subsonic load when you can do the same with at least a half dozen different air rifles for .25$ a round. Actually, probably should be illegal if air rifles are prohibited ? There really is very little difference.

Yea you're right, it generally was regarded as a ladies and kid caliber. Now days people want to use .223 for everything, must be a millennial thing.

I was raised to hunt a certain way, with making an ethical kill and not wounding the animal being priority #1. A bruised shoulder on me is better than a deer running around with an infected wound or worse.

I am not a millennial and I use a 223. I haven't had a deer running around with any infections probably since this millennial thing started. I don't get bruised shoulders so I am not scared of my rifle so I don't make bad shots like a lot of folks that think they need a big rifle do.

Do they make a "Indian Popcorn"?

If you're a man and you can't handle the recoil of a .243 at the least, then you are not man enough to hunt in my opinion. I'm sure you're a real great shot, congrats. But don't act like using a .223 is the norm, or is some kind of great hunting round...because its not. It's a small, flat shooting but weak round. That's a fact, Jack. It has wounded WAY more animals and/or resulted in lost animals than not.

Here you go guys. Now this is a stock gun but the energy created is very similar to what is being discussed.

Not that you feel it when hunting but I always found the push from a .270 or something similar to be sort of satisfying

You just called a lot of MEN that I respect greatly not man enough to hunt. The caliber one uses to hunt in no way bears on what kind of MAN they are.

My grandfather never shot more than a 243 and killed many deer with far less. I know many people who are far from millennials that use 22 hornets 222's and 223's for deer rifles. To make that statement lacks thought.

So since you seem to know everything about hunting. Them bow hunters must really be wimps if they can't even handle the recoil of a 22.

Cool. Still doesn't mean I respect the way they hunt. Using a 22 hornet on a deer is idiotic and selfish, same goes for a .223. Let me rephrase that, If you're a man and can't handle the recoil of a .243 at the least, I do not respect your hunting skills. Now if you're a woman or child, that's a different story, but in my opinion you still shouldn't use anything less than a .243 on a deer, its unethical.

Side Rant: WHY IN GODS WORLD, Would someone use a .22 hornet on a deer? Explain this to me? Anytime I hear someone using something like this on a deer, I automatically think they are idiots. There's always that guy in camp that think's he is Davy Crocket gonna prove everone how badass he is with his .22 hornet, makes me think they aren't very smart to be honest.



This is not good logic. Obviously I'm not talking about bow hunters.

There are many forms of hunting. I know a lot of very manly men who hunt deer for meat with .222's.

A lot of guys, especially old timers, pot hunt with .22 center fires, including the .22 hornet


I've seen .22 centerfires fill up a lot of freezers, but never have I seen them fill up a wall, however

Sounds like Budward wants everyone to start using a 50bmg on deer if they can handle the recoil.... haha if it is ok for a kid to shoot a certain round, why is it not ok for a grown man? .223 is fine for deer with the right round and shot placement. It makes me wonder where all the people that only wounded these deer with a .223 are putting the shots??? like in the hind quarters or neck shots or what... a lung/vital shot will kill the deer within minutes unless they are using FMJ (which is worse than bad shot placement)

and for the air rifle, a friend of mine and his wife hunted an Asiatic water buffalo with an air rifle and she holds the record for it. it shoots a 50cal projectile over 1000fps and got 12" of penetration on the animals vitals. not any different than a bow, but like a bow shot placement is key

In my youth I knew a lot of tough, hard, old timers that grew up during the depression and killed many a deer with a 22. They would chuckle at the mere suggestion that a real man hunts with a lot of lead. And they'd have a good laugh about it while kicking your azz.

The oft quoted noble mantra of "wounding is cruel and irresposible, killing your quarry matters most" had to have been birthed in the mind of a closet snowflake with a peculiar fixation on the movie "Men who stare at Goats".

Unfortunately, I haven't mastered the art of killing an animal without wounding it first.

The logic isn't flawed. Obviously you aren't talking about bowhunters, or anything else for that matter that refutes the premise of your argument or exposes the hypocrisy of it.

Narrowmindedness and tunnel vision more often than not are the result of ignorance and/or inexperience. I'd be willing to bet that as a young man your experiences as a hunter and the mentors you hunted with had a narrowly defined perspective of hunting. Had you watched an elderly man consistently harvest a limit of quail by shooting the heads off the birds with a 22. or using that same 22 to harvest deer year after year, using the same method each time and passing on a shot when it wasnt feasable, would have opened your eyes and mind to the fact that learning to use the tools at your disposal and overcoming their limitations is a good lesson in self sufficiency,

Your way isnt the only way, to lable one "idiotic" for not conforming to your ideology is hypocrisy at its worst.

Closet snowflakes. They out themselves eventually.

I'm not picking a side, but comparing the killing power of a bow and a firearm are two totally different things.

a 2" broadhead cut thru the heart or lungs is very, very deadly. completely apples and oranges.


Secondly, I've killed my share of deer and pigs with a .22-250 and a .223. but they make bigger calibers for a reason.

if a .22 LR or .22 hornet was all a person needed then they would have stopped production right there.



a man I know real well has killed a pile of deer with his .22 hornet. he has a small acreage tract in the hill country and baits them up to 30-50 yards and heart shoots them, doesent have a problem. they run off a ways and he finds them


now, based on that logic, a .22 hornet is a fine deer gun. but bring him out of that scenario he is going to be severely handicapped compared to larger caliber rounds.


I think that's the point of the story.


These threads always get derailed with people defending the use of small caliber firearms by touting stories of their grandfathers uncles cousin who fed his family for 50 years with a .222 but when it comes down to it, that guy hunted the same property, same scenario year after year and wasn't upset to let a deer get away if he wasn't presented a perfect shot. it worked for him in certain scenarios. it would not work in the majority.


I've seen guys hauling skidloaders with ford rangers but that doesent' make it acceptable nor recommended

Never fails.

We can't keep a discussion on topic without someone being criticized because they have to haul their skidloader with a wimpy Ranger instead of a manly truck like an F350. blah, blah, blah, Skidloader this, skidloader that, my skidloader cost more than your skidloader, my skidloander is bigger than your skidloader. And twice as long. Your GF said my skidloader can fill a hole twice as big as yours. And runs a LOT longer without running out of gas......

It's the same snobby attitude I get from the guys on my team at our sporting clays tournaments. They make a big show of opening their guncases and pulling out their $80k Kreighoffs and showing it off like its a sexy trophy wife. My Stoeger Coach gun shoots justas good as their fancy high dollar shotguns. If those jerks would stop avoiding me at the stands like they don't know me and stop running off the instant their done shooting a stage, they'd see for themselves how good it is. Snobs.

The comment of derailed threads with stories of old timers hunting using outdated methods of limited utility to hunt game, when other options exist, is a bit selfserving since the discussion diverged from the question that the OP asked which was "Is the 300BLK Subsonic a 200 yard Deer Killer? That was the topic of the OP's question, not "are larger calibers more effective" as you stated. And the main point of comparison betwen old/outdated versus new/better was meant to shed light on the of becoming proficient in the use of the tools you use to hunt with, their strengths and limitations, and the importance of shot placement. There are much better choices than a 22 for hunting deer, but it's an acceptable choice for harvesting deer when used where and when it's most effective

I have really learned a lot from reading your posts. Then, every once in a while you pop out with posts like that one - as if you are a total tacticool newbie who doesn't know the difference in hunting applications and combat applications.

Lots of conflating battle gear, sniper gear, target punching gear and a bunch of other stuff in attempts to shoehorn every tacticool weapon into a good hunting tool these days. Too much trying to fit square pegs into round holes IMO. I know personally of 3 deer hit and lost using a .300 BO because Dads thought their kids couldn't handle a cannon like a .243. Now it appears adults can't either...

i heard down at the range today that the .300 blkout is the best choice for hunting Bigfoot because it's less likely to pass thru and hit the loch less monster

The 300blk is so underpowered I use mine to change the channel on the TV and flip the light switches on and off without having to leave my lazyboy.


.

A .300 blk out is what I use when I want to pinch my wife's butt from across the room

I'll go ahead and take your bait. So, by saying the 300 blk out won't work and a "newbie who doesn't know the difference in hunting applications", riddle me this. Let's look at the standard "go to" energy chart of having the 1000 foot lbs of energy to be an effective killing cartridge for Whitetail and pigs. The 300 blk out has 1500+ ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle (see chart below), 1200+ ft/lbs at 100 yards, and doesn't fall below the standard 1000 ft/lbs until about 170 yards (with a 125 grain SST at 2350 fps, chronographed and confirmed in my rifle). And yes, everyone knows you can kill critters with much less ft/lbs. I have seen perfect mushroom shaped bullet expansion with pass throughs on everything I have shot, except for large pigs. For what the blk out is, it is a great cartridge. So, from an energy stand point, how can someone say it's not an effective round?

And for Dad's letting kids use a blk out and losing deer, that's simple shot placement and lack of practice for the child. I've killed everything I have shot at with a 300 blk out, except some pigs about 600 yards away once. And if they are using subsonic ammunition, that's a bad choice to begin with. It's like shooting a 45 ACP 230 grain FMJ round out of a rifle platform. There's no bullet expansion, no hydrostatic shock, and an ice pick wound. I even tell my customers that the subs make a poor choice for effective killing. Can they work, yes. But there needs to be clarification on which round was used (subs or supersonic round) that didn't work. There's a big difference there.

I think a lot of hunters, probably more than 50% in the field, have the idea of needing a much larger cartridge to "plan for" a bad placed shot to have more energy to make up the difference in a poor shot. A bad shot is a bad shot. If a 300 blk out drops a deer in it's tracks with a well placed shot, how is a 300 RUM going to do any better. Dead is still dead. Many hunters have this bigger cartridge mentality. A lot of it boils down to shooter ability and practicing enough to place a round on target where you want it. Some have this ability, some don't. Larger rounds have more recoil, more muzzle blast, and heat up barrels too fast to get a hunting rifle consistent and on target well. It's kind of like the little guy on campus who drives the big, jacked up, 12" lifted 4x4 truck.

For me, the 300 blk out is a perfect cartridge for simple shooting and hunting. I like what the blk out gives me. When the guys in my hunting camp asked me what I was shooting, and I showed them this little round, they smiled. Yes, it's a little round, but a VERY effective round. And when I'm killing the most crap in deer camp, and they see it's destruction, their opinion quickly changes. They begin asking more questions and getting more info on it. To each his own.

Just curious, do you drive a big, lifted truck?


Range Velocity Energy
(yards) (ft/sec) (ft-lbs)
0 2350 1532.7
20 2295.5 1462.5
40 2241.9 1395
60 2188.7 1329.6
80 2136.1 1266.4
100 2084.2 1205.6
120 2033 1147.2
140 1982.6 1091
160 1933 1037
180 1884.2 985.3
200 1836.2 935.8
220 1789.1 888.4
240 1742.9 843.1
260 1697.5 799.8
280 1653.1 758.4
300 1609.6 719

No.

The title of the thread is asking if a .300 BO SUBSONIC is a good 200 yard deer cartridge. The expert on the video's definition of same is simply can he put a bullet on a target at 200 yards - that's good enough for him. Energy? Velocity? Heck, the 200+ grain subsonic rounds are not even designed to expand. It barely moves the steel, for heaven's sake. Psshhhh....who cares? He's good to go, it's a great deer cartridge. The whole thing is laughable.

By your own standards (1000 ft/lbs)- even a .300 BO SUPERSONIC is not a good 200 yard deer cartridge. Thank you.

Effective? I guess that depends on one's definition of effective. Effective for what? At what range? However you slice it, it's a piss ant cartridge compared to even such giants as a .243, 7mm-08, and the mighty cannon that is the .308. Your talk about the "destruction" it wreaks/"killing the most crap" compared to what your buddies are using sounds just like the tacticool guy at the range. What are your buddies using? .410 slugs? Pellet guns? .22 Mags?

I won't discuss calibers higher than above so as to not give some the vapors.

Giving some the vapors? That was good NP. I haven't heard that in years. Made my afternoon.

Yeah this thread got way off topic trying to defend the 300 blk while the OP was trying to promote using sub sonic that has a slower bullet speed than my Gamo pellet gun.

Again, a ton of difference between a supersonic 115/125 grain premium projectile & a 220 grain subsonic.

The answer to the OP's question is "NO", there is no way a .300BO subsonic is in any way, shape, or form a legitimate 200 yard deer cartridge.

It's videos like that which spread irresponsibility like a virus. And it's the animals that pay the price. I wonder if he even knows any better?

Sure it is, why not?

Mine works fine at under 100. Hand loaded 240grain lead bullet, out of a 10" SBR with a Costal can!
Out of my "pig stand" 100 yards is the farthest I can see.
200 yard subs, not me... Supers out of the SBR/can, at 200, YEP!

No.
Move along, nothing to see here.