I found 16 inch Hornady velocity:
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/more_detail0b05.html?id=72&sID=151&pID=2
2540 fps.
They don’t have a BC value for 6.8 velocities, so I can’t run the complete example like I could with the Sierra bullet.
Just compare data only from companies that load to SAAMI standards.
I see that as an artificial limitation designed to boost the likelihood of the 300 doing well in the comparison.
Are all of these loads loaded to SAAMI standards?
Why do you think it is ok to compare industry-standard 55,000 psi 300 BLK ammo to 6.8 ammo which may be 63,000 psi? How is that an apples/apples comparison?
Most of those seem to be bullets, not loads. But the one which is a load - yes, that seems ok.
SSA 2nd generation 115 gr SMK OTM w/cannelure, 5 shot averages:
16” barrel: ave vel = 2525 fps
I carry +p (sometimes +p+ ammo when I carry my full-size 9mm). So do you think it’s not okay to compare +p to other pistol loads?
BTW: Silver State loads to 58,000 with it ‘Tac Loads’ (says it on their website) WC’s loads appear very similar.
Also all manufacturers except Remington list their 6.8 loads from a 16" barrel.
For 9mm, there is a SAAMI cartridge called “9mm Luger +P.” That means everyone who makes that stays under the pressure limit it is listed as. So one can use 9mm +P, and still compare apples to apples.
There is no +P standard for 40 S&W, or for 6.8. That means companies who make ammo over pressure can each do so by as much as they are willing to risk, rather than to a fixed amount. So even if comparing 40 S&W loads, I would not include any listed as +P.
One can hotrod 300 BLK also - I had 110 grain up past 2600 fps in a 20 inch barrel - but I don’t use that for comparisons.
So a ‘hotrod’ .300 from a 20" barrel is comparable to a standard factory loaded 6.8 from a 16" barrel—got it. What do you think the pressure was, 68,000 PSI? Certainly not 58,000?
And, are you saying that SSA and WC ammo is unsafe because no SAAMI member companies have petitioned to create a 6.8+p? Or just that since your round is artificially limited theirs should be too?
OK, you drank the 6.8 juice and refuse to admit there may be other options out there. We get it.
But your last few replies are starting to get childish.
I understood where Silvers was going the FIRST time he said it. Having him repeat it 1800 different ways from Sunday is getting old. I keep seeing this thread come up with new replies and I think there may be something of interest, but no…
Oh my God…get over it already…
6.8SPC to Remington (IMO) is the red headed step child that they just want to forget about & hope will go away. The problem is even without their support the cartridge continues to thrive with improved chambers & ammo that preforms.
Remington 1st tried to kill off the 6.8 with the 30 Remington AR & when that didn’t work then came along the 300AAC.
If Remington put half the effort into the 6.8 that they are putting to the 300AAC (Revised SAAMI spec & promised loads of ammo) the 6.8 would be even more popular than it is now.
I believe it would be a cold day in hell before Remington revises the SAAMI spec for the 6.8! To do that might have other(firearm & ammo)manufactures get into the 6.8 and that’s not in the best interest of Remington now that the 300AAC is their new pet project.
I love my 6.8’s (Noveske/WOA/ARP) and run hot ammo from SSA & WC without any issues,but for the lack of affordable ammo.
This is where the 300AAC comes in:supposedly low cost factory ammo(when & for how long) & factory subsonic
My problem with the 300AAC is the ammo that I can find local(when available & almost never)is at the same cost as the 6.8
The 300AAC is fun to shoot(subsonic & suppressed)but on par to the cost of the 6.8 unless you reload.
Both rounds have their place but if you are looking for a hunting round, IMO, the 6.8 is it!
For suppressed/SBR & short range/unauthorized hunting:300AAC
Why on earth would Remington want to “kill off the 6.8”??? Aren’t they in business to make money? Doesn’t selling ammo make them money? Did you notice that they are one of only three companies (Hornady and SSA being the other two) that offer and sell any significant amount of 6.8 SPC ammo? That’s an enviable market position. (Oh yes, Cor-Bon and Sellier & Belloit apparently offer some 6.8 SPC - tell me annual sales for their 6.8 offerings before we talk about significant. And they aren’t any less expensive than the other three options.)
I haven’t noticed that Remington has put any effort into marketing 300BLK. What I’ve seen is that Rsilvers has put enormous effort and has had the resources of AAC to back him, with incidentally some availability of other “Freedom Group” resources, namely Remington ammo. If Remington was putting huge efforts into this cartridge the cheap ammo would have been out a year ago instead of two weeks ago.
I have a couple hundred rounds of the 300BLK UMC ammo that I got for $13/20 shipped. Not vaporware, something sitting in my basement ready to use. I’ve never, ever seen 6.8 SPC for less than $16/20 and I’ve been looking for years - and that was a clearance sale at a single online seller.
Oh, “short range/unauthorized hunting” use? Can you explain that in any way that is not a cheap shot slam at the cartridge?
I am saying that they don’t adhere to any industry standard and I don’t like including them any more than I do handloads. But, people want to know - so I will include the hot 85 grain T-TSX load in my chart.
Is it really worth revising for the 30 fps difference in the two chambers?
That’s a start, what about the 95gr? WC lists them at 2850 from a 16" barrel, same with SSA.
And for they record I do not dislike the .300Blk, in fact I was very interested in buying one. I just think the marketing hype from the guerilla campaign has overstepped reality, so at times I interject. I also dislike the hate/misinformation campaign silvers started against the 6.8 and 6.8 forums in May/June, which is part of what turned me off of the .300 or any AAC/FG product for that matter. Any company that takes to bashing another product to promote their own is not a company I wish to buy from—you may feel different.
As an aside, because of market equilibrium it is foolish to think the .300 is bad for the 6.8. Right now prices for the 6.8 are high because demand is high. If competition starts to erode the demand base it will force suppliers to reduce prices. There is plenty of room to reduce margins with the 6.8, so as sales slow (if they do) manufacturers will reduce prices until it becomes competitive and increases demand (resulting in iterative changes to find the most profit). Reducing output doesn’t make sense unless the same machines could be used to make something different with higer margins. Since the margins on the 6.8 are likely significantly higher than anything else I think prices will come down quite a bit before switching becomes an option. On the other hand significant growth in the 6.8 without additional capacity will likely drive prices higher.
In other words competition is good for the consumer. Though none of this has any impact on which one provides better terminal ballistics—and the answer to that is definitive even when the best is compared to the worst. As I said earlier Mustang vs pimped Civic.
That load is also 2.290 and does not work in all magazines. If it works in your setup, then sure - great for hunting. But it is not a good comparison of one cartridges capabilities to another because it is trick ammo. Even if 6.8 SPC-II ammo became a SAAMI standard. Even if (and I don’t think this would happen) the pressure were raised to 60,000 psi - even then - the max length would never be changed to 2.290. It would be too unreliable in too many magazines for general purpose use.
By the way, it is 2750 fps from SSA.
Sure has tricked a bunch of hogs and deer. All the guys on the 6.8 forum better go check their freezers and make sure they’re all still there.
This is a hunting thread, right? The slap round any good for hunting? Nevermind…
You can load even longer if you single feed.
Here it is with the 6.5G and the 95 TSX added:
I don’t see this as a gorilla marketing campaign at all and I don’t seem to recall them “bashing” the 6.8 or any other round. As for 6.8 being more expensive because of demand…wow…it’s economy of scale. Supply and demand would only kick in if they couldn’t keep up with demand and I am sure that is not the case.
signing off this silly discussion.
OMG!
It’s one thing to be a fanboy, it’s another to be a fanboi without a clue. I really suggest you broaden your understanding of Economics before doing any additional analysis.