Home
Posted By: Gary O 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/07/16
especially for home defense with available factory loads? What say you? Thanks...

http://www.300aacblackout.com/
Posted By: bcraig Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/07/16
5.56 Nato
Higher velocity,less recoil,better ammo availability.

Posted By: constructor Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/07/16
5.56-versatility
Posted By: tex_n_cal Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/07/16
300

bigger holes are seldom a bad thing.
i had a blackout once, got rid of it pretty fast once i realized i could get same performance out of heavy bullets in a 556 ar-15 and ammo is much much cheaper if you dont roll your own!
Posted By: ringworm Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/07/16
the 300 is superior to the .223 but is roundly beat by the 5.56.
the whisper however edges them all out...in some loading.
Posted By: deflave Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/07/16
5.56.





Dave
A 300 with a can and subsonics wouldn't be bad at livingroom distances. If you don't plan on a suppressor, get a 5.56.
Posted By: bea175 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/07/16
For home defence, I could car less which cal I had in my hand. I like both and love the 300 ACC
Posted By: Owl Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/07/16
Neither... A good old fashion 12 gauge pump action shotgun.

You can't beat that universal sound of a racking slide... followed by OH SHIZ, lets get outta here!

Load with #7 shot. Won't go through every wall in the house, yet will take out the bad guy at home defense ranges.
Posted By: tex_n_cal Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/07/16
An AR - even with a 16" barrel - is shorter, handier, and holds more rounds than a shotgun.
Originally Posted by Owl
Neither... A good old fashion 12 gauge pump action shotgun.

You can't beat that universal sound of a racking slide... followed by OH SHIZ, lets get outta here!

Load with #7 shot. Won't go through every wall in the house, yet will take out the bad guy at home defense ranges.


AR is WAY more versatile, can be loaded with varmit bullets for limited penetration, and with an upgraded charging handle can have just as impressive sound when a round is chambered, with much faster follow up shots, especially if they don't run, and there are more then one.



The Correct answer is 5.56.
Posted By: rost495 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/08/16
I used to hold fast to the shotgun thought too... but everyone around here has me about convinced of the AR instead... but just in case both sit by the bed...
Posted By: deflave Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/08/16
Originally Posted by Owl
Neither... A good old fashion 12 gauge pump action shotgun.

You can't beat that universal sound of a racking slide... followed by OH SHIZ, lets get outta here!

Load with #7 shot. Won't go through every wall in the house, yet will take out the bad guy at home defense ranges.


Has anybody ever heard of a real life experience that involved a gun fight or violent act to be prevented after somebody heard a shotgun being racked?



Travis
Posted By: GaryVA Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/08/16
Yes, I have observed an armed combatant, who already expressed intent to go out fighting so not to go back to prison, drop his handgun and comply immediately after a shotgun was placed into battery. On another occasion, a cornered murder suspect shot himself in the head near immediately after arriving officers were placing shotguns into battery upon exiting their vehicles. It is a very intimidating sound that telegraphs imminent pain and suffering to the person on the receiving end.

As to the 300BLK, I have nothing bad to say, a SR30 w/ a QDC suppressor is a wicked little beast, be it subsonic or supersonic. For what it is intended to do, nothing else, including the 5.56, can.

Best smile
Posted By: deflave Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/08/16
Thanks Gary.



Dave
Posted By: bea175 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/08/16
At home range inside you house, don't believe the myth that birdshot from a shotgun won't completely penetrate the wall of one room to another
Posted By: TC1 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/08/16
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by Owl
Neither... A good old fashion 12 gauge pump action shotgun.

You can't beat that universal sound of a racking slide... followed by OH SHIZ, lets get outta here!

Load with #7 shot. Won't go through every wall in the house, yet will take out the bad guy at home defense ranges.


Has anybody ever heard of a real life experience that involved a gun fight or violent act to be prevented after somebody heard a shotgun being racked?



Travis


At a gunshow once a guy told me a story of just that happening. The door got jimmied open, he racks the shotgun back in his bedroom and on inspection he finds a pried open door but nobody there. Now he was selling shotguns so...... wink
Posted By: deflave Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/08/16
TC,

Those accounts I've heard.

I'm talking about influencing somebody that was truly ready to fight.



Dave
Posted By: TC1 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/08/16
Originally Posted by deflave
TC,

Those accounts I've heard.

I'm talking about influencing somebody that was truly ready to fight.



Dave


Then no, I haven't heard of a one. Funny/sad story. When I was a kid there was an alcoholic that lived down the street from us. His son was a friend of mine. The police were called to his house one day for domestic violence and it turned into a barricade situation. There were cops everywhere and finally the guy comes out on his front porch carrying a bolt action rifle and a 5th of whiskey. I bet 10 Remington 870's racked shells at the same time. The guy calmly walked to the edge of the porch, sat down on the steps with the rifle in his lap, took a big slug of whiskey and grinned at nothing. All the neighborhood kids where running around and when it happened we scattered. Nothing came of it. After a few more drinks he put the rifle down and went to jail. He eventually sobered up and became a good father, husband, man. I've always wondered if he ever realized how close he came to his end that day.
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by Owl
Neither... A good old fashion 12 gauge pump action shotgun.

You can't beat that universal sound of a racking slide... followed by OH SHIZ, lets get outta here!

Load with #7 shot. Won't go through every wall in the house, yet will take out the bad guy at home defense ranges.


Has anybody ever heard of a real life experience that involved a gun fight or violent act to be prevented after somebody heard a shotgun being racked?



Travis

Yes
Posted By: jimmyp Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/09/16
emphatic statements are often made without thinking, do you want to telegraph your location to anyone who wants to know where you are by making a vicious shotgun noise? So if you shoot your guns a bit, which one are you more familiar with? Which ever that one is, practice with it and use it and maintain familiarity with it.
Posted By: supercrewd Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/09/16
My BLK is quieter than the 223 suppressed. For use in the home, it would win. Of course it would be a Glock that would get real duty.
Posted By: Bluedreaux Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/09/16
Shotguns suck donkey balls.
Originally Posted by Bluedreaux
Shotguns suck donkey balls.


Makes it pretty easy to tell who just read an article in a 1980's gun rag, and who actually hits the range to do some shooting.
Posted By: MontanaMan Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/09/16
Originally Posted by Bluedreaux
Shotguns suck donkey balls.


Is that an emphatic statement or just something casual? grin

MM
Posted By: rost495 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/09/16
I like shotguns for pigs... kills lots of them at a time, and does a better job often than an AR can.

That said, I keep one of each by the bed... different things for different tasks....
Originally Posted by rost495
I like shotguns for pigs... kills lots of them at a time, and does a better job often than an AR can.

That said, I keep one of each by the bed... different things for different tasks....


I like variety as well.

Rifle, pistol, shotgun, blades. But for the big thumps in the night, the AR generally get the nod.
Posted By: jimmyp Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/10/16
for those of you who keep an AR within arms reach do you keep a round chambered or do you rely on your 2:00AM half asleep manual dexterity? smile
Posted By: rost495 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/10/16
ANY gun I"m going to consider using is loaded all the time.
Posted By: BarryC Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/10/16
Originally Posted by jimmyp
for those of you who keep an AR within arms reach do you keep a round chambered or do you rely on your 2:00AM half asleep manual dexterity? smile


And do you keep ear muffs with it?
Posted By: jimmyp Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/10/16
Pro Ears gold maybe? Will that work? interesting an ar15 with a hot chamber next to your bed, sounds dangerous to me!
Originally Posted by BarryC
Originally Posted by jimmyp
for those of you who keep an AR within arms reach do you keep a round chambered or do you rely on your 2:00AM half asleep manual dexterity? smile


And do you keep ear muffs with it?


Yes.
Posted By: rost495 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/10/16
Originally Posted by jimmyp
Pro Ears gold maybe? Will that work? interesting an ar15 with a hot chamber next to your bed, sounds dangerous to me!


LOL, my fire extinguishers have full charges too.....
Posted By: jimmyp Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/10/16
yes to both! grin
Originally Posted by BarryC
Originally Posted by jimmyp
for those of you who keep an AR within arms reach do you keep a round chambered or do you rely on your 2:00AM half asleep manual dexterity? smile


And do you keep ear muffs with it?
Pretty funny. Takes me back to the first time I shot my weapon while on duty. I have never in my life heard something as loud as a round being shot in a quiet neighborhood after midnight. I felt "dirty". Lol! Like I had done something wrong and the Police were going to hunt me down. Hell, I was the Police.
Posted By: BarryC Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/11/16
The feeling is the least of it. The bleeding from the ears is what would concern me! laugh
Posted By: TWR Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/11/16
I'd rather my ears bleed from an outgoing bullet than an incoming one...

My 21" Benelli is cumbersome in the hallway. My pistol has got the nod the one time I investigated a bump in the night. My AR was right there and ready but I felt better with the pistol that night.

Posted By: rost495 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/11/16
ears bleeding from an AR being fired? Yeah, no I don't see that happening, I want to be able to hear prior and hopefully after teh shot anyway.

Maybe a LOT of shooting from a SHORT barreled gun could be tough.

But most folks worry about crap that matters not in the big picture
Posted By: jimmyp Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/12/16
Gary O,

I bet ya when the window breaks at 2:00AM waking you from a sound sleep it will take you a moment to collect your wits let alone figure out your next move. Some amount of prior thought might want to be given.

Does sheet rock wall penetration worry you? I wonder about the comparative penetration of 00 buckshot, or the 30 cal 110s or 220s vs a 55 grain VMAX?

Posted By: 458 Lott Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
I'd be concerned about long term availability of 300 BO ammo, let's face it it's most likely to run it's course as a specialty/fad round and in the future you'll be hard pressed to find factory ammo for it. .223/5.56, so long as you can legally purchase factory ammo you'll find it.

No round is ideal and IMHO at in the house distances I would expect for all intents and purposes that the 5.56 and 300 BO will be about equal.

I can't see a 300 BO unless you're planning to run it suppressed with heavy for caliber bullets.
Posted By: GaryVA Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
Do not see a scenario where I would choose either birdshot for a shotgun, or a frangible round for a handgun or a carbine, for use to engage an armed combatant in deadly force. I have used frangible breeching rounds for their intended purpose, and I do know we have unintentionally killed with those rounds while breeching, but if intentionally using deadly force, I would choose ammunition tested and approved by either the FBI or the military for such an intended purpose. You need a dependable and proven level of penetration to be effective, which you will not get with either the birdshot or the frangible. It is pure folly to believe they are a wise choice.

As to bleeding ears and bedside earmuffs, having experienced incoming rounds from close quarters, I will say that blasts in my direction were more dramatic than the blasts going away, but I never stopped to think, crap that was loud. On the other hand, I do recall forgetting my ears while discharging an sbr during training. I DID STOP THEN AND SAY CRAP THAT WAS LOUD. My ears rang for several minutes. So for me, brief engagements were more like shots made while hunting, there was a certain degree of auditory occlusion. So in that context, I'd likely never don earmuffs at my bedside when I retrieve a firearm to investigate a bump in the night.

Posted By: Yondering Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
Originally Posted by 458 Lott
I'd be concerned about long term availability of 300 BO ammo, let's face it it's most likely to run it's course as a specialty/fad round and in the future you'll be hard pressed to find factory ammo for it. .223/5.56, so long as you can legally purchase factory ammo you'll find it.

No round is ideal and IMHO at in the house distances I would expect for all intents and purposes that the 5.56 and 300 BO will be about equal.

I can't see a 300 BO unless you're planning to run it suppressed with heavy for caliber bullets.


I gotta disagree with all three of those points.

The 300 Blk is still growing in popularity, and doesn't appear to be going anywhere soon. Even if it did, you make your own from 223 brass and 30 cal bullets; two of the most common reloading supplies in this country.

The 5.56 and 300 do not perform similarly. High velocity light bullets vs lower velocity heavier bullets.

Subsonic 300 Blk is about one of the poorest choices you could make for defense, especially using the commercial 220gr stuff, which doesn't tend to expand or upset much. It's not a rifle round at that point, just a mild pistol round with really poor terminal performance, except for a few boutique bullet choices. You'd be better off just using a 45 or 9mm with good bullets.
Posted By: tarheelpwr Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
Originally Posted by 458 Lott
I

I can't see a 300 BO unless you're planning to run it suppressed with heavy for caliber bullets.


This. I'm partial to an 8.5" suppressed BO
Posted By: GaryVA Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
A 110 Barnes TAC-TX can run 2100+fps from an 8.5", will expand immediately, and will still penetrate 20" of ballistic gel. Rather nice marriage for an effective SBR at close quarters. Likely best choice in such platform for home defense.
Posted By: tarheelpwr Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
The Leheigh (SP) controlled Chaos loaded by gorilla looks NASTY.
Posted By: rost495 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
Originally Posted by 458 Lott
I'd be concerned about long term availability of 300 BO ammo, let's face it it's most likely to run it's course as a specialty/fad round and in the future you'll be hard pressed to find factory ammo for it. .223/5.56, so long as you can legally purchase factory ammo you'll find it.

No round is ideal and IMHO at in the house distances I would expect for all intents and purposes that the 5.56 and 300 BO will be about equal.

I can't see a 300 BO unless you're planning to run it suppressed with heavy for caliber bullets.


What is factory ammo?
Posted By: rost495 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
Originally Posted by Yondering
Originally Posted by 458 Lott
I'd be concerned about long term availability of 300 BO ammo, let's face it it's most likely to run it's course as a specialty/fad round and in the future you'll be hard pressed to find factory ammo for it. .223/5.56, so long as you can legally purchase factory ammo you'll find it.

No round is ideal and IMHO at in the house distances I would expect for all intents and purposes that the 5.56 and 300 BO will be about equal.

I can't see a 300 BO unless you're planning to run it suppressed with heavy for caliber bullets.


I gotta disagree with all three of those points.

The 300 Blk is still growing in popularity, and doesn't appear to be going anywhere soon. Even if it did, you make your own from 223 brass and 30 cal bullets; two of the most common reloading supplies in this country.

The 5.56 and 300 do not perform similarly. High velocity light bullets vs lower velocity heavier bullets.

Subsonic 300 Blk is about one of the poorest choices you could make for defense, especially using the commercial 220gr stuff, which doesn't tend to expand or upset much. It's not a rifle round at that point, just a mild pistol round with really poor terminal performance, except for a few boutique bullet choices. You'd be better off just using a 45 or 9mm with good bullets.


If you ever saw 1000 fps wounds and expanded bullets from 194 lehighs you would be impressed.... I was.. almost an inch wide exits... but thats not a normal round I realize. Which once again points out the need to choose the projectile and shot placement both very carefully..

75 -77 bthps still ride in my 223 house mags mostly, if not its 68/69 bthps...
Posted By: BarryC Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
Originally Posted by GaryVA

As to bleeding ears and bedside earmuffs, having experienced incoming rounds from close quarters, I will say that blasts in my direction were more dramatic than the blasts going away, but I never stopped to think, crap that was loud. On the other hand, I do recall forgetting my ears while discharging an sbr during training. I DID STOP THEN AND SAY CRAP THAT WAS LOUD. My ears rang for several minutes. So for me, brief engagements were more like shots made while hunting, there was a certain degree of auditory occlusion. So in that context, I'd likely never don earmuffs at my bedside when I retrieve a firearm to investigate a bump in the night.


You suffered permanent hearing loss from that one round you fired. Anytime your ears ring from a noise, you suffer permanent damage.

Auditory exclusion might keep one from being distracted by a noise, but it does not prevent damage anymore than not noticing a cut keeps one from bleeding.
Posted By: CrimsonTide Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
Originally Posted by Bluedreaux
Shotguns suck donkey balls.


Dammit boy, apparently you have influenced my agency. I heard in Inservice last week that they intend to relieve us of our shotguns.

Being of a school which is older, and alive because of my shotgun, I am a bit itchy about giving up my dozen gauge.

Posted By: Yondering Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
Originally Posted by rost495
Originally Posted by Yondering
Originally Posted by 458 Lott
I'd be concerned about long term availability of 300 BO ammo, let's face it it's most likely to run it's course as a specialty/fad round and in the future you'll be hard pressed to find factory ammo for it. .223/5.56, so long as you can legally purchase factory ammo you'll find it.

No round is ideal and IMHO at in the house distances I would expect for all intents and purposes that the 5.56 and 300 BO will be about equal.

I can't see a 300 BO unless you're planning to run it suppressed with heavy for caliber bullets.


I gotta disagree with all three of those points.

The 300 Blk is still growing in popularity, and doesn't appear to be going anywhere soon. Even if it did, you make your own from 223 brass and 30 cal bullets; two of the most common reloading supplies in this country.

The 5.56 and 300 do not perform similarly. High velocity light bullets vs lower velocity heavier bullets.

Subsonic 300 Blk is about one of the poorest choices you could make for defense, especially using the commercial 220gr stuff, which doesn't tend to expand or upset much. It's not a rifle round at that point, just a mild pistol round with really poor terminal performance, except for a few boutique bullet choices. You'd be better off just using a 45 or 9mm with good bullets.


If you ever saw 1000 fps wounds and expanded bullets from 194 lehighs you would be impressed.... I was.. almost an inch wide exits... but thats not a normal round I realize. Which once again points out the need to choose the projectile and shot placement both very carefully..

75 -77 bthps still ride in my 223 house mags mostly, if not its 68/69 bthps...


I have, and similar from bigger bullets as well. You are right, but you're one of the few who takes the time to understand what's needed for subsonic performance. Most don't seem to want to think about it that hard, or pay for the quality bullets. For example just a few posts up, somebody recommending 220gr subsonic loads; that would be a non-expanding bullet with very low terminal performance, and about the worst choice you could make in this application.

Even with good bullets like the Lehigh, heck even my 358 with 255gr expanding subsonic hollow points, you get basically the performance of a decent pistol round, but guys talk about it like they expect rifle performance, which isn't the case at all.
Posted By: rost495 Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/13/16
nope, you are right, you don't get it all.

But I'll take 200 yard capability thats fairly quiet... put it where it counts, lights out.

Home defense... honestly I think its over thought. 50% of the time my 45 has lead handloads in it... I"ll use what I have....
Posted By: jimmyp Re: 300 ACC vs. 5.56 Nato? - 04/14/16
I like the electronic earmuffs that offer a slight amount of amplification. Of course I am a hypocrite that sold my one and only Eotech because I did not like to take the time to press a button, while now I am considering putting on ear muffs and turning them on. After shooting all my adult life even with ear protection I am legally deaf over 3000 hertz.
© 24hourcampfire