You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Join the #1 community for gun owners of the Northwest
We believe the 2nd Amendment is best defended through grass-roots organization, education, and advocacy centered around individual gun owners. It is our mission to encourage, organize, and support these efforts throughout Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming.
Discuss firearms and all aspects of firearm ownership
Join others in organizing against anti-gun legislation
Buy, sell, and trade in our classified section
Find nearby gun shops, ranges, training, and other resources
Discover free outdoor shooting areas
Stay up to date on firearm-related events
Share photos and video with other members
...and much more!
I expect a lawsuit to keep it out of production myself, but yeah, it's a 300 Fireball and nothing more from what I can see. Supposedly there is just enough change to require a reamer on your 300 Whisper chamber to use them, but why bother?
The only gain is factory ammo, and anyone with a 300 Whisper build is a reloader by default I would think?
All I can say is that I built one and am very happy with the performance ........ The 220Gr round is dang accurate out to 200 yards ...... Waiting on some 123gr Rounds to become available again. Also have a Hairtrigger Falcon 'CAN' headed in for it. Should be super quite with the 220gr Sub-Sonic rounds .... they also make a 175gr Sub Sonic.
.300 Whisper, .300 Fireball, .300-221, ect and now the 300Blk (saami) are all designed to use ALL standard parts on an AR other then the barrel to provide a quality SS round.
I really like mine .300 "Whisper",
I have had mine a couple years now. Brass is easily made from cut down .223 brass. Any .223 brass I have that is under length for my target AR goes in the "Whisper" pile to be cut down. There are tons of reloading resources online.
You would be more correct in saying that the Marines qualify at 500, I think. I know the Army doesn't...or at least, while I was in (1974 - 1988) we qualified with our max range being 300 meters.
I am NOT a believer in the 5.56 round as a military round. I know others may have different opinions, but I think that a round that is NOT able to provide killing shots at 500 meters is not a service round. (Please read http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA512331&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf) It is a paper written by a US Army Major that describes the whole 5.56 and up argument from an Army perspective...
Wow. Great article. This statement struck me as funny: "The mission in Somalia further confirmed the ineffectiveness of the cartridge on targets that were malnourished and not protected by body armor. Unfortunately, these conflicts were of a short duration and the lessons learned had little impact on improving small arms lethality." I understand he's referring to the short duration limiting the amount of lessons learned, but I dont think a conflict being of a "short duration" is ever unfortunate.
I haven't heard returning troops complain about their 5.56's and in fact, the AR 15 has only grown in popularity as a civilian rifle, even among ex-GI's.
I will strongly disagree that the 5.56 isn't good to 500 yards, and I think it's best in 55gr (XM193) form. I believe the only reason the military went to the ballistically inferior 62gr was so that it could be shot from the same barrel as the long tracers.
The military has increasingly produced 1:7 twist barrels solely because that's needed for the high aspect ratio tracers due to their ballistic co-efficiency, but that would tear up the 55gr bullets. Again, a compromise.
Remember, the first Armalites came out with 1:15 twist which was quickly replaced by 1:12 twist for the 55gr bullet. Now the 1:9 is most common for civilians because it will shoot both the 55gr and the 62gr.
When I start hearing returning GI's complaining about their M-16's, I'll pay attention.