Okay, folks, here's where we rant about cartridges we hate. I'll start.
7.62x40: Created solely as an attempt to get 7.62x39 performance out of an AR platform without changing the magazines. Why on Earth anyone thought this would be a good idea is beyond me. If you want 7.62x39 performance, here's a novel idea: shoot 7.62x39. It is cheap and plentiful (I can't even find x40 ammo for sale).
"But 7.62x39 ARs are hard to find!" Really? Harder to find than rifles built for this stupid cartridge? And what's to stop you from just shooting a regular AK chambered for x39? Wouldn't that be the most obvious solution to this non-existant problem?
"But the AK is so innacurate!" No, it isn't. The x39 cartrige is 95% of the AK innacuracy problem. When Ivan switched over to 5.45x39 in the AK-74, the accuracy improved dramatically (not to mention the Dragunov). 7.62x40 will not fix the x39s inherent problems.
"But x39 won't fit in my AR magazines and those x39 AR magazines are expensive!" More expensive than building a proprietary rifle and shooting proprietary, hard-to find ammo? Like I said, it's a stupid idea any way you look at it.
.300 Blackout: Another attempt to get 7.62 performance out of AR magazines, only this time with thought given to silencers. There are two loads for this round: supersonic and subsonic. The supersonic suffers from all the same faults as 7.62x40, and the cartriges cost about $1 a round. The subsonic is loved by its users for it's low noise when used with silencers. What they ignore is the fact that the ballistics of this round suck a fat one. It also has a max range of 200 meters. Again, if that's the kind of range you are comfortable having, why not go with the AK? Since you probably reload if you shoot this round, why not just down-load a 7.62x39 to sub-sonic levels and save an ass-load of money? Even if you need to lighten the bolt carrier to do so, the project will still costs WAY less than buying a .300 upper and firing $1/cartridge ammo through it.
In fact, if you want the power of a .30 bullet in an AR platform, why not go with the AR-10? Expensive as they are, they're still cheaper than the .300 option and you get a far superior round. Want subsonic? Again, down-load a .308. I think I'll pass on the .300 Blackout.
.25 ACP: This cartridge once had a purpose. Way back in the day, rimfire ammo wasn't as reliable as centerfire. It still isn't, but the gap has closed so much it doesn't make much of a differnce anymore, especially when using high-quality stuff. .22LR is much cheaper and actually has better performance. .32 and .380 are even better and modern mouse-guns chambered for them are far superior to old ones chambered in .25. As much as I love guns and hate to see famous cartridge die, this one certainly deserves it.
.17 HMR: Here's a conversation I'm sure actually happened:
The Boss: "Hey guys, all these other gun businesses have their own cartriges, and we don't, so I had this idea, and feel free to tell me if it's a bad one. The .22LR is deservedly the most popular cartridge in the world. It's great for plinking, practice, and even hunting. Everyone seems to love it. Well, (and here's where it gets crazy!), let's make a cartridge to compete against it! Whadday guys think?!"
Spineless worker drones: "Uhh, mmm, yeah, boss! We'll get to it right away!"
This over-priced cartrige just doesn't offer enough advantages over .22 lr for plinking to justify the price, and offers NO advantages over .22 Magnum for hunting. Pass.
Okay, now your turn.
7.62x40: Created solely as an attempt to get 7.62x39 performance out of an AR platform without changing the magazines. Why on Earth anyone thought this would be a good idea is beyond me. If you want 7.62x39 performance, here's a novel idea: shoot 7.62x39. It is cheap and plentiful (I can't even find x40 ammo for sale).
"But 7.62x39 ARs are hard to find!" Really? Harder to find than rifles built for this stupid cartridge? And what's to stop you from just shooting a regular AK chambered for x39? Wouldn't that be the most obvious solution to this non-existant problem?
"But the AK is so innacurate!" No, it isn't. The x39 cartrige is 95% of the AK innacuracy problem. When Ivan switched over to 5.45x39 in the AK-74, the accuracy improved dramatically (not to mention the Dragunov). 7.62x40 will not fix the x39s inherent problems.
"But x39 won't fit in my AR magazines and those x39 AR magazines are expensive!" More expensive than building a proprietary rifle and shooting proprietary, hard-to find ammo? Like I said, it's a stupid idea any way you look at it.
.300 Blackout: Another attempt to get 7.62 performance out of AR magazines, only this time with thought given to silencers. There are two loads for this round: supersonic and subsonic. The supersonic suffers from all the same faults as 7.62x40, and the cartriges cost about $1 a round. The subsonic is loved by its users for it's low noise when used with silencers. What they ignore is the fact that the ballistics of this round suck a fat one. It also has a max range of 200 meters. Again, if that's the kind of range you are comfortable having, why not go with the AK? Since you probably reload if you shoot this round, why not just down-load a 7.62x39 to sub-sonic levels and save an ass-load of money? Even if you need to lighten the bolt carrier to do so, the project will still costs WAY less than buying a .300 upper and firing $1/cartridge ammo through it.
In fact, if you want the power of a .30 bullet in an AR platform, why not go with the AR-10? Expensive as they are, they're still cheaper than the .300 option and you get a far superior round. Want subsonic? Again, down-load a .308. I think I'll pass on the .300 Blackout.
.25 ACP: This cartridge once had a purpose. Way back in the day, rimfire ammo wasn't as reliable as centerfire. It still isn't, but the gap has closed so much it doesn't make much of a differnce anymore, especially when using high-quality stuff. .22LR is much cheaper and actually has better performance. .32 and .380 are even better and modern mouse-guns chambered for them are far superior to old ones chambered in .25. As much as I love guns and hate to see famous cartridge die, this one certainly deserves it.
.17 HMR: Here's a conversation I'm sure actually happened:
The Boss: "Hey guys, all these other gun businesses have their own cartriges, and we don't, so I had this idea, and feel free to tell me if it's a bad one. The .22LR is deservedly the most popular cartridge in the world. It's great for plinking, practice, and even hunting. Everyone seems to love it. Well, (and here's where it gets crazy!), let's make a cartridge to compete against it! Whadday guys think?!"
Spineless worker drones: "Uhh, mmm, yeah, boss! We'll get to it right away!"
This over-priced cartrige just doesn't offer enough advantages over .22 lr for plinking to justify the price, and offers NO advantages over .22 Magnum for hunting. Pass.
Okay, now your turn.
