I've always heard they were threaded on, but never seen one apart. I would have been a bit confused when it happened for sure
Tonight's episode of Adventures in AR Smithin'
- Thread starter DarthVader
- Start date
Wow- that is a first for me to see. Honestly, I didn't know that was a separate piece of the barrel (clearly not an expert here).
For my uses it didn't do anything I couldn't do with a 308 or a 7.62x39 better.
In my opinion it is a great round for shooting people or paper. Not much utility beyond those two targets, both of which I try to avoid shooting at as much as possible.
Funny guy.
I will say OP, I wonder how much of this issue is caused or at least exasperated by the use of reaction rods.
I wondered the same thing. However, I installed the original barrel and removed it. It was installed at 35 ft lbs per the rail makers specs. It also removed easily, so at no time had any excessive torque been applied to the barrel extension via the RR. If the barrel extension had been installed correctly at 180-200 ft lbs, it isn't possible to break that torque by trying to remove a flash hider. The extension was literally hand tight. The other reason that I don't think the RR is the cause, is that I've never seen a report of an extension coming loose except in a case of improper nitride process. With a correctly installed extension, you'd shear the alignment pin before coming close to loosening the extension. Additionally, if I had been using a clamshell, the issue would still have occurred as soon as I attempted to remove the muzzle device. It was like there was no torque on the extension at all.
the design criteria for the 300 were extensive and I think for the most part, they accomplished what they set out to do (or maybe they stole the whisper 300 specs and commercialized it). regardless: it is a 30 caliber round, that approximates the energy of an x39 round when supersonic, is easily suppressed, can chamber and fire a wide range of bullets (~ 110 to 220 grain), requires no other conversion to a 556 AR other than barrel and flash hider, fits 30 rounds in a standard ar mag, and maintains significant energy from shorter than 16" barrels. they never set out to create the perfect hunting round. they also didn't intend to create the cheapest plinking round.
personally, I prefer the 6.8 to the 300 round but I own both. imo, the 6.8 significantly exceeds the 300 on whitetails but I am beginning to think that some 300 offerings are more than adequate within 200 yards (fusion and Hornady).
nws - is it the cost compared to 308 and x39? the lack of range? the limited hunting-specific commercial ammo offerings? or a combination of the above?
Good points. The round certainly met the original design criteria. It was designed for go-fast doorkickers to shoot smelly, bearded men in the face and to do it quietly if necessary. I don't really have a need for that capability. I had considered it's usefulness as a hunting Caliber, but if I'm going to hunt with an AR, I think I'd rather just shoot the 6.8 or build up a 16" barreled .308.
Disagree. I have no interest in shooting subs and as such my x39 AR is a much better gun for my needs.