TexasCHLforum.com

locke_n_load wrote:I would vote for the Evo or build your own 9mm.

I have an SBR in 300 BLK with can, and am building a 3.5" 9mm AR (glock mags) and have a 9mm suppressor as well (total barrel length, suppressed = 11").

In the long run, I wish I had skipped the 300 build and went straight to 9mm. The 300 BLK 8" barrel + 7" suppressor is just about as long as a normal AR15, and I can't afford to feed my 300 BLK at $1 a round (even reloading this round is expensive). Yes, the 300 BLK is better than 9mm as far as energy goes, especially at a distance, but I can buy and practice much more at $.25 a round for 9mm hollowpoint subsonics from freedom munitions, and I won't leave the range knowing I spent a fortune shooting that day. I would suspect that good 9mm HP subs (not freedom munitions) would do decent out to a certain point, but I am building that gun for Home Defense anyway - 50 yards max.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:Lately, I'm more in the Kel-Tec Sub-2000 price range.

A 9mm sub gun sounds like fun, but ammo cost aside, why would it be any more effective than a .300 Blk for SD?

Yes, you can ping steel with a 9mm at 100 yards, but you can do that with a 1911 .45 too. But with a .300 Blk 220 grain subsonic load 10ft from the muzzle, you have velocity/energy of 1,061 fps/541 ft-lbs, and at 100 yards you still have 1,012 fps/500 ft-lbs. how much retained velocity/energy does a 9mm have at 100 yards, particularly if you were shooting suppressed subsonics? That's my thought anyway.

Cause it's not just about momentum transfer at the point of impact. It's about the right tool for the application. No one will use a pistol caliber carbine for hog hunting or expect it to turn cover into concealment like a rifle round.

But if I am in a CQB situation, making a quick vehicle exit or clearing rooms under stress, I prefer the SBR to a full length bbl with a can hanging off it.

Now, yes, anyone can hit a full size steel target at 100 yards with a 9mm handgun, but if that target at distance is returning fire,I prefer the longer bbl, a shoulder mount, and a red dot. Fast and accurate target acquisition, especially if the enemy is under cover, is clearly less advantageous with just a pistol.

For the record, in my particular case, I am building a 10.5" SBR in .300 Blk, primarily for CQB, and that is where I was coming from.

Carry on......

The Annoyed Man wrote:Lately, I'm more in the Kel-Tec Sub-2000 price range.

A 9mm sub gun sounds like fun, but ammo cost aside, why would it be any more effective than a .300 Blk for SD?

Yes, you can ping steel with a 9mm at 100 yards, but you can do that with a 1911 .45 too. But with a .300 Blk 220 grain subsonic load 10ft from the muzzle, you have velocity/energy of 1,061 fps/541 ft-lbs, and at 100 yards you still have 1,012 fps/500 ft-lbs. how much retained velocity/energy does a 9mm have at 100 yards, particularly if you were shooting suppressed subsonics? That's my thought anyway.