PDA

View Full Version : 6.5 Grendel VS 300 AAC?



recon562001
09-26-2011, 05:29 PM
I have been looking at the numbers and the AAC shoots a 125 grain 7.62 projectile at 2250 FPS producing 1405 foot ponds out of a 16 inch barrel while the Grendel shoots a 123 grain at 2650 FPS producing 1917 foot pounds from a 24 inch barrel.

To me that seems that if I am using the Grendel in a 16 inch barrel that I am going to be getting about the same performance from either round. Dose that seem to be the case to any one else?

I know there are quite a few guys on here that know much more about these things then I do so any input y'all have would be helpful.

Drifter
09-26-2011, 05:46 PM
Run the data through a trajectory calculator, such as the JBM Ballistics website (http://www.jbmballistics.com/ballistics/calculators/calculators.shtml). I think you'll find that a 6.5 123gr bullet at ~2400 to 2450 fps from a 16" barrel will have more energy and flatter trajectory versus a .30 caliber 123gr at 2250.

I think the 300 AAC might have been designed for suppressor use, and / or use with subsonic ammo, but I could be wrong.

What would be the intended use of the cartridge(s) for you?

bwaites
09-26-2011, 05:55 PM
Intended use here is a critical decision.

The AAC was developed for use as a suppressed round for short ranges, say, 200 yards or less and was really targeted and designed as a subsonic round.

The Grendel is a multipurpose round, and useful at much greater ranges.

BjornF16
09-27-2011, 01:27 AM
I have a Noveske 10.5" 300 BLK bolt/barrel/upper receiver with Troy Extreme handguard. I really enjoy shooting this rig. I'm still awaiting my YHM suppressor so I don't know how it shoots suppressed. After some testing, I'll decide whether or not to make this my home defense rig.

Here is what the AAC website says:

DESIGN OBJECTIVES
• Create a reliable compact 30-cal solution for the AR platform
• Utilize existing inventory magazines while retaining their full capacity
• Create the optimal platform for sound and flash suppressed fire
• Create compatible supersonic ammo that matches 7.62x39 ballistics
• Provide the ability to penetrate barriers with high-mass projectiles
• Provide all capabilities in a lightweight, durable, low recoiling package

9" Ballistics:

@ Muzzle:
5.56mm, M855 2558 ft/s, 901 ft-lb
300 BLK, 155 gr SMK 1785 ft/s, 1096 ft-lb (22% over 5.56mm)
7.62x39mm, 123 gr* 2022 ft/s. 1117 ft-lb
6.8 SPC, Hornady TAP 110* 2157 ft/s. 1136 ft-lb
300 BLK, 123gr MC 2130 ft/s, 1238 ft-lb (37% over 5.56mm, 9% over 6.8 SPC TAP 110)

Björn

recon562001
09-27-2011, 11:23 AM
I was thinking about making a scout style rifle that could also be suppressed but I think I am going to step up to the 6.5 Creedmoor so I have a light weight general purpose rifle capable of taking game up to elk.

And no I am not going to use the suppressor for hunting I just want one because I am an American and I can.

JASmith
09-27-2011, 03:19 PM
I have been looking at the numbers and the AAC shoots a 125 grain 7.62 projectile at 2250 FPS producing 1405 foot ponds out of a 16 inch barrel while the Grendel shoots a 123 grain at 2650 FPS producing 1917 foot pounds from a 24 inch barrel.

To me that seems that if I am using the Grendel in a 16 inch barrel that I am going to be getting about the same performance from either round. Dose that seem to be the case to any one else?
Alexander Arms (http://www.alexanderarms.com/) has a downloadable sheet of ballistics for a variety of barrel lengths. Their sheet lists the 123 gr Scenar as having a muzzle velocity of 2480 ft/sec from a 16" barrel.

And yes, Drifter has it right -- Your 123 Grendel bullet starting 200 ft/sec faster will outshine the 125 gr 7.62 projectile in just about any category you can think of! (Except for cost of ammo!)

bwaites
09-27-2011, 03:36 PM
Alexander Arms (http://www.alexanderarms.com/) has a downloadable sheet of ballistics for a variety of barrel lengths. Their sheet lists the 123 gr Scenar as having a muzzle velocity of 2480 ft/sec from a 16" barrel.

And yes, Drifter has it right -- Your 123 Grendel bullet starting 200 ft/sec faster will outshine the 125 gr 7.62 projectile in just about any category you can think of! (Except for cost of ammo!)

Have you priced that 300 AAC ammo? There ain't no cheap stuff I've found. Comparable to, or even higher, than Grendel ammo.

JASmith
09-27-2011, 04:16 PM
Have you priced that 300 AAC ammo? There ain't no cheap stuff I've found. Comparable to, or even higher, than Grendel ammo.
OK Bill, ya got me again! I was thinking of all that cheap 7.62X39 stuff. The velocity was about right for it too.

Cheers!

LRRPF52
09-27-2011, 10:32 PM
I was thinking about making a scout style rifle that could also be suppressed but I think I am going to step up to the 6.5 Creedmoor so I have a light weight general purpose rifle capable of taking game up to elk.

And no I am not going to use the suppressor for hunting I just want one because I am an American and I can.

The Creedmor will force you to move up to a larger action like the AR10. If you're going to do that, you might as well go .260 Rem and get a little more velocity, plus way more brass source options. Lightweight will be difficult to achieve though, since the AR10 action is much larger. Sure, you can profile down the barrel into a pencil, and use skeletonized stocks, but that pipe will heat-up really quick, and won't be fun to shoot so much, unless you use a deafening brake. This is why the Grendel makes a lot of sense:

* You can have a heavier barrel, and still have a light gun
* You can shoot it all day long, gaining more proficiency with it.
* You can suppress it and still have a lower-profile gun
* While not your first large game choice, the Grendel has successfully taken Elk out to 405 yards.

Another cartridge to look at is the 6.5x47 Lapua, but that puts you back into AR10 action territory again. You have to prioritize what you want to do with your rifle, and take it from there. The .300 Whisper is a totally different animal than the Grendel, with a totally different purpose: Run extremely quiet with higher BC bullets at the threshold of subsonic flight within a limited range.

BjornF16
09-28-2011, 02:03 AM
I was thinking about making a scout style rifle that could also be suppressed but I think I am going to step up to the 6.5 Creedmoor so I have a light weight general purpose rifle capable of taking game up to elk.


Grendel v Blackout...go with Grendel.

I have two Grendel hunting guns. They are more than adequate for elk.

Blackout would better applied to suppressed home defense (not that the Grendel is not adequate for that as well).

260 Rem is a good choice for hunting as well.

LRRPF52
09-28-2011, 03:00 AM
I use .260 Rem for ranges out to 1100m for long-range field and military competitions, where I know I will be in the bipod-prone, fighting position standing, or other supported positions most of the time. It really starts to shine over other calibers at 500m, but it is not the rifle I want to lug around so much in the heavy barrel form that I have, even at 22". My Grendel is light as a feather compared to the AR10's with target barrels, and I can shoot the Grendel a lot with its lighter barrel without fatigue. The Grendel also doesn't suck a ton of powder when I load for it, so that means less trips to the store for powder.

When I have done 2-day long-range courses with a featherweight .308 dropped into a McMillan A4 stock, even suppressed, it beat the trash out of my face and head, and that was with 155gr Scenars. The gun still shot 1/3rd MOA all day long, since it is a Sako 75 .308 with an amazingly accurate barrel, but it was abusive over extended shooting sessions. Not so with the Grendel, especially when you go to a heavier barrel. It feels recoilless in heavy barrel format to me, without a brake. While it may be the slower cartridge for distance work, it is a great balance of weight, accuracy, and efficiency.

JASmith
09-28-2011, 03:16 AM
Grendel v Blackout...go with Grendel.

I have two Grendel hunting guns. They are more than adequate for elk.

Blackout would better applied to suppressed home defense (not that the Grendel is not adequate for that as well).

260 Rem is a good choice for hunting as well.
The 260 Rem is an under appreciated sleeper. It shows ballistics approaching those of the .270 Winchester in a .308-length case.

Similarly, the Grendel can to as well or better than the .243 Win with a .223 Rem-length cartridge. Its a surprising result, but you can check out a discussion of the comparison at http://shootersnotes.com/grendelmania/grendel-potential-for-large-game/.

LRRPF52
09-28-2011, 03:27 AM
Joe,
That's funny that you mention .260 Rem versus .270 Winchester. I recently purchased two different projectile types for my .270, since there are match pills available now from Sierra and Berger. Sierra makes the .277 135 SMK, and Berger makes the .277 130 and 140 Hunting VLD's. I got the 140 Bergers, and ran both G1 and G7 forms through Berger's ballistic program. The .270 needs at least 250fps more MV to match the .260 pushing the 6.5mm 140gr Berger VLD, but the 6.5 has quite a bit less wind drift at 1000 yards.

That being said, if you really push the .270 to 3000 fps and faster, you can get under 8 Mils of elevation for 1000 yard impact, which is pretty nice, but I can do that with the .260 Rem and much less velocity, like I said. You can tell which is the superior caliber for aerodynamics by just looking at the 6.5's versus .277's. The .260 starts to deliver more muzzle energy and flatter trajectory at 500 yards when comparing the 140 Berger VLD's in 6.5 and .277. It takes around 60 grains or more of powder for the .270 to launch at those velocities, and a long action as well. At least I have some use for the H4831 powder I bought now in a case that can suck it up. The .270's attraction is that it delivers more mass per area of impact, so it will probably ring steel nicely. I'll see soon enough!

JASmith
09-28-2011, 04:15 AM
And guess which rifle I bought? The only problem with my BLR in .270 Win is an atrocious trigger pull.

Yes, I've already run down the possibilities for making it better, but even the Browning folks say that I've got the best that can be done given the design. Much of the trigger group moves with the lever, so the creep and heavy pull result from margins needed to assure safety.

I continue to be amazed at the accuracy reported by AR users!

Nimrod
09-28-2011, 04:43 AM
And guess which rifle I bought? The only problem with my BLR in .270 Win is an atrocious trigger pull.

Yes, I've already run down the possibilities for making it better, but even the Browning folks say that I've got the best that can be done given the design. Much of the trigger group moves with the lever, so the creep and heavy pull result from margins needed to assure safety.

I continue to be amazed at the accuracy reported by AR users!

I don't intend to hj the thread but I just got a BLR take down I'm .325 WSM and it has a trigger that you need three fingers to pull. I have a gun smith neat by that says Thai can make it better, when I hey it worked on I will let you know how it turned out.

warped
09-28-2011, 05:56 PM
Probably the best designed .270win rifle is the Remington 760 or 7600, much can be done with that and a trigger job is super easy.

A pump action rifle with free floated bbl, what is there not to like?

Besides having an action nearly as fast as a semi-auto.

warped
09-28-2011, 05:59 PM
Joe,
That's funny that you mention .260 Rem versus .270 Winchester. I recently purchased two different projectile types for my .270, since there are match pills available now from Sierra and Berger. Sierra makes the .277 135 SMK, and Berger makes the .277 130 and 140 Hunting VLD's. I got the 140 Bergers, and ran both G1 and G7 forms through Berger's ballistic program. The .270 needs at least 250fps more MV to match the .260 pushing the 6.5mm 140gr Berger VLD, but the 6.5 has quite a bit less wind drift at 1000 yards.



That being said, if you really push the .270 to 3000 fps and faster, you can get under 8 Mils of elevation for 1000 yard impact, which is pretty nice, but I can do that with the .260 Rem and much less velocity, like I said. You can tell which is the superior caliber for aerodynamics by just looking at the 6.5's versus .277's. The .260 starts to deliver more muzzle energy and flatter trajectory at 500 yards when comparing the 140 Berger VLD's in 6.5 and .277. It takes around 60 grains or more of powder for the .270 to launch at those velocities, and a long action as well. At least I have some use for the H4831 powder I bought now in a case that can suck it up. The .270's attraction is that it delivers more mass per area of impact, so it will probably ring steel nicely. I'll see soon enough!

We are getting nearly 3200fps on a 130 SST with awesome groups. The Remington 760 is a slick old gun if you know how to tweak it just right. Plus you do not have to break your cheek weld while firing and tracking for another shot is needed.

JASmith
09-28-2011, 07:26 PM
We are getting nearly 3200fps on a 130 SST with awesome groups. The Remington 760 is a slick old gun if you know how to tweak it just right. Plus you do not have to break your cheek weld while firing and tracking for another shot is needed.
3200 with 130 gr? Sounds interesting --

My dad taught me to work both bolt and levers while keeping the rifle in position, including the cheek weld.

Took a bit of practice, but the actions got a lot smoother too!

warped
09-29-2011, 02:20 AM
Here is some interesting info for you then, I forget the powder my friend loads for our .270win's but it might be this or something close.

Hornady® Superformance™

SUPERFORMANCE ammunition is loaded with proprietary propellants that increase the velocity ratings up to 200 feet per second compared to other popular brands. Because there is no increase in pressure, regardless of the caliber, there is no increase in felt recoil but there IS an increase in efficiency and high speed performance. From sub-zero arctic temperatures to almost unbearable desert heat, SUPERFORMANCE ammunition can withstand any hunting habitat.

Technical Information
Caliber: 270 Winchester
Bullet Weight: 130 Grains
Bullet Style: SST
Case Type: Brass

Ballistics Information:
Muzzle Velocity: 3200 fps
Muzzle Energy: 2955 ft. lbs.

recon562001
09-29-2011, 09:07 AM
Coming back from the 270. I am going with the 6.5 Creedmoor its going to be a bolt gun so I do not have to worry about the increased size of a AR10 platform also the Creedmoor is nearly a ballistic twin of the 260, will feed consistently from 308 mags, and takes the same bullets I already load my Grendel with.

If I end up needing any more gun then that I have a 30-06 witch will and has taken most North American game, and if I still need to step up its going to have to be in the 375H&H class.

JASmith
09-29-2011, 03:05 PM
I like your plans B & C.

I understand that the primary motivator for the Creedmore is to give that little bit of extra space needed to seat long, heavy bullets (AMAX & VLD) in the .308 magazine length. Hornady made up the loss of powder volume by using a blended propellant like SuperFormance, hence factory loads are close to the .260 Remington in muzzle velocity.

Are you reloading for these calibers?

warped
09-29-2011, 03:12 PM
30-06 is truly not more capable than the .260rem. it runs out of gas sooner and is not nearly as sleek or flat shooting.

JASmith
09-29-2011, 03:24 PM
Ah, the beginnings of a new form of the 70+ year long .270 vs '06 debate!

I haven't run the comparative ballistics yet, but I suspect that the .260 is indeed flatter shooting than the '06 depending on bullet and load choices. There are also some loads that will closely match the trajectories. I would also agree that the .260, the Creedmore and the classic European 6.5's will take about any game animal you'd care to consider. Not so sure that most folks would consider a rifle with 6.5 caliber bullets appropriate for Brown Bear, Lions, elephants, etc.

The context of the comment laying out the '06 and the 375 as fall-backs suggests an interest in larger game. One's confidence in taking large bullets at moderate range is typically higher when using heavy bullets in the '06 or .375.

Sniper20
09-29-2011, 03:39 PM
If you guys reload, and you are looking for cheaper brass, go with converting the 7.62x39 brass to Grendel. I plan on doing it, but have not gotten there yet. I'm not sure if anyone has done it, but if you have, can you give some input on it? I was going to get some, but the only brass I could find (with the company I was going to put my order through) was Lapua, and it was just as expensive to get 7.62x39 as it was Hornady Grendel... So I will wait to get some cheaper stuff to try it out and see if I can save some pennies on brass. I was told that the biggest thing is to get a neck trimmer to make sure you don't have it too thick... So I can leave some notes on what I find out when I do it, or someone else can give us an opinion on that.

warped
09-29-2011, 03:43 PM
If you consider your time and effort, that brass is not cheaper than Hornady brass.

Keep that 7.62x39mm brass for your AK or SKS, you will be glad you did, if reloaded it really does perform a lot better than the offerings in factory ammo.

recon562001
09-29-2011, 03:43 PM
Ah, the beginnings of a new form of the 70+ year long .270 vs '06 debate!...

...The context of the comment laying out the '06 and the 375 as fall-backs suggests an interest in larger game. One's confidence in taking large bullets at moderate range is typically higher when using heavy bullets in the '06 or .375.

I know right! Lets just agree they can take game and some of us like one over the other.

What I meant was the Creedmoor will take any thing I intend to hunt as long as I do my part and put the bullet where it needs to go.

Most of the arguments about long range and targets at 1000 yards do not apply to me. I know my ability and I also know that I will not be shooting beyond 400 meters at game (I may be opening another can of worms with that statement). That is just my limit to where I can ethically engage game.

You are right if I ever do go on a brown bear hunt or on a safari for the big five I will need to but that is another matter entirely.

And yes I reload for 5.56 and 6.5 Grendel I also plan on reloading for the creedmoor.

Sniper20
09-29-2011, 03:57 PM
If you consider your time and effort, that brass is not cheaper than Hornady brass.

Keep that 7.62x39mm brass for your AK or SKS, you will be glad you did, if reloaded it really does perform a lot better than the offerings in factory ammo.

I got an AK and don't do accuracy with it. I just have the steel case surplus. I don't think it's worth reloading for in my case. I don't really do anything with it other than go out playing and having fun. If I decide to put some decent optics on it and go for accuracy, then I might do brass and reload, but for now, just a toy...

JASmith
09-29-2011, 05:12 PM
...If I end up needing any more gun then that I have a 30-06 witch will and has taken most North American game, and if I still need to step up its going to have to be in the 375H&H class.
Reloading will give more flexibility for the suggestion here, but comparing factory loads makes the point. This information is part of an article I'm writing called "Paired Rifles for Practice and Hunting." It is a rewrite of an existing article: http://shootersnotes.com/articles/companion-rifles/. Among other things the ballistics data in the old article is no longer as current as I'd like.

Look at the 120 gr AMAX load for the Creedmore -- drop at 500 yds is 41.4" for the Hornady standard sight-in.

Look at the 165 gr GMX Superformance in 30-06 -- drop at 500 yds is 41.7" (The interbond is 40.7").

This means that by using the same model of glass on both bolt rifles, almost everything you do for Kentucky Windage and Tennessee elevation for the 6.5 Creedmore in this load will apply to the loads shown for the 30-06.

This will work at least out to the 400 meters you are interested in and will improve your shooting skills!

Nifty huh!

BTW Sighting in for the same drop at 400 meters will assure that small differences between published data and the performance in your rifles will be washed over.

LRRPF52
09-29-2011, 09:02 PM
I have no problems loading any of the VLD type projectiles into mag length with the .260 Rem. To engage the lands with secant ogive VLDs like the Berger 140's, you will really be pushing COAL outside a lot of bolt-gun mags too. The 139gr Scenar, 140 SMK, 140 Berger, 142 SMK all fit just fine in the .260 Rem, and I can buy factory brass ready to go from Remington, 7mm-08 Winchester brass necked-down, Lapua .260 Rem brass now, Nosler, and Norma. Creedmore brass is only available from Hornady.

.260 Rem has become the standard cartridge for long-range shooters using short actions now. Not only does it smoke .30-06 ballistics, but .300 Win Mag as well, especially when you look at wind drift. The .30 cals are dying out really fast as shooters realize that you just don't get comparable ballistics without excessive gains in powder, bullet weight, and punishing recoil. The only short-action, long range calibers that out-do the 6.5x47 and .260 Rem are the 6.5x284 (bye-bye barrel life), and the 7mm WSM pushing the 180 Berger VLD's. This is why so many people are building .260's in droves.

I'm trying to get Lapua to make a .260 Palma with small rifle primers, so brass life will be extended even further, and pressures will be higher. At the end of the day, brass availability is what made me choose the .260 Rem over 6.5x47 and 6.5 Creedmore. The Lapua is probably the best performer, but only has one brass source, at over $1.10 a piece. I've had excellent results with necked-down 7mm-08 in my auto-loader, getting at least 5 loadings with high pressures.

JASmith
09-29-2011, 09:32 PM
In deference to the comments from LRRPF52 about the .260 Rem vs 6.5 Creedmore, here's a couple of numbers to consider for the .260 Remington:

.260 Rem Premier 120 gr Accutip, drop at 500 yds = 41.7 with 200 yd zero (Effectively the same as the post above for the Creedmore).
.260 Rem Federal 120 gr Nslr Ballistic Tip 500 yds = 42.1 with 200 yd zero (the same within any reasonable accuracy standard)
.260 Rem Federal 120 gr Triple Shock x at 500 yds = 44.7 with 200 yd zero (less than 0.6 MOA difference from 30-06 larger game loads)

BTW can do a similar story with the Grendel 123 gr AMAX and the .375 H&H Magnum Federal with 260 gr Accubond bullet. But at least one is likely to be the long bolt...

bwaites
09-29-2011, 10:06 PM
Zak Smith did a great writeup on these three here:

http://demigodllc.com/articles/6.5-shootout-260-6.5x47-6.5-creedmoor/?p=1

Final result for those that don't feel like reading: There is nothing the Creedmoor or 6.5x47 will do that the .260 won't.

Advantage in brass to the .260, and small primer .260 brass would make it conclusively .260 in my thoughts!

JASmith
09-29-2011, 11:31 PM
...There is nothing the Creedmoor or 6.5x47 will do that the .260 won't...
But you won't have the neat names---

recon562001
09-30-2011, 04:01 AM
[QUOTE=bwaites;11405]

Final result for those that don't feel like reading: There is nothing the Creedmoor or 6.5x47 will do that the .260 won't.

/QUOTE]

Yea my gun smith talked me in to the 260rem last night. So that is what hes going to build the rifle in.

LRRPF52
09-30-2011, 05:25 AM
I don't know why they ever made the 6.5 Creedmore, to be honest. Everyone will either chamber in .260 Rem, or 6.5x47 Lapua. The Lapua is a higher pressure cartridge that is meant to work with a certain set of powders. I used to think the .260 Rem had too much case capacity, until I started using the Hodgon's powders. Zak told me most long range shooters using .260 Rem are using H4350, H4831SC, and RL17. He competes in or runs several invitation-only precision rifle field matches, like Steel Safari, and sees a lot of the Nation's top shooters when it comes to practical long-range marksmanship.

I had this same discussion with a buddy of mine who was a sniper in 10th Mountain Division. The only reason he chambered in Creedmore was that his brother-in-law is already set-up for it..brass, dies, etc. I started my load development with N500 series powders before I discovered that they were bad news for throats and barrels. I started playing with Hodgon's H4831, and immediately got a consistent string of sub .75 and sub .5 MOA groups, finding several accuracy nodes with the 139gr Scenars into 5-round groups, starting with a .65 MOA string right off the bat, and several .4 MOA groups. I'm now working with H4350 and AA4350, with 139gr Scenars, 142gr SMK's, 140gr AMAX's, and a bullet I didn't know exists...the Barnes 140gr Match Burner. They all weighed exactly 140.3gr, with no deviation, and they all appear and measure to exact external dimensions.

Most (90%) practical long range shooters running .260's are using either 139gr Scenars, or 142gr SMK's. The 139gr Scenar is the most popular long-range 6.5mm bullet over the pond as well.

Hoot
09-30-2011, 07:55 PM
+1 Reloader 17 in my 26" .260 Remington on a Savage Model 12 action.

I suspect the 6.5 Creedmoor is what we laughingly say at work, "Forget the delicious steak. Sell them more sizzle!" http://cdn.calguns.net/calguns.net/calgunforum/images/smilies/no.gif

Hoot

LRRPF52
09-30-2011, 09:09 PM
My buddy Ray uses Reloader 17 in a 25" .260 Rem with the 139gr Scenars at 2980 fps, and has made 1st-round hits on steel at 1450 yards with it. I'm not sure if I should mess with Reloader 17 in my auto-loader until I get an adjustable gas block, since people are getting an average of 100-150fps advantage over H4831sc and H4350 in .260 Rem. I made a mistake by not going with one right off the bat when I had GA Precision build it for me. I just need to have a smith drill and tap the block for a set screw over the gas port.

jwilson1985
10-03-2011, 12:16 AM
the 300 with a pantom on it is awesome 8.5-16"barrel is ll you need...but like above idk why the keep coming out with calibers

stanc
10-14-2011, 04:30 AM
Speaking of .300 BLK, have you seen the AAC Honey Badger? :cool:

http://68forums.com/forums/showthread.php?18983-300-blackout-vs-6.8&p=249235&viewfull=1#post249235

YutYut
10-14-2011, 01:52 PM
that honey badger video was funny as hell.

jwilson1985
10-17-2011, 06:11 PM
umm that stock is really close to loki design i may need to bring that up ..but none the less funny video

Sniper20
10-17-2011, 07:37 PM
From what I have read on the 6.5 Creedmoor vs the .260 is they are pretty much identical, but the 260 has a touch better drop (.3 mils at 1K) but the CM has less pressure, giving better barrel life. Now the barrel life is a huge debate as there are competitors that claim to have over 6,000 rounds and still got match grade accuracy, so I think the biggest thing is going to be preference... I think I would like to get a Creedmoor...

jwilson1985
10-17-2011, 11:44 PM
see ive heard from a guy using a creedmore that he was getting a little a 500 b4 his groups starded going to shat but i know nothing about the load data hes using it may be past the raged edge as most benchrest stuff........the stock on that 300 is still bugging the crap out of me thats a loki stock copy with a damn cover over it...wheres JAsmith he knows all the legal suff

stanc
10-19-2011, 01:05 AM
...the stock on that 300 is still bugging the crap out of me thats a loki stock copy with a damn cover over it...wheres JAsmith he knows all the legal suff
It does have some similarity in design. However, the AAC stock is a lot more chic than Loki's. ;)

BTW, if the AAC stock bugs you, you oughta love H&K's stock.
http://www.hk-usa.com/-images/products/hk416c/lg_hk416c.jpg

But, I don't see why you should get too upset about it, though. After all, it's not as if the Loki stock is an original design.
http://www.lokiweaponsystems.com/images/news/lwsf-gat-small.jpg
It is clearly a copy of the stock on the M231 Firing Port Weapon.
http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/362/sam231.jpg

jwilson1985
10-19-2011, 08:14 AM
i sent u a pm explaining...i didnt want that part public ,its all being handled thanks again though

rsilvers
10-19-2011, 11:15 PM
I am project lead on 300 AAC BLACKOUT at AAC.

The 300 BLK and 6.5 could not be more opposites. While I see some merit in comparing 300 BLK to 6.8, I see little for comparing it to 6.5 - which is even longer range capable than 6.8.

I see 300 BLK as replacing the MP7, MP5, 10 inch barrel HK-416, Mk18, and for hunting and self-defense with an AR when you want 30 caliber bullets but don't want the size/weight, and expense of an AR10. The Remington UMC ammo coming out is just $12.99 a box MSRP. There is a lot of info at www.300blktalk.com

By the way, I like 260 a lot - I even designed a 260 barrel that headspaces easily on a Remington without needing a reamer:

http://www.midwayusa.com/Product/164759/advanced-armament-co-aac-barrel-remington-700-medium-contour-260-remington-24-1-in-8-twist-5-8-24-threaded-muzzle-matte

Loki - I was not aware of your stock, but we did know about the Colt M231. We started our design around that but made the rails more like the HK MP5.

bwaites
10-20-2011, 12:41 AM
Mr. Silvers, welcome to the Grendel board!

The 300 BLK is an intriguing cartridge.

BjornF16
10-20-2011, 01:22 AM
Welcome rsilvers!

I love my Grendels...I also love my .300 BLK!

I hunt with Grendel while my Blackout (w/ 10.5" barrel) sits by my nightstand...Thanks!

jwilson1985
10-20-2011, 01:25 AM
you would be surprised i think at the number of 300s loki moves on a weekly bases ,its a cool round ,and will be my next ar.rsilvers welcome to the board...the loki gat stock is made from the hk design aswell,,but wont go in to that welcome aboard though

pinzgauer
10-20-2011, 05:53 PM
The 300 BLK and 6.5 could not be more opposites.

You said it well on another forum: "If you are looking for the performance characteristics of one, then you would not be interested in the other." (or something like that)

stanc
10-22-2011, 09:21 PM
AAC Honey Badger

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/wp-content/blogs.dir/5/files/aac-honey-badger/101211od_ausa11147.jpg

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/wp-content/blogs.dir/5/files/aac-honey-badger/101211od_ausa11144.jpg

pangris
10-23-2011, 12:30 AM
I have both.

My 300 is a 9" gun. It shines as such.

My 6.5 is an 18" gun. It shines as such.

They are different rounds for different purposes.

jwilson1985
10-23-2011, 02:08 AM
AAC Honey Badger

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/wp-content/blogs.dir/5/files/aac-honey-badger/101211od_ausa11147.jpg

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/wp-content/blogs.dir/5/files/aac-honey-badger/101211od_ausa11144.jpg

good looking rifle

jwilson1985
10-23-2011, 02:14 AM
add where special weapons tested our 300 aac http://www.tactical-life.com/online/special-weapons/aacremington-300-blackout/

rsilvers
10-25-2011, 02:10 AM
http://www.ammoland.com/2011/10/24/300-aac-blackout-cartridge/

stanc
10-27-2011, 08:18 PM
Staff Sgt. Daniel Horner, one of the US Army’s Marksmanship Unit sharpshooters, has just won the 2011 USPSA Multigun National Championship using AAC’s 300BLK.

4 years ago, the US AMU started looking at a .308 carbine round so they could make major power factor in shooting sports competition.

The AMU first tried 300 Whisper as their entry into the major power factor.

They next looked at the 6.5 Grendel case and found they could neck it up to 7.62, giving them the round they wanted at a safe chamber pressure. In fact, the 30AS (or 30 Gremlin as it’s also known), is a solid shot out to 600 meters, has recoil similar to a 5.56, and makes major power factor in competition. It’s become the AMUs go-to round for action shooting. But, the round has an Achilles heel; magazine compatibility. The unit must make its own mags and the most 30AS ammo that will fit in a standard AR mag body is 26 rounds...

The AMU still uses the 30AS for any gun games that present more distant targets, like outlaw shooting events. But, inside 300 meters, the 300BLK is the right combination of power and compatibility to get the job done.

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2011/10/23/usamus-horner-takes-the-gold-with-300blk/

stanc
11-09-2011, 06:55 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cvxq7-Ior-g

recon562001
12-17-2011, 04:21 PM
Where can I get some of that SLAP from?


I am ging to ditch the 5.56 barrel on my M&P and put a Noveske 300AAC barrel on it. Now I just need to figure out what I am going to to do with my bran new battle comp and case of M855 I have sitting at home.

bwaites
12-17-2011, 04:32 PM
There are plenty of guys here who would be happy to buy your 855 at a reasonable price.

recon562001
12-17-2011, 04:50 PM
There are plenty of guys here who would be happy to buy your 855 at a reasonable price.

I thought as much. I will post it up along with my 5.56 barrel and battle comp in the buy sell trade section once I get back in the U.S..

bwaites
12-17-2011, 05:21 PM
Sounds good!

Rambozo
12-17-2011, 07:21 PM
I have been looking at the numbers and the AAC shoots a 125 grain 7.62 projectile at 2250 FPS producing 1405 foot ponds out of a 16 inch barrel while the Grendel shoots a 123 grain at 2650 FPS producing 1917 foot pounds from a 24 inch barrel.

To me that seems that if I am using the Grendel in a 16 inch barrel that I am going to be getting about the same performance from either round. Dose that seem to be the case to any one else?

No. Performance only appears equal superficially. Both bullets of similar weight will not have the same BC due to the difference in diameter. All else being equal, the smaller diameter bullet will have the higher BC. The higher the BC, the better the bullet will carry it's velocity. That means that the 6.5 will do better at further distances.

jwilson1985
12-18-2011, 04:19 AM
and the 300aac was ment to run sbr and suppressed...there is no point to have a barrel on a 300aac longer then 16"s

BjornF16
12-18-2011, 04:27 PM
I'm not an expert, but I would think sectional density should be considered as well for penetration:

5.56 SD (68 grn) = .194
300 SD (125 grn) = .188
6.5 SD (95 grn) = .195
6.5 SD (120 grn) = .246

What would be the optimum PDW bullet (inside 100 yds)?

Rambozo
12-18-2011, 05:18 PM
I'm not an expert, but I would think sectional density should be considered as well for penetration:

I would imagine so.

JASmith
12-18-2011, 05:38 PM
...What would be the optimum PDW bullet (inside 100 yds)?
Any of these calibers should do very well inside 100 yards.

The choice of caliber and bullet might be decided by what you might like for plinking or other informal shooting.

Informal shooting is one of the best ways to become very familiar with your firearm operation and quirks unless you have the fiscal resources and time to go through formal training and the follow-up intensive practice.

stanc
12-18-2011, 07:27 PM
What would be the optimum PDW bullet (inside 100 yds)?
For a military PDW? I'd say it'd be one that has lightest weight and lowest recoil (for maximum shootability/hit probability when used by personnel who get little range time). Plus, it should be in a standard caliber. IMO, that means:

- 5.56x45 w/45-55gr bullet, if you consider a SBR to be a PDW.

- 9x19 w/90-100gr bullet, for a holsterable PDW.

BjornF16
12-18-2011, 10:37 PM
Not military PDW...personal PDW.

stanc
12-18-2011, 11:05 PM
For private use, there are too many variables to say there is one optimum PDW bullet.

The optimum bullet, caliber, and weapon would depend on an individual's personal situation.

stanc
01-21-2012, 04:32 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5nvFoQDJUI

Anybody got a Grendel LMG, yet? :(

bwaites
01-21-2012, 06:33 AM
Wow, a necked up .223 runs from the same links as a .223, who'da thunk it!

stanc
01-21-2012, 09:22 AM
Wow, a necked up .223 runs from the same links as a .223, who'da thunk it!
Well, that's sorta the point, in the context of the thread title.

Regarding conversion of belt-fed machine guns, .300 Blackout has a decided advantage over 6.5 Grendel.

Variable
01-21-2012, 10:16 AM
So should I convert this to .300 Blackout?
http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn291/Variable556/Shrike/DSCN1308.jpg

Oh wait, they can't even fill everybody else's 5.56 orders... Nevermind! ;)

While it'd be cool, I'd much rather have mine done over in Grendel any day!!! :D

stanc
01-21-2012, 10:56 AM
While it'd be cool, I'd much rather have mine done over in Grendel any day!!! :D
Oh, if only it could be done...

I'll see if I can find my magic wand. It must be here somewhere. ;)

bwaites
01-21-2012, 05:29 PM
Well, that's sorta the point, in the context of the thread title.

Regarding conversion of belt-fed machine guns, .300 Blackout has a decided advantage over 6.5 Grendel.

Yep, another belt fed with all the great ballistics of the 7.62x39! That's a winner, for sure! Accurate out to 150 yards or so, (well, maybe 300). LOL!

Absolutely NO advantage over 5.56 belt feds with even less effective range and ammo that costs more than twice as much, thats a breakthrough?

Two completely different animals, one a cartridge with extended range and accuracy, the other a short range cartridge that shines as a subsonic.

LRRPF52
01-21-2012, 06:08 PM
I stopped by DSA's booth at SHOT again yesterday and reminded them that Grendel steel case is around the corner, which will make it the most attractive caliber to do in a belt fed conversion due to cost.

.300 AAC in a SAW or Shrike?????

stanc
01-21-2012, 07:24 PM
Yep, another belt fed with all the great ballistics of the 7.62x39! That's a winner, for sure! Accurate out to 150 yards or so, (well, maybe 300). LOL!

Absolutely NO advantage over 5.56 belt feds with even less effective range and ammo that costs more than twice as much, thats a breakthrough?
Wow. What an incredible distortion of my words. I never said that .300 BLK is by any measure superior to 5.56 for belt-feds, let alone that it's a breakthrough.

Two completely different animals, one a cartridge with extended range and accuracy, the other a short range cartridge that shines as a subsonic.
Absolutely. But, if you had to go to war tomorrow morning, which would you rather have: The .300 BLK M249 that actually exists, or the 6.5 Grendel M249 that is no more than a dream?

bwaites
01-21-2012, 07:34 PM
Wow. What an incredible distortion of my words. I never said that .300 BLK is by any measure superior to 5.56 for belt-feds, let alone that it's a breakthrough.

Absolutely. But, if you had to go to war tomorrow morning, which would you rather have: The .300 BLK M249 that actually exists, or the 6.5 Grendel M249 that is no more than a dream?

I'd point out that in the context of the thread, the original poster was comparing the Grendel and the .300 BLK in a 16" barrel AR and their associated velocities and energy at the muzzle and downrange, it had nothing to do with a belt fed.

As for distortion, I didn't distort anything, I simply stated the facts when it came to the .300 BLK. Its a VERY niche cartridge, and the fact that you can get it to run in a rifle designed for its parent case is no real surprise or breakthrough, is it?

Given the choice between the .300 BLK that exists and the 5.56 that exists, I'd take the 5.56 everytime. I'm NOT confident that the .300 BLK M249 will even run consistently. I found it interesting that the belt in that video was so short, wonder why that was?

BUT....the .300 BLK as a belt fed for carry is a non starter regardless, and overweight, obese non starter at that. As hinted at in the video, it was done as a one-off for some kind of "I'll show you!" kind of thing.

stanc
01-21-2012, 07:36 PM
I stopped by DSA's booth at SHOT again yesterday and reminded them that Grendel steel case is around the corner, which will make it the most attractive caliber to do in a belt fed conversion due to cost.
Good pitch! Let's hope they run with it.

.300 AAC in a SAW or Shrike?????
They say it's loads of fun to shoot subsonic suppressed.

stanc
01-21-2012, 07:47 PM
Given the choice between the .300 BLK that exists and the 5.56 that exists, I'd take the 5.56 everytime.
Well, sure. But that doesn't answer my question.

I'm NOT confident that the .300 BLK M249 will even run consistently. I found it interesting that the belt in that video was so short, wonder why that was?
No idea. How 'bout a couple hundred rounds?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGFfzaM0lOk

P.S. Gotta love those Texans. No way you could get away with that here in Kalifornia.

Deezil
01-22-2012, 12:43 AM
I thought about a 300BLK, but didnt really get the point, no offence, but when I go out with something, I want to have longer range as an option, those are shorter range guns right? Thats why I went 6.5G over 6.8 or 300.

stanc
01-22-2012, 03:07 AM
I thought about a 300BLK, but didnt really get the point, no offence, but when I go out with something, I want to have longer range as an option, those are shorter range guns right? Thats why I went 6.5G over 6.8 or 300.
Yes, shorter range. If someone wants long range, then .300 BLK is not the way to go. But, for an SBR, I'd choose .300 BLK over 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC.

There is one thing 300 Blackout and 6.5 Grendel have in common: The ability to use long-ogive, streamlined bullets.

http://www.gunblast.com/images/300Blackout/DSC02413.JPG

rsilvers
01-22-2012, 04:31 PM
As for distortion, I didn't distort anything, I simply stated the facts when it came to the .300 BLK. Its a VERY niche cartridge

300 BLK is the opposite of a niche cartridge. It is a very general purpose and versatile cartridge - and is a power and terminal effects upgrade from 5.56mm that still has 30 rounds in a normal magazine. The fact that it can be suppressed easily is a niche aspect, but that is in addition to the normal features.

In the last 15 months, over 80 companies have jumped on board.

http://img861.imageshack.us/img861/9338/300blk300small.jpg

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/7161/300aacblkbarriersummary.jpg

Alexander Arms is very interested in it:

http://www.300blktalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=151&t=78758

I put updates here: https://www.facebook.com/300aacblackout

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/10/horner-wins-tactical-optics-divison-at-multigun-nationals/

Cheap ammo:

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/547535/remington-umc-ammunition-300-aac-blackout-762x35mm-115-grain-full-metal-jacket-box-of-20

Deezil
01-22-2012, 04:35 PM
different strokes for different folks. I wouldnt trade my Grendel for one

JASmith
01-22-2012, 04:47 PM
I am also unimpressed by the 300 AAC Blackout. Barnes appears to have used pistol bullet manufacturing processes to get the expansion shown in the pictures.

The Grendel gets at least the same performance as is shown above at 300 yards and is clearly superior beyond that.

Furthermore we don't have to aim a "mile" over the target to get a hit at 300 yards.

65man
01-22-2012, 04:52 PM
I think 300 blk have a place on short distance battle for military & swat/police (how about for long distance? ) but for civilian I will keep my 5.56 for blaster and 6.5 grendel to have fun on shooting

bwaites
01-22-2012, 06:32 PM
I'm impressed that a post by someone as obscure as I warrants a response from Mr. Silvers. For those unaware of it, please understand that Mr. Silvers is the leading proponent and developer of the cartridge, so he has a significant interest in seeing its expansion.

While I agree that it is an interesting cartridge, it is VERY much a niche cartridge. Simply because companies produce something widely doesn't mean it does not fill a niche. There are millions of .380 pistols manufactured every year, and it very much fills a niche in the self defense market, but to believe that it will EVER be accepted as a widespread, primary, and generally accepted manstopper is ludicrous. The 300 BLK very much fills that same kind of niche.

Any rifle cartridge which has exterior ballistics inferior to the 5.56 and similar to the 7.62x39, seems like it might only be described in todays world as a niche cartridge. That's not all bad; the Grendel, 6.8, and many other AR cartridges are niche cartridges.

I love the subsonic characteristics, but I load 30-30's with essentially the same supersonic exterior ballistics, and that cartridge has been around for over 100 years!

Alexander Arms may indeed be interested in the cartridge, but that doesn't change the fact that it is still simply a variant offering which chambers in the AR. For that matter, I would be surprised if AA WASN'T interested, since being able to market to multiple different niches in the market is critical to survival in todays fractured rifle world. Every AR manufacturer around is looking for spots to fill in their lineup, and AA, as perhaps the premier small arms niche marketer, is quick to see those gaps.

In fact, in some ways AA might have invented the niche market, with one of the first 5.45 variations of the AR, (the Genghis, which is no longer marketed), then the Beowulf, then the Grendel, then the .17 HMR. AA has repeatedly found ways to bring cartridges to market in the AR15 platform that have not been marketed, or only scarcely marketed, before. I expect we will continue to see new and exciting offerings from them.

BjornF16
01-22-2012, 09:11 PM
I have a great complement of ARs: 10.5" BLK, 2x16" 5.56, 18/20" Grendels...who needs anything else? (except a bolt rifle in Grendel):cool:

jwilson1985
01-23-2012, 10:06 PM
i have a hard time seeing the military switching to it . loki talked grendel with them till erik was horse and they still wanted a 556. this was for designated marksman rifles mind you

Sniper20
01-24-2012, 01:32 AM
I would have to agree with Bwaites... I think it's a great round, but it has it's place. Are there better rounds out there, yes. Is this better than some, yes. Every cartridge has it's place, and this one is no different.

Will I get one, no. I have my Grendel as well as my 5.56. I don't need it. Someone that doesn't have those, and wants the latest and greatest, they might be interested, but not this guy.

stanc
01-25-2012, 05:32 AM
i have a hard time seeing the military switching to it .
The military (as in Army and Marines) won't switch to .300 BLK, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if SOCOM personnel start using it for some missions.

loki talked grendel with them till erik was horse and they still wanted a 556. this was for designated marksman rifles mind you
Of course they won't use 6.5 Grendel for DMRs, as long as 5.56 is the standard round. You'll have to convince them to completely replace 5.56 with 6.5, for carbines, rifles, IARs, and LMGs, too.

wrsteve
01-27-2012, 03:13 AM
Like rsilvers says they are very diffent calibers and both have their place. I have a couple of grendels but I am going to build a 300 AAC BLACKOUT 9" suppressed. It is a really great looking CQB rifle. That is the beauty of the platform - lots of different toys to build :)

By the way I did see a post saying that Alexander Arms was interested in the 300 AAC BLACKOUT.

rsilvers
02-13-2012, 04:56 AM
Yes, here is a photo of the AA 300 BLK:

http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/969/40643995.jpg

Variable
02-13-2012, 05:37 AM
Hee Hee, Oh you did it now.LOL!

BjornF16
02-14-2012, 10:40 PM
I can't read the engraving on the lower...does it say ".300 BLK"?

Bill Alexander
02-15-2012, 07:57 PM
That rifle was a production standard upper with the Mk10 hand guard option but we did not get the lowers in time so the lower is a billet ambi. For production we will have ambi market forged lowers.

Barrels are 16" stainless and fully heavy fluted with AAC flash hider 5/8-24. The carrier is M16 style with properly staked gas key. Bolt is HP tested and MP inspected.

We spent a lot of time pondering this caliber and trying to decide if/where it would fit. There is no denying that there is great utility in this combination but one (the manufacturer) has to decide what the role is. In its own way it is like taking a 10.5" Grendel and shooting to 600 yards. Possible, fun, but not immensely practical. What we saw was the possibility for a light, low recoil hunting rifle. The context for us is really the lighter bullets in the 110 to 150 grain weight range. These are superb out to 200 yards and do not demand stupid hold overs. While lacking range over the Grendel it adds some cross section and as you get to +140 grains gives a capability that the Grendel cannot, without the brutal recoil of the Beowulf. Commensurately the gas system is a standard carbine length and is set for supersonic ammunition. It will be picky with subsonics unless used with a silencer.

My congratulations goes out to RSilvers for steering this caliber through the early stages and hope that he can keep it on track without the usual 47,000 variations. Alexander Arms for one will will use the SAAMI specification.

BjornF16
02-16-2012, 01:10 AM
What we saw was the possibility for a light, low recoil hunting rifle. The context for us is really the lighter bullets in the 110 to 150 grain weight range. These are superb out to 200 yards and do not demand stupid hold overs. While lacking range over the Grendel it adds some cross section and as you get to +140 grains gives a capability that the Grendel cannot, without the brutal recoil of the Beowulf.

My congratulations goes out to RSilvers for steering this caliber through the early stages and hope that he can keep it on track without the usual 47,000 variations. Alexander Arms for one will will use the SAAMI specification.

God Bless you Bill for sticking with SAAMI...and my compliments to Mr. Silvers. I already have a 10.5" BLK which I really like (as do those who I have let shoot it)...now I will have to ponder a 16".

Bill, can you shed more details on the barrel?...cut rifled?

BjornF16
02-16-2012, 01:45 AM
BTW...I have a case of Hornady 300 Whisper ammo...can we start a forum area where I can complain about feeding issues?:rolleyes:

noone
03-07-2012, 06:11 PM
All these cartridges have their purpose. It appears to me that ignoring the purpose behind a cartridges development, and then arguing over whether that cartridge can do some other job well, is akin to arguing about why an Indianapolis 500 car won't win at the drag strip against a fuel dragster, and then arguing over why the dragster won't win at Indy. Neither was intended for those purposes, and it is the same for many of these cartridges.

Kinda a Ford VS Chevy argument.

jwilson1985
03-14-2012, 08:42 AM
speaking of a 300blk if you get the chance to look at the new copy of guns and weapons , lokis 300blk is in there. Here is a link to a partial article
http://www.tactical-life.com/online/guns-and-weapons/loki-weapon-systems-300-blackout

Bwild97
03-14-2012, 09:40 AM
So What role is the 300 AAC supposed to fill? And why or "how" is it an improvement over the 7.62x39?

JASmith
03-14-2012, 04:11 PM
...why or "how" is it an improvement over the 7.62x39?
One, and a major reason the 5.56 is so entrenched, is the number of rounds available in the magazine. The 300 AAC is essentially a necked-up 5.56 so the cartridge base diameter is appreciably smaller than that of the 7.62X39.

So, the improvement is "getting the same performance in a smaller package." For locales where 5 rounds is the largest magazine permitted, there is no practical difference. When that limit is not present, as in LE, military, etc. the larger number of rounds can make a difference.

txgunner00
03-15-2012, 12:19 AM
So What role is the 300 AAC supposed to fill? And why or "how" is it an improvement over the 7.62x39?

Same bolt as .223
same magazines as .223
Only mod necessary is a barrel swap
uses the most abundant brass in the country
Sub-sonic loads cycle AR15 actions

Very close to or matches 7.62x39 performance in full power loads

bwaites
03-15-2012, 12:34 AM
Most abundant brass....Naw, that would be .22 LR!! LOL!!!!!

Most abundant reloadable brass? Naw, that would probably be 9mm, at least at almost every range I've been to. There are buckets of the stuff at most of them.

Most abundant reloadable centerfire rifle brass? There we go, that fits!!

Just given ya a hard time txgunner00!

wrsteve
03-15-2012, 02:28 AM
The answer is obvious - build at least one of each.

txgunner00
03-15-2012, 04:21 AM
Most abundant brass....Naw, that would be .22 LR!! LOL!!!!!

Most abundant reloadable brass? Naw, that would probably be 9mm, at least at almost every range I've been to. There are buckets of the stuff at most of them.

Most abundant reloadable centerfire rifle brass? There we go, that fits!!

Just given ya a hard time txgunner00!

details, shmeatails :)

bwaites
03-15-2012, 06:56 AM
details, shmeatails :)

lol!!