How do these two rounds compare? If the x39 is superior why did they make the .300 blackout when theres plenty of x39 uppers available for the AR already?
the 300 was designed to be used Suppressed in a short barrel, a compact CQB weapon, with heavy 200-220 grain bullets it cycles the AR action at sub-sonic velocities…very quiet and efficient in a 8-10 inch barrel…was never meant to compete against the AK round…even though in super sonic loads it is very similar…
As mentioned, the 300 is a different type of round. It feeds in a standard AR mag, unlike the x39. Using the sub sonic rounds on a 8-10" barrel with a suppressor(welded) makes for a great defensive and or quite weapon that only needs one stamp.
Depends how much $$$you want to spend on ammo too! I bought ruger ranch rifle in 7.62×39 & I love it! $ 189 per 1000rounds of hollow point. I can shoot all damn day for pennies!with the shit wolf ammo 1-1/2" groups at 200yds! Good cheap round for hogs, deer & coyote. You can reload the 300 affordable, just cut down some 223 brass.
Trying to find accurate info on this can be a bit of a joke. Many of the videos out there doing comparisons are ridiculous, for instance; comparing a 168gn load to a 122gn load and calling it an accurate assessment.
The following article takes time to do a good evaluation of the cartridges from an apples to apples standpoint.
You have to skim down quite a ways to get to the meat of the article since the first half is about the military history/development of different rifles/cartridges…but that is interesting as well.
On a side note: I really think the .300 Blackout in the 125gn supersonic load is an undiscovered gem in the 0-300 yard realm.