New From SilencerCo: Harvester Subsonic 300 BLK Ammunition

2

One of the most dangerous places on planet Earth is the space between Nick and any new 300 BLK product. So when I got SilencerCo’s press release (after the jump) announcing they’re getting into the ammo biz with their new Harvester line of ammunition, I immediately requested some samples for him to test. I still wouldn’t advise getting in his way, but at least he knows he’ll be getting some of the new silencer-optimized rounds soon . . .

WEST VALLEY CITY, UTAH – Dec. 8, 2014 | SilencerCo, the industry leader in firearm suppression products and technology, today unveiled its new line of Harvester Subsonic 300 BLK high performance ammunition, designed for optimal performance in silencer-equipped firearms. The ammunition gives shooters exceptional accuracy and enhanced noise reduction without sacrificing the terminal performance hunters and marksmen expect.

Silencer-optimized Harvester Subsonic 300 BLK rounds enable groups in the sub-Minute of Angle (MOA) range, or less than 1 inch per 100 yards of distance to target. The ammo combines this best-in-class accuracy with the stopping power of a 220 grain projectile, plus unrivaled sound suppression.

“At SilencerCo, we are customers first — hunters and shooters,” stated Joshua Waldron, SilencerCo Chief Executive Officer. “We were underwhelmed by the quality of subsonic ammo on the market. Customers shouldn’t have to accept a tradeoff between accuracy and sound reduction, so we designed the Harvester ammo line to provide sub-MOA accuracy in the quietest subsonic 300 BLK ammunition on the market.”

SilencerCo’s Harvester 300 BLK Ammunition is now available for direct purchase online and through select dealers. To learn more or to place an order, go towww.SilencerCo.com/ammo.

comments

  1. avatar Swarf says:

    One of the most dangerous places on planet Earth is the space between Nick and any new 300 BLK product.

    I actually laughed out loud.

  2. avatar Scrubula says:

    Do they make a lead JHP subsonic in .300 blackout?
    I ask because a lot of the new expanding rounds are solid copper, but those aren’t going to be heavy enough for subsonic ammunition if you want good muzzle energy.

  3. avatar Bobby McKellar says:

    Sounds great! I’ll take a case!

    I’m shooting up my Remington “subsonic” 220gr loads right now just to have the brass….that crap is as loud as my 10.3″ 5.56/.223 SBR using M855 with my AAC M4-2000.
    It “crack’s” like a whip!!
    Gonna chrono it tomorrow just to prove what I already know!

    Look forward to trying this SilencerCo load!

    1. avatar Accur81 says:

      I hear Hornady 208 grain “subsonic” A-Max 300 BLK has a nasty habit of achieving 1400 FPS or more from a 16″ barrel. I’d like to see more 230-240 grain loads at 1,000 FPS.

      1. avatar NDS says:

        I actually had two consecutive Hornady 208gr Amax chrono at 761 and 1328 out of a 9″ SBR. I actually thought of Nick and his IQ charts or whatever… 6+ inch groups at 50 yards and absolutely filthy.

        The bullets themselves are great though, got a bulk deal awhile back and they’ll shoot 2MOA easily, over 9.6gr IMR 4227 and converted brass. Not as accurate as these SMKs SilencerCo is using, but cheaper.

    2. avatar mike says:

      You must be referring to the crappy UMC boxes. That’s what Silencerco probably used in their comparisons chart.

  4. avatar LarryinTX says:

    This is all real fun, but which boolits actually perform at subsonic speeds? I have several different loads, but there is no discussion of what the performance of the bullets themselves is! Listen, there are zillions of 7.62 bullets out there, essentially all of them designed for 2500+ fps use. I have fired dozens of rounds into wood and metal, without seeing ANY deformation of the jacket. How about a test of subsonic .300 Blk differing BULLETS, never mind loadings, with analysis of which were actually designed to be used SUBSONIC!? How ’bout including Lehigh 175 and 196 gr subsonic ammo?

    1. avatar Jim R says:

      This is a really good point. A lot of these lower-power subsonic rounds are still using the same bullets as their full-powered counterparts. A bullet designed to expand at 2,000+ FPS isn’t going to do its job at half that speed or less. I would assume that in order to get proper expansion in a subsonic JHP, the bullet would need to be softer in order to allow for proper expansion with the lower muzzle energy. Or I could be totally wrong. I’m not a physics major, after all.

    2. avatar NDS says:

      Agreed I’d spend good money, as I’m sure others would for a dependable, 220-240gr projectile designed for sub-1000fps performance. Something expanding, with a subsonic-friendly ballistic shape.

      Most of the heavy commercial 30 cal bullets are for 300 Win Mag and a zillion FPS. The 208Gr Amax will tumble and fail sometimes at basically point blank range, but I’ve never gotten more than FMJ performance at 100 yards from any subsonic.

  5. avatar Sammy says:

    I don’t see much use for subsonic ammo other than for police to quietly take out a street light or something like that. Given that sub ammo is about the same bullet weight as 45acp and only a little bit faster, there’s not much energy there for terminal use. I have a 300blk with a suppressor that I only supersonic.

    1. avatar NDS says:

      Subsonic for me is a fun challenge, especially out at longer distances and is very inexpensive to load. Out a suppressed bolt gun the giggle factor is high as well. 100% agreed on energy though, I know there are people that hunt with subs but I think that’s silly when there are truly excellent supersonic loads out there… The 110Gr Barnes Tac-TX is crazy accurate and powerful as well.

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        The Barnes 110 is accurate, but was pretty wimpy on the deer I shot. A 140-150 pound whitetail buck that left entrance and exit holes so small that they were hard to find. That was from a 16″ barrel. Contrast that to .30-30 Hornady LeverEvolution with left 1-2″ holes from 16″ and 18″ barrels, or .308 leaving 2″ holes from 16″ and 20″ barrels.

        Next year I think I’ll upgrade to a 6.8 SPC, or just go back to the .308 – .30-06 class. The 300 BLK is only powerful compared to handguns or the .223. YMMV.

  6. avatar S.CROCK says:

    I have no plans of buying anything in this caliber in the forceable future but I am greatly amazed by it. From what I have read/ seen about it, this looks like the round of the future.

    1. avatar lolinski says:

      How is it the future? It is a NATO version of 7.62×39. Ballistically this has existed for over 60 years and if you have a reloading bench and some knowledge you have enjoyed this for years.

  7. avatar RT says:

    http://www.outlawstatebullets.com

    Pick your poison, and break out your reloading gear. They’re expensive, but they work.

    1. avatar VTAero says:

      Those bullets look awesome and are just what I’ve been looking for. I’ll have to get some to play with.

      I can’t believe the harvester rounds are using 220 SMKs. Sierra even says not to use them for hunting. I just dont see how they are claiming in the press release “without sacrificing the terminal performance hunters and marksmen expect.”

  8. avatar bandolero says:

    The box art on these looks great too.

  9. avatar ohit'skino says:

    Not impressed by this ammo. The 208r Hornady A-max is abeautiful and impressive bullet… Silencerco’s loading is neither. I shot four different types of .300blk ammo out of an unsuppressed 10.5″ AR with an H2 buffer; the Silencerco load was the only one out of the 208gr reload, 220gr Sig Sauer, and 220gr Remington load that failed to lock the bolt back on an empty magazine. I can accept a slightly underpowered load if there are corresponding benefits. However, this failed to be the case. Granted, I didn’t test for MOA accuracy, but the Silencerco load did not seem to be any more accurate than the aforementioned loads (except for the Remington), nor did it seem noticeably quieter when shot suppressed through a Silencerco Saker 7.62 or Omega (and I LOVE both suppressors). Lastly, and probably the most disappointing aspect of the ammo: filler, filler, filler. Holy crap; this ammo left a mess of filler material in/on my gun. Clearly Silencerco could benefit from loading their ammo with a little more powder and a lot less filler, likely without sacrificing sound or accuracy. I will not be buying anymore of this ammunition. Silencerco suppressors? Yes, please! Silencerco sub-sonic .300blk? Pass!!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email