I am a huge fan of the AR-15 platform. I have several uppers in .22 LR, 300 AAC, and 5.56x45. I was planning on buying a Bushmaster 450 upper but came across the Sharps 25-45 caliber. Does anyone have any input on this caliber? It has been described as having the same performance as the Savage .250-3000 and beats the 6.5 Grendel.
The reason I am interested in this is for getting a caliber that will perform better than the 5.56x45 at long ranges but still able to fit in the short action of the AR-15. I had considered the 6.5 Creedmoor but that uses the AR-10 based rifle.
The Sharps 25-45 appears to be a good compromise between the 5.56x45 and the 6.5 Creedmoor. The Sharps 25-45 has almost the same ballistics as the Creedmoor with a slightly less mass bullet. The Sharps uses a .257" bullet and Hornady offers 110 grain bullets with a G1 of 0.390. I can also get .264" bullets for the Creedmoor that are 120 grain Amax with a G1 of 0.465. When I run these in a ballistics calculator, the performance difference is not noticeable until you get out past 600 yards.
The Sharp's 25-45 under performs the Creedmoor. The Sharps however uses .223 or 5.56x45 cases which is a huge plus for me. Anyone going to a range today will find this brass all over the place. It looks like the Sharps brass is easier to make than the 300 AAC.
I'm going to assume based on your post you reload.
Of the x45 case variants, the 25x45 is probably best suited to mid-range hunting due to the relatively low BC for bullet weight of most .257 bullets and traditional 1:10" twist rate of the caliber. Although as you noticed, there are some potential long range options. Historically the 6x45 (similar thing with .243 bullets) has been more popular for longer range shooting and certain competitive disciplines. It likewise is easy to make brass for - just size .223/5.56.
Also consider loads using the 77 Tipped Matchking in 5.56. They have a .42 G1 BC, use normal unmodified cases, and can be driven faster and will buck the wind better than the 110gr Hornady you're looking at. Accuracy can be hard to achieve with the TMK due to a long jump to the lands though. Overall I would put the long range performance of the 5.56 ahead of the 25x45.
In terms of sheer performance in a case that fits in the AR-15 platform, the .224 Valkyrie is hard to beat, but requires a 6.8SPC bolt and magazines and you can't use range brass.
Ultimately there are a lot of options and only relatively subtle differences between them.
Quote from: Luminous Rabbit on February 10, 2019, 06:12:55 PM
I'm going to assume based on your post you reload.
You are correct in that assumption. I own a 300 AAC upper that has seen several thousand rounds go through it but never a factory load.
I like to experiment and some times I end up with a great product and others I end up with crap. I have seen both with the 300 AAC. The best load that I have made uses a 168 grain Zmax/Amax. I also made a disappointing load that used a M1 Carbine bullet that would never feed correctly. It shot just fine sled loading it.
I looked at the Valkyrie and was not impressed. It looks to be a small increase in power over the 5.56x45 for a lot more money. I also looked at the Grendel and was not excited about the new bolt and magazine. I like simple. The main reason that I like the 300 AAC is because I can make the brass from 5.56x45 or .223 brass and it uses that same bullets that I already stock for my M1 Garand and Winchester .308 reloads.
It looks like there are a lot more options available in the .264" bullets. The .257" bullets are older and have fewer options. This alone may make me pass up the Sharps 25-45.
https://www.go2gbo.com/forums/89-wildcat-cartridge-discussion/263822-357ar-max-rimless.html
Mutant you may find the 357AR Max interesting. There is a lot of info in this post and it looks a lot better then the mess the "Legendary" Winchester just brought out.
Also check out Full Lead Taco on YouTube he cast a lot of bullets and has interesting toys.
Starling has brought out straight walled 5.56 brass so no forming is needed.
Chuck
Very interesting Wildcat! I have never heard of this. I was planning on building a 375 Raptor upper for my AR-10. This 357AR however is more appealing to me. It looks like a little brother to the Bushmaster 450! There are only about a few dozen different varieties of the 357 bullets around. I bet it could shoot wadcutters if you sled loaded them. I doubt they would feed from a magazine.
The only draw back is that Appleseed shoots only allow .32 caliber or smaller.
Quote from: Mutant Texan on February 13, 2019, 12:42:34 AM
The only draw back is that Appleseed shoots only allow .32 caliber or smaller.
That isn't quite true. At some ranges you can shoot handgun calibers up to .45 (which the 357AR isn't). Considering that everything is scored using a ".30 caliber rule", you may not allowed to "shoot for score".
Also, some ranges only allow rimfire ammo to be used.
Not exactly first hand experience but my neighbors father shoots one , and loves it. he uses it for deer and coyotes on the farm.
he was a long time 25-06 shooter and reloader and was well stocked on .257 cal bullets.
with an 87gr bullet at 2800 fps , you can understand why he really likes it on deer under 200 yards.
while not an issue in WI it also gets meets the legal requirements of being .24 or larger that some states require for deer.
as an Appleseed gun or even a new caliber unless your really into .257 cal for some reason I don't see a benefit that justifies the cost.
I went a different route and shoot a 300 black out my dad liked mine so much he built one identical and has taken 2 deer with his.
in the 300 I like the 110 gr vmax they make 420 yards supersonic but around 450 are dropping below.
at 100 yards they are even energy wise with a 150gr 30-30 load.
as an Appleseed KD gun there is a lot of windage and elevation to account for at 400 yards.
if holes in paper is the goal at 100-400 yards 223 is a hard round to beat especially at the cost per round.
Quote from: Tennessee Beast on February 13, 2019, 03:09:40 PM
Quote from: Mutant Texan on February 13, 2019, 12:42:34 AM
The only draw back is that Appleseed shoots only allow .32 caliber or smaller.
That isn't quite true. At some ranges you can shoot handgun calibers up to .45 (which the 357AR isn't). Considering that everything is scored using a ".30 caliber rule", you may not allowed to "shoot for score".
Also, some ranges only allow rimfire ammo to be used.
It has been pointed out that the FAQ section of TIPs (internal policy) says that the maximum caliber is 8mm. However, the event info pages (what the public sees) say that " Some ranges are .22 rimfire only. At ranges that allow centerfire no rifle cartridges over 8mm cal or handgun cartridges over .45 cal are allowed." So, there is conflicting info out there.
I suspect the .45 caliber thing is in reference to what was previously known as Pistolseed.
25-45 sharps is 25 caliber 45mm long.
A .223/5.56 cartridge necked up too 25 caliber.
Quote from: Mark Davis on February 14, 2019, 10:33:29 PM
25-45 sharps is 25 caliber 45mm long.
A .223/5.56 cartridge necked up too 25 caliber.
I know exactly what the Sharps 25-45 is and I have an interest in it. It is supposed to have similar ballistics to the Savage 250. I have never seen the Sharps 25-45 in person or fired one. I am seeking input from people that own it or fired it. It looks like it could be a very good substitute for the 6.5 Creedmoor that is AR-15 compatible. Obviously I can't drive a 120 grain .257" caliber bullet down range from a Sharps 25-45 at 3000 fps, but it would be very close at around 2850 fps.
I am mostly interested in it because I have a large supply of spent Remington .223 and 5.56x45 brass. I have converted a lot of it to 300 AAC and been very happy with my results. The 300 AAC brass however requires a lot of work to make from the 5.56 brass. This Sharps 25-45 looks like it may be an easier caliber to craft brass for. I am not going to test it, but it also may add a layer of forgiveness should someone make the mistake of chambering a 300 AAC. The ballistics of the Sharps 25-45 are very good for long range shooting.
I have always been skeptical about the newest things and the "newer & better" caliber. I did not adopt the 300 AAC as my primary caliber of choice until a few years ago when it appeared to be catching on and getting more popular. I still don't use factory ammo despite seeing it on Walmart shelves for about the same cost as brass cased 7.62x39. The 300 AAC just makes too much sense. You can reload the Winchester .308, .30-06, and 300 AAC all with the same bullets and that means a lot to me.
Quote from: Lomshek on February 14, 2019, 10:09:17 PM
I suspect the .45 caliber thing is in reference to what was previously known as Pistolseed.
BINGO!!
aj
I have watched this thread with interest since the first post.
No personal experience, but a friend whom I discuss reloading with often, does have one.
He likes the ability to launch a heavier bullet from a large magazine AR, but it's not a 250 savage.
Flat out just does not hold enough powder to equal.
Neither my friend or I doubt the rifle's ability to kill game.
I meant Starline Brass not starling that auto-mistake put in and I didn't catch.
Have fun researching your new toy.
I agree the 357AR looks very interesting.
Quote from: Mark Davis on February 15, 2019, 11:12:14 PM
I have watched this thread with interest since the first post.
He likes the ability to launch a heavier bullet from a large magazine AR, but it's not a 250 savage.
Flat out just does not hold enough powder to equal.
I whole heatedly agree with this statement. I went to Cabelas yesterday to look at their reloading supplies. They had some Savage 250 brass for sale and I compared them to the .223 brass next to it. There is no similarity in case capacity. The only way to get Savage 250 performance out of the Sharps 25-45 is to load it to pressures well beyond the 62 kpsi max of the AR platform.
Modern barrels made from high quality 4150 CMV steel and Sharp's better bolt may be enough to handle the increased pressures needed to match the performance of the Savage 250 but I am not going to make that call and I doubt Sharp's will risk that either. One thing I am sure of is that the 5.56x45 brass that I would use to make the Sharps 25-45 cases will not likely be usable after a single cycle at such a high pressure. The primer pockets will likely be too loose to get another primer in again. I have seen this behavior with the LC brass loaded to max pressures on my 300 AAC brass.
I found some very cheap 6.5 Creedmoor ammo there as well. You can buy a 20 round box of Winchester target ammo. I think it was loaded with 120 grain FMJ... don't hold me to that because I did not take a picture of it. I just know that it was 6.5 Creedmoor and was on sale for $14.99 a box. I looked at the brass and some 123 grain ELD match bullets. It would cost me about $1 per bullet and case. Now I can reuse the cases and that cost will go down with time. The 6.5 Creedmoor appears to have come down in price a lot.
What frustrates me most about the Sharps 25-45 is their choice to go with a 0.257" bullet. The choices available in the 0.257" design are small compared to the .264" bullets. I would have bought the Sharps 25-45 had they gone with a 0.264" bullet. This would allow me to use the same bullets in both an AR-10 or AR-15 platform like I do with the .308" calibers. One of the biggest selling points of the 300 AAC to me is the fact that I can use the same bullets that I load in my 7.62x51/ Winchester .308 and .30-06. Sharps could have had a slam dunk winner had they simply used the .264" bullet instead of the .257" bullet!
This is also the main reason I passed on the 458 SOCOM. I instead plan to buy a Bushmaster 450. I am still on the look out for a good quality upper. With the .452" bullets that the Bushmaster 450 uses, I can make cheap plinking rounds using .45 ACP bullets. When needed, I can use the Hornady 250 grain .452" bullets that are designed for the BM450.
Increasing powder capacity has decreasing ability to gain bullet velocity.
Comparing the performance of today's .25-45 to the .250-3000 on it's introduction, the new cartridge is pretty close.
Chamber/bolt steel, projectiles, and smokless powder all have been improved in the last 104 years. With all the advances, the .250 savage is more capable than it was back when Charles Newton named it .250-3000.
True, the choice of bullets is limited in .257. But you only need one good bullet bullet design.
The .25-45 will use about 62% of the powder a 6.5 creedmore, and fit in the AR-15 platform.
The 6.5 will give a little better performance, needs an AR-10, more weight and bulkier mags carring the same amount of ammo.
Quote from: Mark Davis on February 18, 2019, 02:07:40 AM
Increasing powder capacity has decreasing ability to gain bullet velocity.
Comparing the performance of today's .25-45 to the .250-3000 on it's introduction, the new cartridge is pretty close.
Chamber/bolt steel, projectiles, and smokless powder all have been improved in the last 104 years. With all the advances, the .250 savage is more capable than it was back when Charles Newton named it .250-3000.
True, the choice of bullets is limited in .257. But you only need one good bullet bullet design.
The .25-45 will use about 62% of the powder a 6.5 creedmore, and fit in the AR-15 platform.
The 6.5 will give a little better performance, needs an AR-10, more weight and bulkier mags carring the same amount of ammo.
I bit the bullet and ordered a Sharps 25-45 conversion kit with the 20" 41V50 CM barrel and improved BCG. I went with the 20" barrel because I want a rifle rather than a carbine and I want to get as much velocity as I can. The Sharps needs longer barrels to get the most benefit.
I also ordered an Aero Precision blemished enhanced upper and a 15" M-lok hand guard. This will be the first time to use the enhanced upper design. It seems to get nothing but good reviews and I like how the hand guard has 8 screws holding the hand guard to the actual upper receiver rather than a friction fit on a barrel nut.
I need to find a good low profile gas block next. I am not sure if I want to go adjustable or standard. I ordered the reloading dies as well along with some Sierra 90 grain bullets and plan to start production of Sharps 25-45 ammo as soon as I get them.
I would have been happier had they used the 0.264" bullets instead. I know about the Grendel and have no interest in it. I want to standardize around the same brass. This caliber however will deliver more energy and momentum on impact than any 5.56x45 and has better energy retention than the 300 AAC at longer ranges. I think the 300 AAC will still be my favorite but this Sharps should perform better at long ranges.
Ah, the "non .223 AR bug." I know how that bite feels.
I've been experimenting with 300 blackout since 2012. After my experience there, all I can say is be wary of one round's power being compared to another. At the time, all the articles were calling the blackout .30-30 in an AR. Years of experimenting and I don't buy that at all anymore. Part of that was finding a deal on a Marlin and being able to compare directly with my actual loads. 7.62x39 falls short of .30-30, and 300blk falls short of 7.62x39. A failure on game of my own and a couple friends having the blackout fail on hogs also played a role.
It wasn't enough to sell all my 300blk uppers and components, but I do think differently about what I take into the woods, especially in places known to have bigger hogs around.
For my friend's property where there are some huge ones on the game cams and we don't want to have a long track because the area is quickly developing, we go for higher power. The last hogs taken there have been with 450 Bushmaster and 45-70. .30-06 and .308 have been in the mix as well.
I've been interested in the 277 Wolverine too. I was going to bring that up before your post where you pulled the trigger on 25-45. The 277 has a similar forming process to 300blk, so that's a big downside compared to 25-45.
I've been watching the 357 Max AR for a while now. The commercial version of 350 Legend can make things interesting. I'll have to see how that compares to the old wildcat version once people have spent some time with it.
Quote from: 2wheelDuke on February 21, 2019, 10:40:01 AM
Ah, the "non .223 AR bug." I know how that bite feels.
I've been experimenting with 300 blackout since 2012. After my experience there, all I can say is be wary of one round's power being compared to another. At the time, all the articles were calling the blackout .30-30 in an AR. Years of experimenting and I don't buy that at all anymore. Part of that was finding a deal on a Marlin and being able to compare directly with my actual loads. 7.62x39 falls short of .30-30, and 300blk falls short of 7.62x39. A failure on game of my own and a couple friends having the blackout fail on hogs also played a role.
It wasn't enough to sell all my 300blk uppers and components, but I do think differently about what I take into the woods, especially in places known to have bigger hogs around.
For my friend's property where there are some huge ones on the game cams and we don't want to have a long track because the area is quickly developing, we go for higher power. The last hogs taken there have been with 450 Bushmaster and 45-70. .30-06 and .308 have been in the mix as well.
I've been interested in the 277 Wolverine too. I was going to bring that up before your post where you pulled the trigger on 25-45. The 277 has a similar forming process to 300blk, so that's a big downside compared to 25-45.
I've been watching the 357 Max AR for a while now. The commercial version of 350 Legend can make things interesting. I'll have to see how that compares to the old wildcat version once people have spent some time with it.
I hear you on the 300 AAC. I got into it because it was a 30 caliber that had decent power and would fit in an AR-15. I have read the same nonsense about the 300 AAC being comparable to a 7.62x39 but this is pure crap. The 7.62x39 has a case capacity of 36 grains H2O. The 300 AAC has a case capacity of 25.1 grains H2O. You can almost make an argument that the .308" bullets have a better BC than the run of the mill 7.62x39 but I can get around this by reloading my own 7.62x39 with high BC .311" bullets. The main reason that I got into 300 AAC was because I can easily make the ammo for it with the copious 5.56x45 brass that I own and .308" bullets that I use to reload my Winchester .308 and .30-06 for my M1 Garand. The 300 AAC also has a much larger set of choices for bullets than the 7.62x39. I have designated my 300 AAC carbine as my primary HD weapon. The 300 AAC packs more momentum than the 5.56x45 and the 300 AAC excels in short barrels.
If I am going hog hunting, I am taking nothing less than my CMMG Mutant which is chambered in 7.62x39. The Mutant gives me the best of both worlds. I get a powerful cartridge in an AR like platform. It is hard to argue against a 40 round box of Tulammo costing you $10. The only problem with Tulammo is how much powder they use. I will only use that Sh*t in a Mutant or an AKM. Some of this Tulammo Sh*t has to be loaded well above the SAAMI specs. Tulammo once pushed a primer into the firing pin of my Yugo SKS and shredded the after market spring that I installed for preventing slam fires. I occasionally get one hell of a fire ball out the end of my Mutant at least 2 feet in diameter.
I am also looking at the BM 450. I will buy an upper in that caliber when I find something that I like. I like the idea of using my .452" pistol bullets for making cheap plinking rounds. I have never fired a BM 450 but it appears to be close to the 45-70 based on published results. I have fired the 45-70 and I know what kind of power that caliber packs.
I am not getting into the BM 450 vs SOCOM debate on the merits of the round. I am simply happy that I can use the same caliber bullets between the .45 ACP and the BM 450. This is enough for me to decide on going with the BM 450 in the future. Hornady is making .452" rifle bullets now and that pretty much seals the deal for me. I also plan on building a 45 Raptor upper for my AR-10 and that uses .452" bullets. The 45 Raptor will put both the SOCOM and BM 450 to shame.
This touches on why I love the AR-15 pattern so much. I can simply swap out the upper and have a large variety of calibers at my disposal. No single caliber is best.
much of the equal too or nearly equal too requires you use a low BC bullet in one and a high BC in the other.
300 black out will make 420 yards supersonic if you use a 110gr .290 BC bullet or better starting at 2160fps or faster where a 150gr .186 BC bullet starting at 2200fps from a 30-30 will not it drops sub sonic just short of 300 yards.
the same with a 7.62X39 it will fall sub sonic right about 400 with a flat base 123gr .252bc bullet that is listed in the hornady reloading manual for the cartridge but if you run a better bullet with a higher bc and take it further yet if you use the new powders developed for 300black out you can make the 7.62x39 shine brighter as well.
so many of these comparisons are the 50+ year old factory norm vs a new load in a new gun.
30-30 can be made faster also but factory ammo has to play it safe when you could be putting their ammo in a 120 year old gun and if in a non tube mag could be loaded with much higher BC bullets also.
if you compare apples to apples for bc and pressure the case with the largest capacity generally wins.
the 30-30 definitely has more thump at 20-70 yards where most game animals fall.
*Update*
I ordered a conversion kit from Sharps a few weeks ago as well as an enhanced upper receiver and hand guard from Aeroprecision. I finally got everything together today.
I will start by saying that I am extremely unhappy with Sharps. Their website advertised that the barrels were nitrided. When I received my kit the box for the barrel had black oxide for the finish instead of a check mark next to the nitrided. I emailed Sharps and they asked where it said "nitrided" on the website. I sent them a screen shot of "nitrided" next to their 20" barrels and they quickly sent me an apology saying they missed this during their website update.
They offered to take it back or exchange it for a 16" barrel which is nitrided. I decided to keep as is and give them negative reviews about this until they send me a nitrided 20" barrel. This basically means I will forever be giving them bad reviews :sb:. The Sharps 25-45 really needs to be in a rifle length to get the full performance capability of the round and I am not going to be happy with a 16" barrel. Basically they put the premium finish on their Sh*tty barrels and the Sh*tty finish on their premium barrels. This makes no sense!
I am very happy with Aeroprecision. I ordered stuff off their "blemished" section. I looked all over the upper and hand guard and can not find any blemishes! The enhanced receiver has the mounting surface for the hand guard and the receiver as a single forging. The barrel nut has the threads on the outside and goes into a "female" threaded hole on the receiver. You simply put the barrel in like normal and torque the nut to about 40 ft-lbs. You do not have to line anything up or time the barrel nut. The hole for the gas tube is separate and fixed in the upper. I used Valvoline Durablend synthetic moly grease to lube the threads of the barrel nut. I called Valvoline and they assured me that there is no graphite in their automotive grease products. I understand that it is not "mil spec" and also know that the real concern is graphite. You don't want graphite in the grease because it can setup a galvanic circuit and destroy the aluminum.
The hand guard is secured to the upper receiver with 8 torx screws. This system is much better than the friction fit systems that you mostly see these days with free floating hand guards. The hand guard is called an "enhanced hand guard" and you can use it with the upper receiver that it is designed for or use a special barrel nut that is compatible with standard uppers. The barrel nut has 8 holes in it for torx screws and it must be timed.
One more thing I liked about the upper is that the dust cover was super easy to change. You simply remove a screw in plug from the upper that unblocks a hole to pull the hinge pin out. I had the new dust cover in in less than 5 minutes. I can't say enough good things about the upper and hand guard! I plan to use this system again soon when I build a Bushmaster 450 upper.
I will give an update later this week when I go and fire it at the range. I will be fitting it with some glass and an Mlok sling swivel.