Angstadt SCW-9

That compact Buttstock is awesome - a "must have" for PDW and PCC aficionados. The proprietary shortened BCG is not unexpected and definitely not a show-stopper. .300 BLK is the appropriate chambering for this ultra-compact PDW. Í will take one in that calibre.
 
FyreFighter said:
300 blk is pointless for a range toy that can't be suppressed.
Click to expand...

I don't happen to agree. The SCW is a PDW intended for the short-range engagements associated with close protection operations. Just because .300 BLK subsonic loads are optimized for short-range use with a silencer doesn't mean that the calibre's supersonic loads aren't at least as capable as 7.62x39 mm out to 300 metres. The .300 BLK is optimized for 9" barrel length, whereas the 5.56 mm is hobbled in a pistol-length barrel with a commensurate reduction in that round's effective range. 9mm is severely limited from the outset and is largely irrelevant beyond 100 metres. For these reasons I believe that the .300 BLK in a supersonic load is the optimal calibre for the SCW's anticipated employment.

The SCW's Canadian legal status as a Restricted "Range Toy" is completely irrelevant to the discussion of firearms capability... ������
 
Last edited:
Well hoping they become available soon I want this in the 300 I have a NEA in a 300 and it's an ok gun but a great round not sure why it's not more popular as most people are shooting 100 to 300 eds when hunting or at the range it's a very nice round to have some fun with and to have my ar and pistol in the same calibre freaking awesome , are u folks thinking summer time maybe ? Cheers
 
Except the employment is to putting holes in paper where terminal energy is meaningless beyond the ballistic aspect. Obviously you make your own choice but paying more per round for stopping power against Herman the German makes little sense to me.

You do you.

Bartok5 said:
I don't happen to agree. The SCW is a PDW intended for the short-range engagements associated with close protection operations. Just because .300 BLK subsonic loads are optimized for short-range use with a silencer doesn't mean that the calibre's supersonic loads aren't at least as capable as 7.62x39 mm out to 300 metres. The .300 BLK is optimized for 9" barrel length, whereas the 5.56 mm is hobbled in a pistol-length barrel with a commensurate reduction in that round's effective range. 9mm is severely limited from the outset and is largely irrelevant beyond 100 metres. For these reasons I believe that the .300 BLK in a supersonic load is the optimal calibre for the SCW's anticipated employment.

The SCW's Canadian legal status as a Restricted "Range Toy" is completely irrelevant to the discussion of firearms capability... ������
Click to expand...
 
I went with 7.62x39 for my xcr mini because I use that round for other firearms and its ballistics out of a short barrel are still ok.

I'm torn on the calibre because 223 and 9mm are more practical for me but 300 blackout is the best suited for the firearm.
 
FyreFighter said:
Except the employment is to putting holes in paper where terminal energy is meaningless beyond the ballistic aspect. Obviously you make your own choice but paying more per round for stopping power against Herman the German makes little sense to me.

You do you.
Click to expand...

And you apparently only do .22LR, based on the logical outcome of your "reasoning" above.... ��
 
How is that more compact than an MPX? IMO the SIG operating system is as compact as it gets. That said, I am guessing these in 556 will be more available than the non-existent 556 Rattler?
 
No, because .22 doesnt let you hunt coyotes or reliably reach out to >100y, etc.

I don't see what additional capabilities 300blk gives the shooter that is worth the extra expense. Its a free country. Spend your money as you see fit.

Bartok5 said:
And you apparently only do .22LR, based on the logical outcome of your "reasoning" above.... ��
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom