Introducing the 7.62×40 WT (Wilson Tactical)

Despite coming out strongly for the .300 AAC BLK cartridge, Wilson Combat has developed their own 7.62x39mm-equivalent for the AR-15. The 7.62x40mm WT is a 5.56mm NATO cartridge necked up to .30 caliber. To convert an AR-15 to use the 7.62×40 WT a barrel change is (obviously) required and a special Wilson-modified version of Lancer’s L5 AWM polymer magazine.

The cartridge is designed with tactical/self-defense and hunting use with soft-point or hollow point projectiles. The company published this comparison with the 5.56mm NATO, 6.8mm SPC, 7.62x39mm & .300 BLK:

5.56 Nato (16” Barrel)
55 gr: 3150 FPS Muzzle Velocity and 1212 Foot Pounds of Energy
62 gr: 3000 FPS Muzzle Velocity and 1239 Foot Pounds of Energy
77 gr: 2750 FPS Muzzle Velocity and 1293 Foot Pounds of Energy

7.62×39 (16” Barrel)

123 gr: 2320 FPS Muzzle Velocity and 1470 Foot Pounds of Energy 

6.8 SPC (16” Barrel)

110 gr: 2550 FPS Muzzle Velocity and 1594 Foot Pounds of Energy 

300 BLACKOUT (16” Barrel)

125 gr: 2275 FPS Muzzle Velocity and 1436 Foot Pounds of Energy

Unlike the .300 BLK, the 7.62×40 WT has not been designed for suppressor use (ie. it is a supersonic cartridge). Remington will be manufacturing supersonic and subsonic BLK loads.

Wilson Combat 7.62×40 WT loaded with 110 gr. Sierra HP is on sale right now at a cost of $18 for 20 rounds at the Wilson Combat store.

Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


  • Nanban Jim

    You know, from a design standpoint, I kinda like the look of the cartridge.

  • Lance

    Another great idea for a new military cartridge. Unfortunately, the US military is stuck in 5.56mm NATO land.

  • Brad

    The real question is ” Will those new poly mags feed 7.62 reliably in an AR platform?”

  • In what way does the ammo differ from the BLK?

    I can’t help thinking that adding yet another round like this will just divide and confuse the market and make it more likely that none will succeed.

  • snmp

    for mimic the 7.62×39 M43 you could found 4 ammunitions :
    .300 WHISPER (7.62x35mm) => 7.62x37mm Royal Ordoance for HK SL9SD => 300 AAC BLACKOUT => 7.62x40mm Wilson Combat

    Why not build an amunition like the Russian 9x39mm (in fact 9,3 mm bullet) with the brasse of the 5.56NATO

  • Doug

    Yeah, another new caliber. I’m sure it’s everything the x39 had hoped to be, but really, is it that necessary?

  • I can see how this fills a gaping void between .300 Blackout, and whatever else is identical to it.

    Oh, wait, April Fools.

  • Erwos

    Am I the only one who wonders who the heck buys these weird wildcat cartridges?

  • Travis

    In the same way that the 300AAC BLK is generally compatible with most 300Whisper (aka 300/.221 Fireball) chambers, one must wonder if this round would chamber in those? Too many names for the same thing? or Enough subtle differences to be dangerous?

  • Vitor

    So, what this cartridge really does that the .300BLK does not? Besides requiring some fancy magazine…

  • Was the data for comparison of the 7.62 x 40 omitted?

  • Other Steve

    I am starting to hate Wilson Combat’s arrogance more and more every day.

    What is it this round offers that 300BLK doesn’t? Oh, you need special mags, right. And the round wasn’t designed with subsonic in mind… Uh, Winning? Let’s see a real comparison between this and 300BLK with a 110gr.

    If I’m going to switch from 223 and for some reason just could not use 300BLK, why not 7.62×39, or even Remington’s forgotten 30AR? At least the later probably works well enough in an AR and has a major company behind it. It’s a stupid idea sure, but why would anyone jump into a new round platform by a small player like Wilson?

    Their parts are expensive as hell, I expect this to be NO different.

    Their suppressor line, while being Titanium and not stupid looking, is very expensive. If I remember how their attachment system explained, I think their rep said that titanium was naturally sticky so it surely won’t back off it’s threads… wtf?

    And their recently released 147gr 9mm ammo is over $1 a round, for nothing more than run of the mill 147gr. It’s a complete scam praying on the ignorance of their customers.

    Thanks, but I’ll do a 300BLK gun and won’t be looking back. Way to be a few years late to the party though.

  • Alex

    Who makes that forearm? Reminds me of a mix between the lw KAC (on the special magpul run of guns) and the OBR lite rail.

  • Chase

    “The company published this comparison with the 5.56mm NATO, 6.8mm SPC, 7.62x39mm & .300 BLK.”

    It is technically a comparison, but probably not the one they meant to publish, since the new 7.62×40 round isn’t there!

  • zincorium

    I am… slightly confused. By their own description and data, this round has no purpose. It’s not as apparently powerful as the 6.8 SPC, it’s not subsonic like the .300 BLK, and as a small production, american made cartridge, it’s probably going to be at least an order of magnitude more expensive than 7.62×39 is going for.

    Did I miss some sort of actual selling point here?

  • Nathan

    Yawn. The ‘shoehorn every other caliber into an AR-15’ trend is getting a little worn to me, especially this lackluster addition to an already saturated market. .300BLK got the .30 cal AR offering right, taking up the same space in a STANAG magazine as 5.56, while maintaining the 30 round capacity and 5.56 bolt face.

    Meanwhile over at Wilson, they require a proprietary magazine. Also, .300BLK is optimized for *both* subsonic and supersonic velocities. This, to me, is just laziness in engineering on the part of Wilson Combat.

  • jdun1911

    I really like the new look for the Lancer magazine. Very sexy. Too bad it is out my price range, tho.

  • michael

    those 6.8 figures are spec 1 and dated…..

    I’m still trying to figure the purpose of this new round. why?

  • Carlos U.

    So basically the same diameter, weight, and speed as the russian 7.62 X 39, but much more expensive. Why would any one buy this?

  • Andy from CT

    Doesn’t use P-mags…

    No thanks.

    Besides, Whisper and Blackout are vastly cooler caliber designations. 😉

  • Andy from CT


    What comparison? The 110 grain stats on the box give 1,434 foot pounds. The Blackout does 1,436 with a 125 grain bullet. Sooooooo, why is this newest round needed?

  • Chris

    Is it just me, but is the article missing the actual spec on this new cartridge. They talk about 5.56, and 7.62×39, and 300 AAC, but not the new cartridge numbers.

    No matter what this just seems foolish, let’s make 300 AAC but proprietary, and use modified magazines. 300 AAC will go supersonic with light loads, what does this 7.62×40 WT give us that 300 AAC doesn’t.

  • coyote

    This is an old wildcat cartridge. It has been out in one form or another ever since the 223 Rem. came out.
    30-223 Rem.
    30-223 Rem. improved (many different shoulder angles)

  • For crying out loud: Why?

    What does 7.62x40WT provide that one of those other four existing SAAMI-spec’d cartridges don’t?

    Is this just another kludge to get the ballistics of 7.62x39mm with a standard AR-15 bolt?

  • Martin (M)

    Sure looks like fun, ’cause we’ve all got piles of 7.62×40 laying around. I second what Chris said, what’s the numbers for 7.62×40? Surely they aren’t markedly different than 7.62×39, so why?

  • Jimbob

    How can a cartridge design like this feed reliably in a full or semi auto rifle? There is only the tiniest vestige of a shoulder for headspacing and still not enough body taper. This seems like just another overly specialized gimmick cartridge.

  • drewogatory

    Look, if you want big and slow go .338 at least. Otherwise 6-7mm is going to have a far superior BAC than .308 will for the same bullet weights. The 123 grain 6.5mm Lapua Scenar is .547 compared to the 125gr Sierra 2120 at .277. That is a ridiculous disparity.

  • It’s been out in many forms before.

    Unfortunately, it is a failure because:

    -Not SAAMI standardized
    -No subsonic options
    -Need to modify 5.56 mags to get it to function
    -Normal Wilson cost

    The 300 BLK was designed as a 30 cal solution for an AR that requires minimal modifications to the host (just the barrel itself). In lighter weight bullets- 110- 155 etc, it provides great supersonic preformance, and allows for astounding suppression with the use of 220 (and similar) bullets. All while cyicling an AR and fitting 30 rounds in standard 5.56 mags.

    As an aside, I am not biased simply because I work with AAC- being that the 300 BLK is a standardized SAAMI round, we ask for and receive no royalties or licensing whatsoever on 300 BLK. 🙂

  • Oh, and an additional 30 ft/lbs have zero real-world benefits.

  • You know, I saw this was listed on April 1, so I’ve been waiting for the April Fool’s retraction. Seeing none, this may be real.

    Vendors and such — please be aware that new product or service announcements made on April 1 might not be taken seriously.

  • MC311

    Wilson Got butthurt because he teamed up to make the 300 BLK and didnt want to go subsonic so he depearted and made his own in supersonic (so Ive heard)
    This Im sure will fade away because no one in there right mind would buy this set up instead of the 300 aac or a 6.8 or even the damn russian 7.62×39 because of his arrogant “Im better than everyone” pricing.
    I cant believe Wilson is still in biz with his rediculous pricing.

  • Murphy

    Why all the hate? cant everyone just welcome someone’s contribution to the shooting and hunting sport? So it isn’t YOUR favorite… Why trash it for people who don’t shoot anything but 5.56 and are looking for another caliber to shoot?
    Do you, Sir, have a financial interest in this cartridge? if so , then rant on YOUR website.
    Let people judge facts free of your spatterings of wisdom.

    Thank You.