AAC’s Honey Badger to come to market

Good news for those looking for the strong, silent type: MilitaryTimes Gear Scout reports that AAC is bringing the Honey Badger suppressed .300 Blackout PDW to market:

The Honey Badger is coming, and this [TFB author’s note: Referring to the title image of this article] is what it might look like. Remington Outdoor Company Tactical Accessories Director Jeff Still and Senior Product Manager for silencers, Carlos Martinez confirmed Advanced Armament will bring the Honey Badger to the commercial market. They hinted at a release around the 2015 NRA annual show, but didn’t offer a price or an exact configuration. They did show the semi-auto version of the 300 AAC Blackout carbine shown above with AAC’s new Squaredrop handguard, though. The new handguard attaches to the barrel nut using a turnbuckle.

While I didn’t shoot this version, I did run the Gunsite Scrambler a few times using an earlier version sporting the Remington Accessory Hand Guard equipped with Magpul’s MBUS Pro folding iron sights. The gun ran like a champ in semi-auto, and had no issues digesting a mag with the selector in the third position.

The Honey Badger is a spiritual successor to the MP5-SD integrally suppressed submachine gun, though it is chambered for the much more powerful .300 AAC Blackout round. It features a special upper receiver, as well as its own proprietary receiver extension and collapsing buttstock. Named for the ratel of Africa, an animal known for ferociousness not in proportion to its size (and for being the subject of a certain YouTube video), the Honey Badger made waves on the Internet soon after photos were released in late 2011.

No word yet on pricing or availability.

Note from Phil: We had some good hands on time with the earlier model of the Honey Badger last week. In fact I’ve shot it a good deal over the last year. Katie A will have a full review and range evaluation in the next few days.

Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to modern small arms design and theory. He is also the author of the original web serial Heartblood, which is being updated and edited regularly. He can be reached via email at nathaniel.f@staff.thefirearmblog.com.


  • echelon

    Until I can walk into a gun store, buy this thing and walk out with it I’ll pass.

    Plus it’s still a Remington product so I’d pass on it just on that alone.

    • Seburo

      As much as a crack wise about .300 AAC MN. Remington just makes it worse.

      Anybody else remember what they did too the ACR?

      • echelon

        Trust me – I’m an ACR owner and I really adore the gun. I troll the Shrubmaster “customer service” every few months just to ask them when the barrel exchange kits will be available. I take bets on if they say “two weeks”, “six months” or “next year”…I gotta stop cuz it’s turning into a gambling addiction! 😉

    • AAC and made by AAC top to bottom.

      • floppyscience

        AAC is a Freedom Group company, and in May they announced they were doing to AAC what they do to all their companies sooner or later: close the plant, fire all the employees, and move production to a Remington plant. The AAC brand is being moved to plant in Huntsville, AL.

      • echelon

        Yes but ROC owns AAC and you know as well as I do that the current “AAC” is not the previous one.

        Just because it was designed, probably, by some geniuses in their own right does guarantee that mass production and QC will be kind to it – precisely where ROC fails the hardest.

        I can easily say ACR, made by Bushmaster top to bottom. And the gun itself it actually quite good. But little to no aftermarket support, none of the improvements or accessories from the Remington Defense version out on the market to consumers, no barrel exchange kits, poor QC on them overall, spotty customer service at best….shall I continue? Let’s talk Remington 700 issues, R51 issues, 887 shotgun issues, etc…

        I appreciate your opinion and I wish the best of luck to anyone who decides to purchase based on AAC’s reputation, but I’ll still continue to pass for all the reasons I stated.

        Financial investment groups should not run gun companies, period.

  • J.T.

    Or we could wait for the Sig MCX, which was made with the help of the designers of the Honey Badger and is basically it’s successor.

    • 3XLwolfshirt

      Is that actually coming out though? I’ve heard lots of news regarding the MPX, but next to nothing about the MCX.

  • Michael R. Zupcak

    Too bad the SIG MCX absolutely owns this thing. The SIG is piston operated, doesn’t require a buffer tube, has a quick-change barrel system, a quick-change stock system and that really cool, thin folding stock. It’ll also be available in 5.56, not just .300 BLK.

    • JumpIf NotZero

      I can’t see how any of those aspects as tangible combat advantages. Yes, they’re all true, but nothing that would mean a damn thing in actual use.

    • mechamaster

      Well, as long SIG doesn’t get troubled with their Quality Control, MCX potential will be great.

  • Paladin

    I am skeptical. Big Green has gutted AAC, everyone who made it what it is is gone. Even if I wasn’t ideologically opposed to buying FG products I would be wary of this Syrup Stoat.

    • Not everyone by a long shot. We talked with them last week and asked some pointed questions. The man that runs it now has an impressive background.

  • Mazryonh

    Has AAC actually had any success in getting LE/Mil organizations to replace their MP5-SDs with this PDW? And how exactly would this compare with those really short 5.56mm carbines (such as the CQBR) fitted with suppressors?

  • David Lowrey

    The HB looks like a massive pile of money and NFA paper work too me.

  • blackspike2710

    Still holding out hope for the Magpul PDR.

  • Dan Atwater

    3 stamp? How do you figure? It’d be one for the can and two if the can isn’t permanently attached to the barrel.

    • JumpIf NotZero

      In the original there was a suppressor, a SBR, and an expansion device between the barrel and suppressor the ATF regulates that like a suppressor.

      The expansion device provided the back-pressure/dwell time to enable the gas system to run with such a short barrel.

      If you look at it like a three stamp gun, it’s entirely dumb compared to a 8-9″ typical AR-15 in 300blk. The SIG MPX appears to always have been a two stamp. We’ll see this year at SHOT I’m sure.

  • Yep true—-

  • mechamaster

    Surprisingly, Honey Badger doesn’t have the Forward-assist button, and it’s shoot with silencer plus DI combo that create fast-carbon fouling.
    Well, it’s still good in accuracy and doesn’t create “piston-pop” phenomenon like suppressed piston-operated.
    But for a reliability in dirty-condition and fixing the jam, it’s a bit concern to not included the forward-assist button in the design.

  • JumpIf NotZero

    Has is been said what the reason for those messed up keymod holes? They are KM-Compatible, but… why?

  • Dan Atwater

    While acknowledging JumpIf NotZero’s post above, I don’t see where you are getting stamp #3.
    SBR: Stamp #1
    Can: Stamp #2
    Unless you meant to include the “expansion device” mentioned above.

    Given that though, yeah, “entirely dumb” pretty much sums it up as far as viability on the civilian market goes.

  • whamprod

    Remington, schmemington. I don’t give a crap who built his thing. If it runs, it looks like the one in this picture, and I can afford it, I want one. I don’t listen to the whining about Remington, their 700 triggers, etc. I have a 700 model VSF (no longer manufactured) in .308 that will flat shoot. Instead of griping about the stock trigger, I dropped a Timney in and set it to 2-1/4 lb.The rifle is perfect.

  • Mazryonh

    Much more quiet than the MP5-SDs, or the ultracompact 5.56mm carbines?