.416 Hushpuppy from AM-TAC Precision

AM-TAC Precision designed the .416 Hushpuppy to be the hardest hitting and flattest shooting subsonic cartridge ever available for the AR-15. It uses a 450 grain open tip match bullet and a short, stubby case to deliver a heavy hit from a cartridge that not only fits in standard AR-15s, it uses standard magazines (single stacked). It delivers a wound channel greater than 12 gauge shotgun buckshot or a 12 gauge slug thanks to its tail-heavy design which will begin to tumble when it hits.

Though it hits hard, it shoots more like a 20 gauge shotgun thanks to its subsonic velocity. The shooter feels more of a “thump” than a sharp blast. It has excellent suppression characteristics.

The photo shows a .223 bullet for comparison.

Shelby Murdoc

Murdoc is a freelancer who writes at various publications and web sites including Shooting Sports Retailer and GunPundit.com.


  • Vhyrus

    Should have named it the Corgi, cause that is one short legged cartridge.

  • Zugunder

    Man, I wouldn’t be pleased if someone just threw this thing at me, haha!

    • avconsumer2

      lol… “OWww!!! Stop it!!!”

  • Aono

    Parent cartridge?

    • Looks like .50 AE. Which would be amusing.

      • Giolli Joker

        The rebated rim is definitely small, my bet is on a shortened .50 Beowulf.

        • .50 Beowulf seems to have a much larger gutter between case and casehead. But could be.

          • Giolli Joker

            You’re right.
            It uses a 7.62×39 bolt face like .50 Beowulf, but the parent case is .50AE, with a more rebated rim.

  • tazman66gt

    So…this is better than the .458 SOCOM or the .450 Bushmaster how exactly?

    • Roy

      Ballistic coefficient, think of a football flying rather than a jar of mayo.

      • uisconfruzed

        It’s only better if it’s slightly deflated.

    • Giolli Joker

      This is designed for subsonic operation with the highest BC available for the caliber. Surely you can shoot heavy bullets subsonic with the other two, but the casing can’t accommodate properly the most streamlined, high BC ones, therefore the maximum range is inferior.

      • tazman66gt

        Hype and balderdash

        • Roy

          Surely you meant physics.

          • tazman66gt

            Nope meant exactly what I said, hype of another cartridge that won’t go anywhere and balderdash from people trying to make it sound like its the Holy Grail

          • Giolli Joker

            I borrow Scott Ripley’s word:
            “I am only a proponent of physics. I have no opinion on another round that I will probably never see in person.”

          • tazman66gt

            So you couldn’t add anything more to the conversation so you had to take someone else’s comment, good for you.

          • Giolli Joker

            I was simply giving you a key to read my words to clarify that I’m NOT praising a new ballistic Holy Grail.
            Did the day start off badly for you? I see no reason to keep a confrontational tone in this discussion.

          • tazman66gt

            I don’t need a key to understand anything you have said. If you go back to the first comment I made I asked how this was better than what is already out there and you began the lecture on ballistics. Since this is a new round with no ground under its feet I said basically its all bull until you can apply hard numbers to support what is being touted. If you are going to use this round to take out lights at distance that’s one thing but if you are using this to put someone or something in the ground then the lack of velocity is going to reduce its operating window. Also, if we were able to put this round and a .458SOCOM in same length barrels and actually test them side by side I suspect the differences would be marginal at best.

          • Giolli Joker

            The hard numbers are already there.
            This is a subsonic round, barrel lenghts are not a variable because the maximum speed that this round aims to obtain is still subsonic.
            This lack of velocity serves the only purpose of reducing sound signature, more efficient suppression, that’s it.
            How does it compare to a supersonic 458 Socom? It sucks!
            How does it compare to a 600grs subsonic Socom load? Less energy at the muzzle but it will catch up and surpass it somewhere downrange.

            BTW, if I had to elect my Holy Grail in this field, it’s been designed by the creator of 458 Socom… I doubt I’ll ever have chance to shoot it.

          • Ethan

            If you need help getting that chip off your shoulder, I know a good therapist. ;-P

            Just because your don’t have a use for it doesn’t make the simple physics any less true. This isn’t a debate – it HAS a better ballistic co-efficient..

          • tazman66gt

            Don’t need a therapist, just need to be able to walk to the fridge without being in mind numbing pain. :- )

  • GearHeadTony

    Umm…where does the powder go???

    • Roy

      It’s a subsonic only, it only needs a pinch.

  • Dracon1201

    “Flat Shooting”


    • Roy

      In regards to subsonic rounds, that has to be with the BC the .416 bullets run. Check it out in any decent ballistic calculator.

      • Dracon1201

        Maybe without being constrained to subsonics. Physics does not support the statement that it will be flatter shooting than a subsonic .300blk. Look at the massive differences in weight.

        • Scott Ripley

          More weight with the same BC at the same speed will mean the heavier bullet will shoot flatter, as it won’t be slowed as quickly by air resistance.

          • Dracon1201

            I see, you are correct. (I am always skeptical of manufacturer claims) Just as well, I used the Hornady Ballistic Calc to check it.

            I have the sheet here, but the thing is, the differences in the drop of the bullet in a comparison between .416 and .300 are so minimal and marginal, even at 300 yds, (difference of 1.3 inches), why would I bother. This seems like min/maxing for the heck of it. The increase in muzzle energy and the retention of that energy are the only real gains I can see.

            In my book, at least, it doesn’t make logical sense to go with the .416, at least vs the .300 BLK. The difference in aftermarket support will always be an issue for the .416, as will the massive differences in price of components and the pure size of the suppressors. Then you also get to the point where you look at .300 Blk and realize that has unsuppressed usage. The .416 is dedicated to be that way. I’d imagine you could never make up the case volume to make it anything but subsonic. It just seems like a heck of a long shot to really make this min/max cartridge do something marginally better.

            But in the end, to each their own.

          • Scott Ripley

            I am only a proponent of physics. I have no opinion on another round that I will probably never see in person.

          • Dracon1201

            Amen to that.

          • Giolli Joker

            It even means more energy that can be sought for by the hunter that wants to shoot a suppressed gun.
            .300 BLK subsonic loads have roughly the muzzle energy of a .45ACP.

          • Ethan

            THIS. While I am 100% comfortable hunting with subsonic 300BLK, I greater terminal impact would open up a wider range of shots that I was comfortable taking.

            300BLK: 230GR @ 1050FPS = 563 foot-lbs with Ø.308 front area
            416 HUSH: 450GR @ 1050FPS = 1101 foot-lbs with Ø.416 front area designed to tumble on impact

            I doubt I would buy it personally, but I can see its value.

    • dan citizen

      compared to a trench mortar…

  • Hikerguy

    Someday I must sit down and try to list all the cartridges the AR platform shoots. If I can recall them all, that is.

    • Grey

      An impossible task. The list is growing faster than the info can be published.

  • Nicks87

    More wildcats… Yuck!

    • MR

      Exactly! When are manufacturers going to learn, we want fewer options, not more!

      • Dan

        Oh I want more options, but I want something more than just shoving a bullet in a cut down case giving it a fancy name and saying look fits in an AR mag . I want options that are proven to have more of a use then the very limited one this will have. Give me more options but I want useful options.

        • uisconfruzed

          6.5 Grendel is a great round for an AR platform. If you want to replace the bolt, barrel and magazine. Mine’s a tack driver.


    So how about giving the velocity at various distances so we can see how ‘flat’ shooting this grossly underpowered brick will fly? Making it pointy does not make it go faster at these speeds and weights.

    • Someone at AR15 forums speculates the following:

      “Based on that info (at 1000fps) and a 100 yd zero you get…

      50 yds: +3.7″ (972.4 fps)
      150 yds: -12.9″ (959.7 fps)
      200 yds: -35.2″ (947.6 fps)
      300 yds: -109.2″ (924.9 fps)
      400 yds: – 223.8″ (904.0 fps)
      500 yds: -381.0″ (884.6 fps)”

    • Roy

      When it’s subsonic, you’re locked at a static muzzle velocity. The only way to increase power is with weight, to improve the arc of trajectory (flatness) you need more length. Problem is, there’s only so much room in a magazine.

  • Dan

    Are we being serious right now with this?

  • ensiteu

    another unneeded candidate for the ash heap of history

  • Anonymoose

    How does it stack up to 600gr .458 SOCOM?

    • Giolli Joker

      Surely less energy at the muzzle, probably more somewhere downrange.

  • thedonn007

    So, can you use this with a .45 caliber pistol suppressor?

  • gunslinger

    can they get a larger bullet with a smaller case? that’s what i want

    • sianmink

      OK. How about this?

      • gunslinger

        there we go.
        quite the opposite of the 7.92×94 anti tank round…

  • BigBadWolf34

    I’m a little confused. Can you fire this from a standard AR that shoots 5.56? or do you need a rifle that just shoots .416?

    • dan citizen

      if you fire it out of a 5.56 barrel, I’m guessing chamber pressures would be high.

      • uisconfruzed

        Just DO NOT use more powder than the recipie calls for and you’ll be fine.

  • ConservativeSurge

    This round was announced at last year’s SHOT show…

  • dan citizen

    “It delivers a wound channel greater than … a 12 gauge slug”

    No, it doesn’t.

    • Giolli Joker

      Well, it might at 100+ yards (or even less compared to the buckshot).
      I’m pretty sure it doesn’t in CQB ranges.
      (They’re not lying just hiding part of the truth 🙂 )

      • dan citizen

        I’m sure it compares favorably to a single buck pellet, as well as penetrating deeper than buckshot in general.

        But for a company to make a claim of a greater wound channel than a 12 gauge slug…. they probably just watch a lot of shoot-em-up movies, or get their ballistics off of video game forums.

        Reviewing their ballistics information, the kindest thing you could call it would be “skewed and inaccurate”