OATH Ammunition’s Extreme Cavitator

On the extreme opposite of jacketed hollow-points comes OATH Ammunition’s latest release, the Maximum Cavitator. (For those curious “OATH” stands for Operators American Tactical Hardware, which proves that there is no limit to tactical acronyms).

In the same train of thought as the Lehigh Defense Extreme Penetrator or Ruger’s ARX ammunition, the bullet is cut to force soft tissue to cavitate across the bullet. Given the velocity of the round, the final cut will “throw” (my word) the tissue at a 90 degree angle where, in theory, it will create a significantly larger wound channel.


Photos courtesy of AllOutdoor.com. Photos taken by Oleg Volk.

Two loads will be available for release based off of a 124 grain .300 bullet. First up is a .308 loading which reaches 3100 FPS from a 24″ barrel, losing only 250 FPS dropping to a 16 inch boom stick. Our sister site, AllOutdoor.com reports that the bullet will have about 25% more wind drift, but is only overtaken for “flatness of trajectory” past the 1000 yard mark (where the lighter weight and higher drag coefficients catch up to the design).

AllOutdoor.com was able to test the ammunition. Oleg Volk was able to print sub minute of angle accuracy from the 300 BLK load. Which is encouraging, given its high price. The .308 load comes in at $41.95, but the 300 BLK is a bit more reasonable at $31.95.

Nathan S

One of TFB’s resident Jarheads, Nathan now works within the firearms industry. A consecutive Marine rifle and pistol expert, he enjoys local 3-gun, NFA, gunsmithing, MSR’s, & high-speed gear. Nathan has traveled to over 30 countries working with US DoD & foreign MoDs.

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


  • john huscio

    Waiting for 556

  • Spencerhut

    I can see the usefulness in a .300BO, but does a full power .308 Win need any help killing fleshy things?

    • Vitor Roma

      Yes, it does. I think a lot of testing and experiments, specially the ones did in the development of thr M855A1, showed that how the bullet behaves when hitting the target is more imporant than the size/energy. Remember, a full power 7.62×54 couldn’t kill a small, skinny guy from Finland. =P

      Shot placement > Bullet behavior >> Energy and size.

      Of course the energy can help the behavior, but not reliably, like the M855 that could be lethal or meh. The consctruction matters much more.

      • ZEBRA-wit-RABIES

        Do you have any links to M855A1 testing?? That would be very interesting.

        • Vitor Roma

          This very blog has some articles about it.

          • FCUK ChierDuChien!

            FCUK ChierDuChien!

      • AldrexChamexYoloSweg

        Google “155gr AMAX gel test”.
        Hard to ask for more.

      • Vanns40

        Can we PLEASE flip the switch to turn on the cone of silence before continuing with this? The Whiney Mommie collective along with the Bloomberg Violence Center will be having a collective news conference shortly featuring Bullwinkle (if you don’t understand the reference ask your father) in a hospital rehab testifying how he was shot by Boris with one of these inhumane assault bullets, from a silenced assassins assault weapon and later tortured by Natasha.

    • gunsandrockets

      No, but the lighter bullet probably takes the edge off .308 recoil. Nice to have in a combat rifle.

  • manBear

    Extreme Cavitator … My wife used to call me that : |

    • Scott Tuttle

      I cant decide to vote you up or down for that one but I still laughed

    • I voted you up on that one. *High Five*

    • Ron Last

      You should have a dentist look at your bad teeth, or do you have dentures now? If it’s not your teeth, I’m sorry she “used” to call you that – what happened to it?

    • albaby2

      You too?

  • Michael Lubrecht

    At .308 velocities, I’d think that the flutes in the bullet would be largely for show. The shock wave of the bullet hitting flesh will cause a temporary cavity that will pull it away from the bullet, greatly reducing the effect of any sort of cutting edges on a non-expanding bullet. At a minimum, I’d want to see the difference in size, if any, between the permanent wound cavity diameter between this bullet and a similarly-priced, premium expanding bullet, before believing any claims.

  • Rnasser Rnasser

    I smell BS big time… the ballistic coefficient of the bullet will be degraded greatly.
    And WHY?? An expanding bullet will be cheaper and have better trajectory and terminal ballistics.

    • guest

      because gimmicks sell well, as do fancy names

      Where an AK-type weapon might be fitting for the job – why not sell an overly complicated unreliable POS for at least 2x the price?
      Where a Glock can do its job – why not sell a Glock clone or even better some over-machined obscurity that weighs 2x as much, has 2x less ammo capacity and costs at least 3x as much?
      Where a polymer-tipped or a soft-point bullet for the “usual” (ie: reasonable, comparable) price could do the job – why not sell a monometal machined bullet that costs much more, has poorer ballistics, unvalidated terminal performance claims… and… drumroll… costs more?

      Me personally I could easily see the ENTIRE civilian market being serviced by say 3 types of semi-auto carbines, one type of semi-auto handgun, and at most 3 calibers of ammo for ALL the above. The hunting department could add to that a couple of different types of shotgun ammo of only one calibre, maybe a couple more rifle calibres but that’s it. Extremely simplified logistics, interoperability across the board etc ad nauseum.

      But nooohohoho! THOUSANDS of ammo types including obscure wildcats, THOUSANDS of “different” handguns and rifles that do much of the same and often times are nearly or entirely identical in performance, and absolutely endless jerking of the “my gun can do xxxx” debates.
      This is the liberalism of the “gun world” if one could call it that. 99% of which is entirely meaningless, and only aimed at producing “new” things which are almost never new, nor better performing in any significant way, but sound cool, exciting, so in that in the long run every gun owner who often times treats his weapon as if it was his genitalia extension – will be unique, will be “custom”. And I swear before God as many gun types, bullet types, ammo types, optics types there are out there – directly comparable to that diversity number is the lack of skills of the owners, percentage wise, as far as their handling and operating their weapon in concerned.
      Practical example: various survivalist fanatics will have a whole f***ing arsenal, yet for the same effort and money they waste – they could take ONE gun – and train till the trigger finger gets blue and has a hairline bone fracture, and at the end come out of it all with that one gun – where there is no longer a distinction between the gun itself and the operation, they would literally be one unit. Much like a pro race car driver and his car.
      And once that is accomplished – that shooter could do miracles in any situation (SHTF, shooting match, self-defence whatever) with that one “boring” gun, stock ball ammo and the man behind it.
      Living proof of that is that guy … forget his name… the IPSC world champion that creamed his competition with an absolutely “un-sporty” Glock. That is the living proof of that all the knick-knacks, the “tactical strategic terminal performance precision bullet” or whatever other sales gimmick nonsense is just the bubbles on the surface and it will take just a slight gust of wind for them to pop.

      But then of course, that line of thought would be in direct conflict with owning a fancy “new” rifle for a ridiculous price, having custom this and that with no real practical meaning, and not having that “special” ammo. One much choose either to be a well-paying buyer of whatever a good ad campaign sells – or to be a good shooter. The latter costs less in fact, the first however rewards the ego. Tough choice for some, not a choice at all for others.

      • Elvis

        Where is an AK fitting for a job? When you want an obsolete, awkward, inaccurate rifle?

        It’s called progress. The market will decide if it’s a step forward, or a step backwards.

        • guest

          Obsolete? Awkward?

          I’m a simple guy with simple ideas: a gun is a gun. A “military” AK of any model is suited well for the job it was designed to, and so are its civilian brethren.
          It is accurate ENOUGH for the purpose it is designed for, it is as simple as a shovel, and “obsolete”? In what way, exactly? lol

          As for the “steps forward” you are speaking of – I will not write the same stuff I wrote again – a step FORWARD is like making a gun perform *significantly* better than what it is intended to replace. All guns that clearly with a margin can be called “a step forward” I can count with one hand. The rest – fashion knick-knacks and nonsense like these machined mono metal bullets are a step back.

          As for the statement “market will decide” that’s the problem right there: a CONSUMER market will eat anything a savvy manufacturer serves up. Like for example “new” 1911s that are the same old sh** just in new colors. The same old M-16/AR-16 with new furniture and what not. Those are not by any definition “steps forward” – but boy do they sell!
          So buy up, consumer! 🙂

    • Ryobiwankenobi

      I won’t boycott a company just because they make a copper bullet unless they are working to use the force of law to limit or eliminate my ability to make that choice for myself.

  • dP

    OATH? I’m waiting for the Radically Enhanced Tactical American Rifle Defense


    • Josh Mason

      So cash.

    • ZEBRA-wit-RABIES

      They haven’t released the Super Hippy Interrogating Tracer – Sonic Trajectory Ordinate Ravaging Monster bullet design. It’s a prototype.

      • US Army (retired)


        • ZEBRA-wit-RABIES


    • kschmadeka

      That would be a perfect weapon system for the Department of Intelligence Personnel Specializing in Highly Intelligent Tactics.

  • Mark

    You realize, of course, that copper is toxic. Once lead projectiles have been eliminated, I expect that copper will go next. DP and DU anyone?

    • Marc

      Everything is toxic depending on the dose.

      • Mark

        Exactly. I boycott any “unleaded” projectiles simply as a matter of principle. Why reward companies that pander to the incrementalism?

  • noob

    Is this projectile suitable for military use under the law of war?

    • Amanofdragons

      Simple answer. No. I’m 80 percent positive the hogue convention had specific wording making bullets with cut outs illegal.
      Technically speaking, the US never signed the hogue agreement, so we aren’t bound by it. We do honor and abide by the rules though.

      • ostiariusalpha

        No, the Hague Convention of 1899 absolutely only covers bullets designed to physically expand or flatten easily in the human body (e.g. soft points & hollow points), it doesn’t prohibit radially dynamic projectiles like this in any manner. These bullets are perfectly good-to-go for war.

        • Mr. C

          I read about Charles Kelsey, sad story. Pity he died so soon and tragically.

      • Silverado

        “We do honor and abide by the rules though.”

        Oh sure we do…You mean like we do with nukes, cluster bombs or weaponized gas bombs or fleshettes found in “beehive” anti-personnel artillery rounds (little 1 and 2 inch nail-like projectiles with fins to stabilize them in supersonic flight that are loaded in some small rockets and other anti personnel weapons) and many other weapons of war that are outlawed by the Hague Convention everywhere else??? And that’s only a small bit of what we know about…

  • uisconfruzed

    Where’s the ballistic gel slo-mo?

  • Mister Thomas

    Very cool. As the projectile spins, the flat surfaces contacts with soft tissue with devastating effect.

    Here is a description of the Polycase 458 SOCOM ARX:

    “The non-expanding polymer-copper projectile is injection molded and acts
    like a boat propeller in reverse upon contact with soft tissue,
    imparting 100% transfer of 2,798 ft. lbs. of total kinetic directional and rotational energy.”

  • gunsandrockets

    $2.10 per round? Yikes!

    • Vanns40

      Goes along with the $15 an hour minimum wage.

  • Giolli Joker

    I like a lot Lehigh and I agree on the poor name choice from OATH.
    However I’d just call their bullet THV 2.0.

    • It does have potential doesn’t it?

      • Giolli Joker

        Lehigh Defense is one of the few manufacturers whose claims get usually backed by independent tests… it’s not small feat in this world full of marketing buzzwords.