Darth-Vang
Member
What do you guys think about the .30 Super Carry Cartridges? I don’t think it’ll replace the .380 or 9mm luger for that matter.
Thoughts on the .30 Super Carry
- Thread starter Darth-Vang
- Start date
- Status
ExtremeSquared
Member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2008
- Messages
- 259
Someone stole Federal's calculators. No dimension of this 8mm bullet / barrel rounds to 0.30 inches.
I'm guessing the marketing team decided it sounds better.
I distrust it instinctively because of this, but that's probably just me.
I'm guessing the marketing team decided it sounds better.
I distrust it instinctively because of this, but that's probably just me.
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,270
Bullets are .312", traditionally named .32 caliber. They can name it anything they want.
Most .30 caliber rounds typically measure .308, which makes both .30 and .32 caliber closer to .31 caliber.
Yeah, it is just you.
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,270
Seems like a fine round. The bonus of extra rounds is always a good thing.
Swing
Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2012
- Messages
- 1,644
Neat concept, but I doubt it will really take off. The 9x19mm Parabellum is so well established at this point, I'd imagine few will bother with a new cartridge, even if you pick up an extra shot or two in a carry piece. It kind of reminds me of the .327 Federal Magnum; nice performance, pick up an extra round, but is it really way better than existing options? Certainly has its benefits, but ...
Ethan Verity
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2021
- Messages
- 716
There are already multiple threads spanning multiple pages on THR discussing the new 30 Super Carry.
.... but anyway, I do like the concept of the new round. Matching the ballistics of the 9mm, but allowing another 1 or 2 round capacity. It may be a good competitor with 9mm, however I don't think it will impact 380 since it can't be put into the super small size guns like an LCP. It's too high pressure for that.
.... but anyway, I do like the concept of the new round. Matching the ballistics of the 9mm, but allowing another 1 or 2 round capacity. It may be a good competitor with 9mm, however I don't think it will impact 380 since it can't be put into the super small size guns like an LCP. It's too high pressure for that.
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,270
What does pressure have to do with it?
Ethan Verity
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2021
- Messages
- 716
50k PSI of gas pressure drives that smaller bullet to 9mm muzzle energy levels... if a tiny Ruger LCP could handle 30 Super Carry, you likely would have already seen one chambered in 9mm by now...
.455_Hunter
Member
I like it just because it gives the "9mm or bust" cabal a case of the vapors.
In reality, my preference would have been for a detuned version in the ~250 FPE range that gave significantly better performance than the .32 ACP, with the increased capacity, but not entering into 9x19 pressure and blast levels.
In reality, my preference would have been for a detuned version in the ~250 FPE range that gave significantly better performance than the .32 ACP, with the increased capacity, but not entering into 9x19 pressure and blast levels.
Last edited:
Monac
Member
I think 30 Super Carry needs a gun designed specifically for its dimensions and power in order to show its advantages relative to other cartridges. Using guns optimized for other ammuntion is not going to show it at its best.
amd6547
Member
I will be interested in it if we ever get to the point that gun shops have pallets of cheap ball practice ammo.
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,270
That's a meaningless comparison. You can't get a 9mm in a 380 LCP because you need a larger frame to fit the longer 9mm cartridge. Same for the 30 SC. It's the same length as the 9mm. It requires a certain frame size.
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Not going to displace 9mm and wont fit in .380-sized guns, as fxvr5 pointed out....so no, I dont see it going anywhere.
Toss it on the pile with .45GAP and .41AE.
Toss it on the pile with .45GAP and .41AE.
A very good point that it seems like many people ignore when discussing the topic
I'm sure the round is great. Might even be better than 9mm... But when the rubber hits the road and you can't find any ammo or at least some reasonably priced ammo to go with the gun it's going to be a hard sell.
nettlle
Contributing Member
I have read a few comparisons of the 30 super carry vs 9mm. There really isn't all that much difference.
groundhog34
Member
My answer is a question. Why do we need another caliber in hard to find ammo?
Trashyshoots
Member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2019
- Messages
- 598
I think in 2016-17 it had a chance. Now with ammo prices outrageous and still hard to find in some locations it is dead in the water.
Why would it replace .380 ?
A cartridge that produced about as much recoil as a 380 and propelled a hollow point from a 3" barrel that could penetrate to around 14" in ordnance gel through 4 layers of denim and still expand some would be a winner in my book, but 30 SC is not that cartridge.
Maybe a 30 NSS.
ExtremeSquared
Member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2008
- Messages
- 259
All true. But non-dimensional nominal cartridge designations are something you can look the other way on when the cartridge is 100 years old. Engineering came down to "it can't blow up".
Seeing non-dimensional nominal designations in a new cartridge sort of sends the wrong message now that these things are likely heavily engineered before release.
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,270
Yes, a real disaster. Like the 357 SIG which actually uses .355 bullets? Unforgivable. We should boycott all ammo makers because they are purposefully misleading us. Shame on them.
jeff-10
Member
They could only go down in caliber but up in power level. Above the 9mm you have well established 40 S&W, 10mm, 357 SIG and 45 ACP cartridges. Really nothing left there as all of them are proven and readily found. If you go smaller in diameter, which they did, you have to go powerful because we already have the highly established 32 ACP. They basically made the only thing left possible as far as I can see. I doubt it will have legs unless a major government agency uses it. Time will tell though. The next 40 S&W or the next 45 GAP. I think GAP is the more likely.
Last edited:
Monac
Member
In factory ammo, isn't the kinetic energy of the factory standard 230 grain 45 ACP load within about 2% of the kinetic energy of the factory standard 115 grain FMJ 9mm Parabellum load? It surprised me to learn that 45 ACP and 9mm Para are very similar in power, but they are. The 45 has more felt recoil, because the bullet weighs twice as much and that's felt how recoil works, but it's true nonetheless. It is surprising to me how many people do not know that, or argue that 45 is way more powerful, but it just isn't so. Not unless you want to use some other measure, anyway, and I would like to know what that is.
(And yes, I know that the old standard loads are way below the hot hollow point loads we have now, but I would bet that kinetic energy is not all that different overall, or that 9mm actually has an edge because in kinetic energy, velocity counts more than projectile mass.)
Caveat: I stand ready to be corrected if somebody can explain how I am talking through my hat, because I have been wrong a lot and being wrong again will not shock me.
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,511
Meh…for those excited enjoy your moment in the sun before it ends up with Federals other “winner” cartridge they just developed, hyped to the max and let the consumers be stuck with guns whose cartridge failed. I predict it’ll be very similar to the 224 Valkyrie.
- Status
