A new 9mm round to supplement the 380?

[Peter M. Eick]

I am thinking that with all of the complaints about 380's that "should have been 9mm's" that there is a market for a new round.

I was thinking the 355 Auto as the name.

It would have a COL of 1" instead of the .984 for the 380.
It would have a rebated rim so it matched the 380.
It would have the shape and 9mm Luger (.754) and taper from .391 to .380 at the front.
It would be limited to 115 TC's JHP's or 124 grn TC FMJ's or any of the lighter bullets.
It would run at 35K pressures and only work in locked breech 380's like the Glock 42 or Colt Gov 380/Mustang/Sig 238 or similar.

Basically this round would give you 9mm performance in a 380 package with a barrel change. It may also work in some 9mm's with long extractor hooks.

I make no bones about it that this would be hot rodding the guns. You are pushing them up and potentially past their design limits in terms of life expectancy, but it should work.

So, what are your thoughts? Would this fly or is it another 41 Action Express/45 GAP type result?

 

[C0untZer0]

I have been thinking about something similar.

A sort of 380 Super or .380 +P (despite that some ammo manufacturers are creating loads that they call +P) the 355 is fine - whatever.

If there were a cartridge that could get 105 grain bullets moving a little faster than the 380 does currently, a cartridge that could also propel 110gr-115gr bullets at respectable velocities like 1050 to 1100 fps.

It might have a little more punch than the 380, but not up the recoil that much...

I don't think you could venture up into the 124gr area for bullet weights though. it would seem to me that it would be covering the 100gr to 115gr territory.

 

[C0untZer0]

If you look at the 9mm Federal Guard Dog EFMJ, it is a 105gr bullet with a muzzle velocity of 1060 fps

It is basically a down-loaded 9mm that acts like a .380 AUTO round.

And the performance in bare gel is about on par with the main herd of 380 rounds.

 

[Sam1911]

You want to split the difference between 9x17mm and 9x19mm? Seriously? That's kind of like wanting some new round to fill the vast gulf between .22 Long and .22 LR -- IMHO.

And, hey, remember, THERE'S ALREADY A 9x18mm! You want a 9x17.5 to shoe-horn in there somehow?

We've got so danged many cartridge choices as it is, seems like parsing the field into ever tinier niches is trying to find "hardware solutions to software problems."

In other words, there's nothing of actual value that a new round like that would do that .380 or 9mm won't do. And if there is, 9mm Mak will just have to do.

 

[AFDavis11]

In the real-world this is so true. But, think of the debates that would flood the internet of the stopping power of the 9x17.5 vs the 9x18!

 

[Nom de Forum]

So, what are your thoughts? Would this fly or is it another 41 Action Express/45 GAP type result?

Probably more like a lead Zeppelin than a Wright Flyer.

At the small end of the spectrum in pistol size I think there is just not enough wiggle room to fit this proposed cartridge in between the .380 and 9mm. IMHO there is too little gain in terminal ballistic power and like Kel-tec's attempt to chamber .40S&W their 9mm size pistol, too much power for a micro-size pistol the same size as a .380. I could of course be completely wrong. As long as I am not paying for the development costs I would find it interesting to find out if it can be a success.

 

[C0untZer0]

You want to split the difference between 9x17mm and 9x19mm?

Yes.

The mak is a fat slow bullet at .365 (I mean compared to the 380.

This would be like a 9mm Luger on tranquilizers, or maybe a more appealing way to say it is a .380 AUTO on steroids.

But I think it was already invented - didn't the 9×18mm Ultra propel .355" 100gr bullets to around 1060 fps ?

 

[gym]

It is not a good idea. As mentioned we have plenty of types already that are too similar. If you could come up with a cheaper way to make a round then you would have something. It's the cost that' hurting most, worse than a slot machine.

 

[Nom de Forum]

But I think it was already invented - didn't the 9×18mm Ultra propel .355" 100gr bullets to around 1060 fps ?

It, as everyone knows, is considered a World changing success that set a new paradigm for small pistols.

 

[Sam1911]

This would be like a 9mm Luger on tranquilizers

You mean a .380 ACP?

or maybe a more appealing way to say it is a .380 AUTO on steroids.

You mean 9mm Parabellum?

Much ado about nothing.

 

[David E]

It would make the .256 Belchfire Magnum look like a resounding success.

What, you've never heard of the .256 Belchfire Magnum?

Exactly.

 

[LT.Diver]

I think they mastered cartridge design when they developed the .44 magnum )

 

[481]

I am pretty sure that the OP just reinvented the 9mm Ultra...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9×18mm_Ultra

 

[GLOOB]

You want to split the difference between 9x17mm and 9x19mm? Seriously? That's kind of like wanting some new round to fill the vast gulf between .22 Long and .22 LR -- IMHO.

The difference between 9x17 and 9x19 is pretty darn huge, IMO.

And, hey, remember, THERE'S ALREADY A 9x18mm!

9x18 is pretty similar to 9x17. He wants his round to duplicate 9x19. Big difference. He's not talking about 9mm Ultra, 9x18, or any other "let's make a slightly hotter 380 that will still fire in a small blowback gun."

He's talking about sticking 9x19 pressures and performance into a 380 sized locked breech, which is a platypus of a different color.

Problem 1 is getting same performance at a shorter OAL. Can't be done without increasing peak pressure. 45GAP is possible because the cartridge is bigger than it needs to be. The 9x19 has been maxed out to get it to where it stands, today.

Problem 2 is there aren't (m)any 380s in existence that will handle 9x19 with "just a barrel change."

only work in locked breech 380's like the Glock 42 or Colt Gov 380/Mustang/Sig 238 or similar.

None of those guns will handle 9x19 with just a barrel change. You will have failures to extract at best. Most likely you will have kb's, or at least the gun shooting itself apart after a short number of rounds. Oh, then there's the recoil.

There are some, like the Glock 25/28, which would work. These are 9x19 guns rechambered in .380. And because the .380 is so much weaker, the locking lug has been removed from the top of the barrel hood, making them into blowback. With a barrel change, you could turn them back into 9x19 Glocks... But then you could just buy a 9x19 Glock to begin with. Or if you are in a country where you aren't permitted to use 9x19, there's already a solution called the 9x21.

 

[barnbwt]

380GAP, lol

Problem 3 is the liability inherent in producing a 380 cartridge capable of taking blowback 380s apart . I guarantee you'll soon after hear idiotic advice on the webz about how that Raven is more than stout enough for the new 380GAP round (just like the 10mm Hi Point carbine conversions)

TCB

 

[Sam1911]

The difference between 9x17 and 9x19 is pretty darn huge, IMO.

Huge. Ok. Well, that's a definition of "huge" I wasn't familiar with.

I mean, we're talking about 9mm, here. My pre-teen daughter's favorite cartridge.

I get that there is A difference, but we've got so darned many options at this point that you can move across the matrix of power, recoil, size, and weight in nearly any combination until you find something that works well enough that you can stop futzing around with equipment and get to working on shooting skills. We're totally at the point ... no, past the point ... of diminishing returns already. Adding another cartridge to the pile of 9mm-like rounds on the shelves is just not going to make people better defended.

 

[GLOOB]

I mean, we're talking about 9mm, here. My pre-teen daughter's favorite cartridge.

Because your preteen daughter can shoot 9mm out of a full sized gun, it makes it weak? I supposed your daughter can't touch off a round of 45ACP out of a 1911 without breaking her wrist? Just look at the energy and velocity differences between 380 and 9x19. They aren't even playing the same game.

OP, just because a pistol has a locked breech doesn't mean it can handle w/e cartridge you can fit in it. The breech stays locked only for a defined length of travel. If you increase the momentum, the breech unlocks sooner. A locked breech pistol is tuned (by slide mass, distance of travel before unlocking, and recoil spring) to open at a certain point in time for a certain cartridge. Furthermore, the breech must stay locked for a minimum duration until pressure diminishes; when you increase the pressure, that minimum duration increases. So you're going the wrong way on two fronts. A simple barrel change doesn't begin to cut it, in this case. Going from 380 to 9mm is akin to moving up from 45ACP to .460 Rowland. That requires more than a simple barrel change.

Let's take a Glock 17 for example. If you progressively overload the cartridge, you will first start to get failures to extract. This occurs because the pressures in the cartridge are still too high when the action unlocks. The case is still stuck against the case walls when the extractor tries to pull the case out. Load even higher, and eventually that case is going to blow itself out under high pressure and/or rupture before it's even finished extracting. The gun is strong enough to handle it, the case is not. Alter the slide mass and recoil spring, and that's a different story. That's pretty much what you can expect by loading 380 to 9mm levels and sticking it in a stock 380. It doesn't matter how strong the 380 is built, it's a matter of what it's tuned for.

 

[Sam1911]

Because your preteen daughter can shoot 9mm out of a full sized gun, it makes it weak?

Well, no, it's just hard to make an awful lot of the difference between the rounds down at that end of the spectrum.

I supposed your daughter can't touch off a round of 45ACP out of a 1911 without breaking her wrist?

Of course not. She can't run the gun as fast as a 9mm, but even the "mighty" .45 just isn't a powerhouse.

Just look at the energy and velocity differences between 380 and 9x19. They aren't even playing the same game.

Wow. Ok, if you feel the differences are that significant, then they are so to you.

I'll stand by my concept of .380 as "9mm Lite" and of 9mm as ".380 Magnum" (with no practical need to split that difference any further) and you can feel free to disagree.

 

[Armor Snail]

Getting more out of a .380 doesn't need a new cartridge. A call to Underwood Ammo will suffice.

There is your solution.

 

[GLOOB]

380GAP, lol

I think it would be more like 9mm GAP.

 

[mgmorden]

If this thing by some miracle suceeded, in 20 years we'd have internet ideas springing up to make something between ".355 Auto" and 9mm Luger in power, with I'm sure many holding steadfast that there is a huge difference between the two.

In reality, I doubt the real world performance of a cartridge between the two of them would differ enough from either that it would be worth it. If .380 isn't powerful enough for you just get a 9mm and call it a day.

 

[SDGlock23]

Strange I was thinking about the same thing the other day. You can't go messing with the OAL too much or else the size of the gun has to expand too, but I could see perhaps something slightly longer but like you said, running at high pressure (35-40K PSI range). I like the idea of the tapered case because it can allow slightly more powder in compared to a straight walled case, but either would work really.

The biggest issue would be recoil, some think the 380 as is is snappy, but if the gun is sprung tightly (like Kahrs for instance), that can negate some of the recoil without having to resort to porting the gun. Another tactic often used is to make the gun heavier to help with recoil which is off the table as the gun really needs to weight the same as current 380's. Then you'd still have to have special designed bullets for it because most 9mm 115-124 would likely still be moving too slow to reliably open the hollow cavity and too long as to eat up way too much case capacity.

 

[JRWhit]

But, think of the debates that would flood the internet of the stopping power of the 9x17.5 vs the 9x18!

I read a blog that said that the 9x17.5 will handily do anything the 45acp will making anything bigger than the 9x17.5 a total waste of powder.

 

[GLOOB]

The 9mm case length isn't a problem. No one's complaining about the massive grip size of a PF-9, Karh, or Rorbaugh, or ...

So there's really no reason to make a shorter 9mm (and it isn't possible, unless you go to light weight bullets, only). Sounds like what you want is a smaller 9mm firearm. And if you think Rorbaughs aren't small enough, I guess you think the designer of that gun is dumb for not coming up with the idea to simply ream out the chamber and breechface of an LCP and making the magwell 0.2" longer. Newsflash: that won't work until we discover new alloys that have material properties far different from what we currently have and yet remain cost-effective. Everything from the slide, chamber, and locking blocks, down to even the pins, will not stand up to 9mm, even if you could modify the action to stay locked long enough, unless you made the slide twice as heavy for starters. Keltec designers pushed the limits on that gun, as is.

I am willing to believe that some of the larger 380s can be modified to fire cartridges mimicking 9mm ballistics with lighter bullets. What I don't see is a meaningful market.

40/9 conversions are popular because of cost. If you shoot a lot, you will save money. Not many people shoot 380 in high volume, certainly not out of pocket guns. And fewer would shoot this 380 magnum round, which will be even less pleasant to shoot and probably more expensive than 380, rather than cheap as chips 9mm. If you want the power just for SD/carry, you already have the option to get a small and uncomfortable to shoot 9mm. Some people are not comfortable carrying a hot-rodded firearm for SD for legal reasons, let alone potential reliability/safety/recoil issues. So your market is a lot smaller than you might think from reading some of the recent threads on the forum.

 

[WestKentucky]

Like trying to jam another round in between .223 rem and 5.56 NATO. (I know). Serves no purpose. You have already got 3 cartridges that can be adjusted by hand loading or by buying from companies like buffalo bore. If you want overlap in ability you already have it. If you want to change recoil change the build of the gun.