More New From S&W, the .30 Super Carry!

[ccmdfd]

Well, if there were only three companies (Federal/ATK, Nighthawk, and Smith & Wesson) making up the industry, Mr. McElrath would be correct.

Maybe he knows something we don't??

Get ready for more merger mania!

[the Schwartz]

Maybe he knows something we don't??

Get ready for more merger mania!

“You do not realize that Taco Bell was the only restaurant to survive the franchise wars. Now all restaurants are Taco Bell.” —SAPD Lieutenant Lenina Huxley to John Spartan in Demolition Man

[ccmdfd]

I think it is hypocritical when we as gun owners constantly bemoan the lack of innovation in the gun industry, and then immediately shoot down any potential innovation as being inferior to current options.

In this case in particular Federal appears to be making a huge investment in coordinating with various firearm manufacturers and other companies to do as much as possible to make sure this new cartridge is not Dead On Arrival. Most impressively they are dedicating a production line to produce this ammo at a time when they can make as much 9mm as they want and sell all of it as soon as it is produced for a big profit.

Having said that, I think this cartridge is going to suffer not merely from its inherent shortcomings (all cartridges have inherent shortcomings, because any design choice is a tradeoff), but especially from the over-the-top marketing used to introduce it.

They are marketing this as a general 9mm replacement, which I think is the wrong road to go down. I think this cartridge would be much more interesting if they pulled the pressure back a bit, say 40K-45K PSI, and marketed it instead to certain underserved niche groups of shooters. Specifically to old people, women, and others with reduced grip strength or small hands who find 9mm service pistols too big or too heavy recoiling to use effectively. A 17+1 .30cal handgun with the grip width of a single stack, less recoil than a 9mm, and better performance than .380, would be a great option to have for these type of folks.

As a 9mm replacement, I can see only two niche advantages. First, you get slightly more rounds. However, in these days of very concealable 12+1's, and 17+1 service pistols, the likelihood of a few extra rounds making a difference in a gunfight are extremely low. The other advantage would be a flatter trajectory for making hits over 75yds, again something extremely unimportant for real world handgun usage. Neither of these advantages can come close to outweighing having less practice time, and therefore less skill, due to the ammunition cost being higher, to say nothing of less terminal performance.

Speaking only for myself, while I sound snarky about this, I actually would love to see it take off and be highly successful. That is, if it actually can prove to be something Innovative and provide the adequate, acceptable performance in the real world and not just be successful based upon internet and social media hype.

That being said, I can't help but feel that the timing of this is the absolute, absolute, absolute worst in the world. I picked 2021 for some reason to be the year where I wanted to expand my hunting rifle collection by adding a couple of new calibers, 257 The Bob, and 257 Wby Mag. Guess I have a thing for the number 257.

While I managed to snag enough ammo for both to last for a couple of hunting seasons that's about it. While the Bob is an absolute joy to shoot, there is no way I'm just going to take it to the range and plink with it. I would go through my entire ammo collection in a couple of days. Right now ammo for both of those is completely unobtanium.

Just can't see doing the same thing for a new pistol round.

Now if and when the shelves become full and overflowing, and the prices have returned to a reasonable range, then absolutely, have at it!

In terms of marketing, I would personally rather see them proposed this being the replacement for the 380 auto. Still a lot of people buying those concerned about 9 mm being too big despite the fact that we know that in the best-case scenario 380 is borderline for effectiveness.

[FPS]

From a marketing perspective, I actually think this is the absolutely best time possible for this cartridge to succeed:

1) Gun sales are off the charts
2) Strong market trend toward small guns with higher capacity
3) New = More better mindset
4) Non-US market opportunities

Biggest hurdles:

1) Ammo cost
2) Negative sensory experience when shooting - blast, noise, recoil
3) 9mm market dominance

Remember when everyone thought 9mm wasn't enough? Technology made it enough. Perhaps this caliber and the right bullets and powder will make the 30 SC enough.

I like that the industry is trying to innovate and try new things. It won't change what I do but I hope it succeeds. Like the rest of you, I don't want it to be a turd that is pushed on a naive market but with the openness of information today, that would be a massive mistake by those behind the cartridge if they tried something like that (but then again, some companies never learn).

For me, this is "wait and see."

[pangloss]

After thinking some, I would buy a Glock 49 chambered in .30 Super Carry with a standard 20 round capacity this afternoon if one appeared on GunBroker for any sort of typical Glock price. I wouldn't need to sell any other pistols to do it, and I have a weakness for curiosity. Worst case scenario would be losing a couple of hundred dollars on a re-sale after taking the gun to the range a few times. Oddly, I'd love to see the Springfield SA-35 in this caliber, but I have no idea why.

I don't know what the Vista been counters are planning, but if I were them, and I really wanted this cartridge to succeed, I'd sell the ammo near cost for a quarter or two. With some advance planning, they could release a big bolus of ammo in the marketplace to drive pistol sales.

[CleverNickname]

After thinking some, I would buy a Glock 49 chambered in .30 Super Carry with a standard 20 round capacity this afternoon if one appeared on GunBroker for any sort of typical Glock price. I wouldn't need to sell any other pistols to do it, and I have a weakness for curiosity. Worst case scenario would be losing a couple of hundred dollars on a re-sale after taking the gun to the range a few times. Oddly, I'd love to see the Springfield SA-35 in this caliber, but I have no idea why.

If Glock wasn't involved with the development of .30 Super Carry, then I wouldn't expect them to make a gun chambered for it for a couple years, if ever.

That said, wonder what would be needed to convert an existing 9mm Glock to .30 Super Carry. Obviously a barrel, probably different mags since the feed lips would need to be changed for the smaller diameter round, probably a different slide also due to the smaller diameter round not working with extractor on a 9mm slide, probably a different ejector, maybe a different recoil spring. I'm just not sure if there's enough people who'd buy such a kit to make it profitable.

[willie]

Likewise, I too hope that the round succeeds but don't understand how it can. Not needing to rehash comments already made, I suspect it would cause excess wear on smaller frame pistols. I think cheaper availability of 9mm will discourage many from jumping to it. I'm reminded of the hype that S&W and Remington sang in their duo about the .41 Remington Magnum being an ideal police cartridge. I was 15 when the singing and dancing started. Smith produced a heavy N frame that kicked like hell. They introduced a medium loading to no avail.

[pangloss]

If Glock wasn't involved with the development of .30 Super Carry, then I wouldn't expect them to make a gun chambered for it for a couple years, if ever.

That said, wonder what would be needed to convert an existing 9mm Glock to .30 Super Carry. Obviously a barrel, probably different mags since the feed lips would need to be changed for the smaller diameter round, probably a different slide also due to the smaller diameter round not working with extractor on a 9mm slide, probably a different ejector, maybe a different recoil spring. I'm just not sure if there's enough people who'd buy such a kit to make it profitable.

I agree, but a guy can dream. You listed everything that went though my mind. Getting the extractor geometry correct would be my biggest worry. I don't want a retrofitted 9mm slide.

[octagon]

If Glock wasn't involved with the development of .30 Super Carry, then I wouldn't expect them to make a gun chambered for it for a couple years, if ever.

That said, wonder what would be needed to convert an existing 9mm Glock to .30 Super Carry. Obviously a barrel, probably different mags since the feed lips would need to be changed for the smaller diameter round, probably a different slide also due to the smaller diameter round not working with extractor on a 9mm slide, probably a different ejector, maybe a different recoil spring. I'm just not sure if there's enough people who'd buy such a kit to make it profitable.

Glock wasn't involved with the development of the 40 S&Wand yet beat S&W to the market with 40 handguns.

Looking at the dimensions between 40, 9 and 30SC they are pretty close to each other on the step down to the next caliber that a barrel and mag change should be the only thing needed for a conversion. 9mm swap barrels from 40 cal guns are plentiful and work with extractor and ejectors needing only a 9mm mag. I have been running a Storm Lake and Lone Wolf conversion barrel in a couple Glocks for thousands of rounds without issue.

[Duelist]

I never had to try this, but during the 1994-2004 ban era, there was a lot of posting about loading 9mm into .40 S&W magazines (Glock mainly) and getting 2 or 3 more rounds in the magazine. I've been told, but don't have a .40 cal Beretta M96 magazine to verify, that the .40 and 9mm magazines are identical but for the follower, witness holes, and markings. If this is true, it suggest that if you are in a ban state and your double stack 9mm magazines are limited to 10 rds, you might get 12 or 13, maybe more .30 Super in the same magazine. If a conversion barrel works, maybe you get by with just a new barrel. Maybe a new magazine follower. Worst case scenario makes it economically unviable, i.e. a completely new top end. Not worth it for a couple extra rounds.

I do have a .40 Beretta magazine I accidentally bought and used in a 92. I didn’t realize it was a .40 until like a year after I got it, when I was inventorying my mags. It had been in regular use in my 92 the entire time - was one of the magazines I used in my 2k round test. It holds 15 9x19 as if it were designed to.

It now resides permanently in the range bag, so as not to get mixed with the “serious” magazines, but it has never has an issue running 9mm and continues to perform as well as ever.