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

[MandoWookie]

-M&P12 exists to serve a non market
Judging by the continued success of the various KelTec iterations and and Turkish bullpup offerings, it might not be market [B]you[B] are interested in, but there is a market
No, nobody is interested in Turkshit shotguns. The lack of everything and Remington's shutdown during 2020 is the only reason the market exists. I can promise nobody buys Turkish shotguns and doesn't regret it. They make Mossberg Mavericks look like Perazzis.
I have at least 3 people I know personally that disproves this statement. They love their Turkshit bullpup shotguns. Just like they love their multiple Taurus handguns. They might only shoot them once a year, but they love them. Again, not something you or I would purchase, but that does not mean they aren't flying off of the shelves.
-M&P 10mm exists to serve a non market
Again, judging by the amount of offerings from companies up and down the price scale, there is a market that caters to the perceived advantages of 10mm, even if it doesn't appeal to you
A lot of people talk about 10mm. A lot of people don't buy the 10mm they talk about. The whole cartridge is held up by the Glock 20/29/40 and I can guarantee there will never be a 10mm revival for Smith to benefit from.
Judging by the fact that Ruger, Springfield, Colt, Sig, Glock, S&W and goddamn HiPoint offers at least one or multiple 10mm offerings, the idea that there isnt people buying these is unbelievable( and again,
I know people who do.
-M&P9FS Accuracy
Legit issue, that had me switch Glocks over M&Ps, but that is not a QC issue, it is a spec issue. With the amount of changes on the 2.0s, and the fact there is a known fix, S&W has decided the accuracy is sufficient. And it is just as accurate as any other gun in the majority of both civilian and professional users hands
If your service 9mm Glock-killer can't group past 15 yards, it's poor quality control period.
Okay, I work in QC ( in a different industry), that is not poor quality control. QC is verifying that a product is within acceptable limits, limits defined by what you want your product to be at the end of a process. If it outside those limits you deem critical, then it should be rejected. S&W has apparently decided that accuracy greater than what has been typical of the M&P 9mm line is not a critical issue. They are perfectly capable of achieving it in other calibers in the same lineup, and this issue has persisted even through a major revision to the product line. It is therefore obvious that the 9mm accuracyis in fact made exactly according to how they wish it to be made.
-CSX purposely gimped on release
What do you mean by this?
No optic and no rail that will be released in a Performance Center release. In fairness, Glock is equally guilty of this
Or it could be that in the those are not universally desired features? Especially on a product of this type? Hell, there are complaints that they are not offering a non-optic version of the 10mm M&P.
-Obsession with porting defensive pistols
That is not a QC issue, that's features you dont prefer and are not standard
That's a S&W has it's head up it's own butt. Porting is ideal for big honking magnums, not service calibers.
Again, it a feature that you dont see a use for, and might in fact be useless in its application, but so are gold and rainbow colored parts and speed holes cut into slides, but damn if you can avoid running into those things everywhere you look. Hell I think that is half of Sigs catalog at one point or another.
-A "9mm Killer" like the .356TSW or .40S&W..... I mean .30 Super
.40 S&W did pretty much kill 9mm for a time, in certain cases, then circumstances changed to make 9mm appealing. .356 TSW was made for a specific niche that got eliminated before it ever made it to market. That being competition, with some appeal to duty use if it was successful. The .30 SC is targeted toward the broadest and largest segment, the same segment that Micro9s have been dominant, and has some theoretical advantages that appeal to that segment.
It will be a .357Sig .45GAP or .41AE. It provides no tangible advantage to it's competitors except for the Fudd crowd who drools over ft-lbs of energy instead of penetration and expansion.
The ft-lbs obsessed is already likely dismissive of this caliber, because it barely makes it to 9mm levels. You know, the caliber the 'Fudds' are already dismissive of. The touted advantage is that it allows more rounds of equal performance to 9mm in the same size platform.
That they are trying to make 'nearly as good as 9mm' performancesound like barn burning power, that's called 'marketing'. And they do it with everything they make.
Fixing Smith would require minimal effort with regards to what the market actually wants with better internal QC checks.
But they are currently selling every gun they make, likely with minimum complaints, and doing that might move them out of the coveted '50ish bucks cheaper than a Glock' which would also probably hurt their agency sales too.
Just because the market is hot now, does not mean products are good.
Just because you arent interested in what they are selling, doesn't mean they arent selling. And S&W was doing fine even before the market took off.
They could make limited edition 5906 and 4506 in vaporwave pastel packaging so people can LARP Miami Vice and they would sell more than M&P 10mms.
Ah, so you want the Cohen Sig business model, but applied to 3rd Gen Smith's. Because that is what you would get.
People want parts for their 3rd Gen brick craphouses, no locks on revolvers, and current quality problems fixed. I would guarantee S&W would sell 1,000 5906 reissues before they will sell off 1,000 .30Supers or M&P12s.

Possibly, but they weren't selling well enough compared to their contemporaries to keep them in production, and restarting production now? Sig and Beretta were able subsidize their classic lines production from mil contracts, thus had a guaranteed return on at least a portion of sales. What is the guaranteed customer for guns that dont have that cache? The most iconic model is the 1006, and you are the one saying no one buys 10mms.

[spyderco monkey]

I noticed the velocities listed in the graphics on the Guns & Ammo video: 100 HST @1205, and 115 GD @1095. Weren't those advertised at 1250 and 1150, respectively? I imagine the spec velocity is from a 4" barrel, and these were chrono results from one of the guns used in the video -- hopefully the Shield EZ, not the 5" 1911!

Let's say it's from the EZ, with a 3.675" barrel. That's .575 longer than the Shield Plus -- which does not bode well for velocities from the Plus. Extrapolating further velocity loss from a 3.1" barrel, and you arrive at ballistics solidly better than a .380, but not close to a proper 9mm.

This is unfortunate, because the Shield Plus is exactly the size of gun this lightweight, powder-puff, almost-9mm belongs in. I hope I'm wrong.

The narrower the bore, the more ‘swept bore volume’ becomes an issue and barrel length matters. An example is 4.6x30 vs the 5.7x28. Essentially identical in power and projectile weight.But the 4.6s narrower bore requires a longer barrel to reach adequate velocity, which is why HK had to scrap their plans for a 4.6 handgun, while FN was able to create the FsN.

I suspect we’ll see similar factors here with .30 SC vs 9mm. 30 SC may be able to meet or exceed 9x19 energy when fired from 4-5” barrels, but will likely be a good bit less effective then 9x19 when fired from 3-3.5” barrels due to swept bore volume.

[Stephanie B]

The narrower the bore, the more ‘swept bore volume’ becomes an issue and barrel length matters. An example is 4.6x30 vs the 5.7x28. Essentially identical in power and projectile weight.But the 4.6s narrower bore requires a longer barrel to reach adequate velocity, which is why HK had to scrap their plans for a 4.6 handgun, while FN was able to create the FsN.

I suspect we’ll see similar factors here with .30 SC vs 9mm. 30 SC may be able to meet or exceed 9x19 energy when fired from 4-5” barrels, but will likely be a good bit less effective then 9x19 when fired from 3-3.5” barrels due to swept bore volume.

I really learned something, here.

[MandoWookie]

The narrower the bore, the more ‘swept bore volume’ becomes an issue and barrel length matters. An example is 4.6x30 vs the 5.7x28. Essentially identical in power and projectile weight.But the 4.6s narrower bore requires a longer barrel to reach adequate velocity, which is why HK had to scrap their plans for a 4.6 handgun, while FN was able to create the FsN.

I suspect we’ll see similar factors here with .30 SC vs 9mm. 30 SC may be able to meet or exceed 9x19 energy when fired from 4-5” barrels, but will likely be a good bit less effective then 9x19 when fired from 3-3.5” barrels due to swept bore volume.

Huh. Wonder how performance would scale for longer barrels. Doesn't 9mm actually lose velocity in 16 inch barrels or am I remembering incorrectly?

[CleverNickname]

Huh. Wonder how performance would scale for longer barrels. Doesn't 9mm actually lose velocity in 16 inch barrels or am I remembering incorrectly?

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/9luger.html Looks like some loads lose a bit, but not much.

[spyderco monkey]

Huh. Wonder how performance would scale for longer barrels. Doesn't 9mm actually lose velocity in 16 inch barrels or am I remembering incorrectly?

If it’s indeed a 50kpsi round (and ammo makers load to that spec, which I doubt) 30sc should really be cooking out of a 5-8” barrel.

I see the ideal being something like a G34 sized G48 slim frame with a 19rd mag, or a 8” PCC with 36rd mags. Something the size of a CZ P09 or P10f or XDM could hold 21+1. Add on a WML and it should make for a very smooth and flat shooting blaster.

But we’ll have to wait for Quickload to add .30 SC to its software to really get performance estimates of what’s possible.

[Buckeye63]

Im waiting to see if they have built or building pistols around this cartridge or are mini-9’s going to be refigured

I hope a thinner / lighter pistol will be built for this cartridge

[Joe in PNG]

Im waiting to see if they have built or building pistols around this cartridge or are mini-9’s going to be refigured

I hope a thinner / lighter pistol will be built for this cartridge

I suspect that rebarreled mini-9's will be the norm until Kel-Tec does something.
A polymer framed copy of the SACM 1935A for instance.

[MandoWookie]

Im waiting to see if they have built or building pistols around this cartridge or are mini-9’s going to be refigured

I hope a thinner / lighter pistol will be built for this cartridge

Possibly, but the thin 9s are pushing it, for me at least, on being shoot able as thin as they are. If this cartridge does have similar recoil to a 9mm, how controlled is it going to be?

[RevolverRob]

After much, much thought. I have decided that I am going to allow .30 Super Carry to come to market. But if - and ONLY IF - Smith agrees to make a 6-shot J-Frame chambered in it that uses moonclips. Yes, they could just give us a .327Mag. But they seem hellbent on NOT doing that. So a .30SC moonclipped gun would be acceptable.

Smith and Wesson, I have spoken. Get on it. Failure to comply will bring my Super Curmudgeonly wrath down upon thee.