Federal's newish .30 Super, aka a 'spicier' 7.65x20mm Longue

[Velo Dog]

SAAMI Maximum Average Pressure (MAP) = 52,000 psi

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...y-saami-specs/

I doubt Federal is loading them that hot

https://www.ssusa.org/content/380-au...0-super-carry/

[Velo Dog]

When does the lower pressure version make its way into the supply chain ?

Eventually one will be made, IMHO. Much like the full power 10MM.. I just can't see the handguns handling the full power operating PSI.

Federal came to a fork in the road and took it.

Once they started chasing after 9x19mm performance, the .30 Super Carry couldn't really reach the efficacy of .380 Auto.

Some will say that "One more [cartridge] option is a good thing and can't hurt".

Realistically, only a very limited number of new handgun cartridges will ever come onto the market.

Even fewer will be a commercial success, but their very existence will affect what other cartridges are created.

Therefore, it is vital that new cartridges meet a need that a large number of shooters have that could not be effectively met with previously existing cartridges.

Although slightly smaller and lighter pistols built on .30 Super Carry specific frames may eventually be developed, they will still have to be safe and reliable with full power 52,000 psi loads.

That means the pistols will be larger and heavier and harder to rack than what would have been required for essentially a rimless .32 ACP +P cartridge.

The .32 H&R Magnum and .327 Federal Magnum were moderate successes, at best. If the .30 Super Carry is a sales disappointment for Federal, it could mean that there will be less development of 32 caliber handguns, bullets, and cartridges in the future.

[TiroFijo]

For recoil operated pistols it is (mostly) not about chamber pressure, but recoil impulse...

This.30 Super round was designed to have a recoil impulse very similar to that of the 9 mm Para, thus given the same basic pistol design the weight of moving parts should be the same. You get 1-2 extra rounds and that's it.

[LockedBreech]

I've been following the .30 Super Carry with great interest since it came out. At long last, I don't think I'm going to buy in.

I'm one of the few shooters who actually doesn't mind .380 Auto. A lot seem to view it with some distaste as being "close but not enough" whereas my stance on it is basically "basically standard pressure .38 Special performance tiny enough to tuck in my pocket." No, it's not a duty-quality round, but in the use case I have for it, it's not expected to be. It's certainly more effective than most pocket calibers and that's enough for me.

.30 Super Carry juices things up a bit, but isn't small enough to be as compact and also does not have performance equal to quality 9x19 loads. So it's basically a 9mm where you trade some mild extra capacity for a mild to moderate loss in performance. I don't trust the lightweight .30 Super Carry rounds to perform when I don't even trust 115-grain 9mm to perform aside from Barnes copper loads. Finally, because the OAL is even longer than 9mm, there's no chance of a gun as small as a .380 Auto. And 9mm guns are not lacking for capacity. I still marvel at the 10+1 of my Shield or my fiancee's P365. There are older full-size metal framed 9mm service pistols that don't hold that many rounds (See P225/P6). I just do not see capacity as an area the 9mm lacks in.

It's a stupid thought maybe, but is there perhaps potential in going the other direction? Making a slightly fatter .380 that is still short and fits in tiny guns, with extra cartridge space to make it a better performer? Something in the .40-45 range that is also very short and gives mild recoil? I'd much rather carry an LCP Max with 5-6 stronger rounds than 10 rounds of .380.

To simplify the ramble...when I pick a .380 Auto, I am going for size more than I am going for ballistics. .30 Super Carry doesn't address that. If I'm already getting a Shield, I'll get a 9mm.

[spyderco monkey]

Some will say that "One more [cartridge] option is a good thing and can't hurt".

Realistically, only a very limited number of new handgun cartridges will ever come onto the market.

Even fewer will be a commercial success, but their very existence will affect what other cartridges are created.

If the .30 Super Carry is a sales disappointment for Federal, it could mean that there will be less development of 32 caliber handguns, bullets, and cartridges in the future.

This is very perceptive and I think true. And a real shame with .30SC.

New cartridges - especially cartridge failures - will 'suck the oxygen out of' the development of similar new cartridges, even if those new cartridges are better.

In this case, .30 SC will likely smother any hope of what the market really needs - a rimless .32 ACP +p/+p+ 85gr @ 1025fps for high cap LCP use.

[spyderco monkey]

It's a stupid thought maybe, but is there perhaps potential in going the other direction? Making a slightly fatter .380 that is still short and fits in tiny guns, with extra cartridge space to make it a better performer? Something in the .40-45 range that is also very short and gives mild recoil? I'd much rather carry an LCP Max with 5-6 stronger rounds than 10 rounds of .380.

The problem for .380 is that its already 'too fat' for its level of power, resulting in poor sectional density. The result is over expansion and poor penetration. A 90-115gr .40 @ 140-200ftlbs of energy would have even worse penetration and expansion.

What the .380 sized / powered gun needs is a narrower projectile with higher sectional density. This allows for limited expansion (~0.45") and adequate penetration (12-13").

Brassfetcher basically showed whats needed for optimal pocket pistol performance with his .32 NAA experiments. A .312 85gr (so nearly the same weight as a .380 projectile but narrower for better sectional density) launched at 1025fps (basically identical to .380 +p 90gr @ 1000fps).



A straightwall .32NAA is really what .30SC should have been.

[LockedBreech]

The problem for .380 is that its already 'too fat' for its level of power, resulting in poor sectional density. The result is over expansion and poor penetration. A 90-115gr .40 @ 140-200ftlbs of energy would have even worse penetration and expansion.

What the .380 sized / powered gun needs is a narrower projectile with higher sectional density. This allows for limited expansion (~0.45") and adequate penetration (12-13").

Brassfetcher basically showed whats needed for optimal pocket pistol performance with his .32 NAA experiments. A .312 85gr (so nearly the same weight as a .380 projectile but narrower for better sectional density) launched at 1025fps (basically identical to .380 +p 90gr @ 1000fps).



A straightwall .32NAA is really what .30SC should have been.

That's educational, thank you!

[5pins]

The ammo is here, and the pistol is on the way.

[Polecat]

Finally got to try one, rented a Shield shot the federal 100gr FMJ. When you shoot this yourself you will like it. It is better than 9mm recoil wise to me. The impulse is different, bit loud more like a crack, recoil impulse seems shorter and back into my hand little muzzle rise. I was a nasayer, but I will buy one! Hope other manufactures embrace and support it. Try it for yourself. I let several others shoot from the box and try it and they all walked with the same opinion, “ oh yeah that is def less recoil!”

[5pins]

I was able to shoot my Shield plus this morning, some 100 grain Federal and Remington FMJ, and I agree it is softer shooting. It's not a huge difference, but noticeable. I need to shoot it side by side with my Shield 9 and get a better sense of it.