Page 2 of 32 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 316

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

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by the Schwartz View Post
    What happens inside the firearm/platform is interior ballistics.

    The topic of this thread is terminal ballistics of the .30 Super Carry; that is, what happens at the ''receiving end'' of things.

    There is a difference.
    I get the obvious difference but discussing the minute difference between this and other similar projectiles at similar velocities without any detailed information about said projectiles other than diameter doesn't justify a separate thread but enjoy speculating.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Caballoflaco View Post
    Has they published any data on performance through barriers? I wonder if the sectional density can make up for the light weight when going through things like laminated glass and sheet metal.
    Not that I've seen (yet).

    The 115-grain HST JHP has a sectional density (0.169) that is slightly greater than that of the 9mm 147-grain HST (0.167) and the .45 ACP 230-grain HST (0.161) so the potential to defeat hard barriers, given a solid design, exists. Sectional density is important in addressing the erosive/ablative effects seen in hard/ductile barrier penetration so the 0.312'' 115-grain HST certainly has the potential to pass the FBI test protocols if the correct materials and engineering is pursued.

    For example, applying common projectile material parameters to the .30 Super 115-grain HST JHP to the A-T model used here—

    https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....id-penetrators

    —the .30 Super 115-grain HST at 1,250 fps should be able to defeat the two 20-gauge hot-rolled steel panels used in the FBI ''automotive car door'' test protocol with a residual velocity of 965 fps and a residual mass of 93.3 grains.
    Last edited by the Schwartz; 01-05-2022 at 06:47 PM.
    ''Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.'' ―Albert Einstein

    Disclosure per the Pistol-Forum CoC: I am the author of Quantitative Ammunition Selection.

  3. #13
    I see the question asked, that if its performance is similar to 9mm, then what is the point?
    Well wasn't the same question asked about the relationship between .40 and 9mm? If you can get the nearly the same performance but with less recoil and more rounds, why stick with the larger caliber?
    Now 9mm had other things going for it beyond just those factors, but those are the ones I've seen given the most emphasis.
    It definitely has an uphill climb, but I hope this concept pans out.

  4. #14
    327 Federal Magnum 115 Gr. GDHP @ 1363 fps

    https://le.vistaoutdoor.com/download...dDotPoster.pdf

    Ignore the velocity error/typo on the Speer poster.
    30 Super Carry should have less velocity.

    Not bad terminal performance, but no better than 9X19mm.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Velo Dog View Post
    327 Federal Magnum 115 Gr. GDHP @ 1363 fps

    https://le.vistaoutdoor.com/download...dDotPoster.pdf

    Ignore the velocity error/typo on the Speer poster.
    30 Super Carry should have less velocity.

    Not bad terminal performance, but no better than 9X19mm.
    But in a smaller cartridge that can get more pills in the equivalent size package.

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by MandoWookie View Post
    I see the question asked, that if its performance is similar to 9mm, then what is the point?
    Well wasn't the same question asked about the relationship between .40 and 9mm? If you can get the nearly the same performance but with less recoil and more rounds, why stick with the larger caliber?
    Now 9mm had other things going for it beyond just those factors, but those are the ones I've seen given the most emphasis.
    It definitely has an uphill climb, but I hope this concept pans out.
    Expansion to 1.5x caliber with terminal penetration in the 12 - 18 inch range, as seen in Federal's heavy clothing test [0.53''/115 grains/1,250 fps = 15.50''], is typical performance of 9x19 115-grain JHPs. Thinking about this, your point is well taken. I can see the appeal that it might have to some but, I am not sure that current market forces won't kill it off. Maybe it'll survive.

    I'd really like to see more extensive testing of the .30 Super though, especially against tempered auto glass.
    ''Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.'' ―Albert Einstein

    Disclosure per the Pistol-Forum CoC: I am the author of Quantitative Ammunition Selection.

  7. #17
    I wonder if a lighter bullet of around 80 grains would make some sense in the 30 Super Carry.

    Less loaded magazine weight, possibly lower recoil and/or ammo cost, and still have decent terminal ballistics.

    https://www.americanrifleman.org/con...ed-32-magnums/

  8. #18
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Texas
    I would have said that the bullet would lack enough momentum to penetrate to published depth after expanding to .53.
    In the event expansion failed to occur, the tiny bullet would be a needle passing through its target.

  9. #19
    Revolvers Revolvers 1911s Stephanie B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    East 860 by South 413
    The only positive that I can think of is that this round may offer 9mm equivalent performance for use in places where "military cartridges" are forbidden for civilian use.
    Gentlemen, please rest your sphincters.

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie B View Post
    The only positive that I can think of is that this round may offer 9mm equivalent performance for use in places where "military cartridges" are forbidden for civilian use.
    With Italy doing away with that law what other countries have prohibited military calibers and handgun ownership of significance?

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •