Considering how little ammo in all calibers that Federal has sent us over the past couple years, we don't need another caliber to divert their production attention. Probably will do just as peachy as their other darling, .224 Valkyrie...

How 'bout just getting out all of that 30-06, .270, 30-30, 6.5 anything, .308, 300WIN, .357SIG, .357MAG, 38SPL, 5.7, 9MM, 40S&W, 45AUTO, 44MAG, 12GA waterfowl, anygauge upland, etc, etc, that we've had on order for the past couple or so years, Federal?

Had we the ease of purchasing reloading components, and ammo in general, that we did several years ago I'd say "Neato, more options".

With today's prices I'm at the point where I don't feel like bothering again until they can break 1000ft/lbs from a 3" barrel with .22 short recoil.

Not feeling it. Similar ballistics to a 9mm, same OAL as 9mm so it needs to remain in current 9mm platform pistols. The only thing it offers is a minuscule bump in capacity.
I'd rather see the resurrection of the 356TSW than this, bullet velocity whore that I am.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Yet another cartridge destined for the boneyard.

Yep right there next to the .45 GAP .

I do think Tirod is on to something with this round being geared to new shooters and woman. Perhaps the old and arthritic as well.

It's not a horrible idea. There are millions of new shooters, many of them woman.

There are a lot of baby boomer generation shooters slowly growing weaker and more arthritic. (I'm one of them but hate to concede it).

If it has enough to offer there I don't know. I think it might come down to perceived recoil and muzzle blast with the new round compared to existing options.

Federal and Smith have an uphill climb on this one.

quote:

Originally posted by abnmacv:
Hard to beat the 7.62 x 25. Wish there was a modern handgun for that round.

Me also. And ammo maker's develop or offer
Some JHP loadings.
Perhaps a modernized version of the Yugo M57.

I am not critical of new cartridge offerings. I jumped on the 327 Federal Magnum wagon when it was first offered, and prefer it to the 357 Magnum.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
As for the .327 and .357 magnums, I don't see it supplanting them at all.

If that was directed at my earlier analogy, I wasn't suggesting that .30 Carry would supplant .327 and .357.

Rather, I was stating that .30 vs. 9mm is analogous to .327 vs. .357, where both .30 and .327 are giving up a little bit in performance compared to their larger brethren (9mm or .357) in order to squeeze a bit extra capacity out of the gun.



Personally, I see it most likely going the way of .356TSW or .45 GAP... Making a small splash at inception, before eventually fading into obscurity.

quote:

Originally posted by Nick B:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Yet another cartridge destined for the boneyard.

Yep right there next to the .45 GAP .

And 9mm Federal Rimmed

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
As for the .327 and .357 magnums, I don't see it supplanting them at all.

If that was directed at my earlier analogy, I wasn't suggesting that .30 Carry would supplant .327 and .357.

Rather, I was stating that .30 vs. 9mm is analogous to .327 vs. .357, where both .30 and .327 are giving up a little bit in performance compared to their larger brethren (9mm or .357) in order to squeeze a bit extra capacity out of the gun.



Personally, I see it most likely going the way of .356TSW or .45 GAP... Making a small splash at inception, before eventually fading into obscurity.

That's a good guess because that's most new cartridges.

New pistol cartridges are a tough sell.

Around 1200 ft/s (depending on bullet looks like some 1150ish and some 1250ish)
.312” diameter
Estimated msrp is around $30 give or take a couple bucks for 50rd boxes of range stuff or 20rd boxes of hp
More penetration in ballistics gel than 9 and 380 so I guess that’s useful for places with heavy clothing (don’t worry too much about heavy clothing here in Arizona)
Higher capacity than 9/380

Another attempt at an odd ball round creating some traction… I think it’s going to end up like most of the other attempts at new rounds that float around but we’ll see

If Smith comes out with a six shot lightweight J frame in 30 Scary or whatever it's called, I'd buy it if only for the collector value.

I wonder how many would fit in a metal Glock 43 magazine.

I don't see the advantages and all I see for this is something about as good as 9mm that will probably end up costing way more per round.

Not for me, and I agree this is gonna end up in the caliber graveyard.

quote:

Originally posted by Austin228:
I don't see the advantages and all I see for this is something about as good as 9mm that will probably end up costing way more per round.

Magazine capacity, I suppose.

This very much looks like an answer in search of a question.

I guess if it can be shot from tiny guns (think LCP) and can be more effective than .380, it might be worth a look. But that's the only use for it I can think of where it would be superior to 9x19mm

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
This very much looks like an answer in search of a question.

I guess if it can be shot from tiny guns (think LCP) and can be more effective than .380, it might be worth a look. But that's the only use for it I can think of where it would be superior to 9x19mm

I think Federal is going for 9mm level terminal performance with more rounds in the gun.

Maybe, maybe slightly less recoil than a 124gn 9mm JHP.

Will that be enough to put this cartridge over the top?

Probably not.

quote:

Originally posted by Tirod:
Speaking of, who's in for a moon clipped .30 Super six shot snub in stainless? Cylinder size might be close to the same as a five shot .38.

Yeah, capacity.

Wouldn't a snub-nosed Ruger in .327 be more sensible?

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
If that was directed -

Apparently I misled Jimmo952. He seemed to think I meant the .30 Super Carry would be a competitor with the .327 and .357; I was trying to say that I was more interested in it in a full-sized pistol for screwing-around purposes than in a compact pistol for defensive purposes.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

Originally posted by Tirod:
Speaking of, who's in for a moon clipped .30 Super six shot snub in stainless? Cylinder size might be close to the same as a five shot .38.

Yeah, capacity.

Wouldn't a snub-nosed Ruger in .327 be more sensible?

Why? It would be close to the same thing.

The. 30 Scary might have more defensive loads available or be more tuned to short barrels. We will see.

I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand.

A 6-shot equivalent to the M&P340 chambered in 30 Carry would be a seriously capable pocket gun.

If I was going to hunt with it, handload for or use it as a plinker, I'd favor a longer barreled all-steel revolver in .327.

As a pocket-revolver cartridge though, the .30 Carry might work out well as it seems intended for short barreled semiauto defensive work.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
Not too much information, except that it'll be loaded with a 100 grain bullet and that the Smith's capacity will be 10 rounds versus 8 rounds of 9mm (so maybe not a bottleneck round?).

Not bottlenecked.

Seems like .30 Super Carry is to 9mm what .327 Federal is to .357 Magnum.

so basically a lenghtened 32acp? (.3125 bullet vs 313)

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

Originally posted by Tirod:
Speaking of, who's in for a moon clipped .30 Super six shot snub in stainless? Cylinder size might be close to the same as a five shot .38.

Yeah, capacity.

Wouldn't a snub-nosed Ruger in .327 be more sensible?

They was my first thought as well.

But with the release of the Kimber K6 line, do we really need a smaller caliber 6 shot revolver? I love my SP101 in .327 but if I’m going to carry a revolver today I’ll pick my K6s. The .38/.357 just have too many options and a proven track record.