Federal 30S Super carry, new cartridge

44 AMP said:
So, I took a look at the linked video, as far as the case drawing, which I found interesting.

and it also explains to a degree why it needs high pressure to deliver what I consider adequate but not outstanding results.

First, the COAL of the round, is the same as the 9mm Luger, !.169" The drawing shows a very tapered bullet with a very large flat point at the max length. Clearly this length was chosen to fit in 9mm frame size guns.

Otherwise, the case is straight with a slight taper, and approximately .30 cal, so smaller in diameter than 9mm or any of the other common larger caliber rounds. And, while the case is 0.07" longer than the 9mm Luger, its also about the same amount shorter than the .38 Super or the .45ACP.

And, as to women or smaller individuals shooting it from compact guns (assuming there are compacts to handle the pressures) NOTHING pushing a 100gr bullet at 1200fps is "light recoil" or pleasant to shoot from a compact size pistol. Not a 9mm or a .30 or anything, that's just a matter of basic mass and energy.

So I feel marketing claims about how the smaller bore size round would benefit women etc, I think that's just market hype.

I think that if a 1200fps 100gr 9mm is a vicious little beast in a compact gun, a .30 cal shooting the same weight bullet at the same speed will be, as well.
Putting a lot of lead in the air often wins in military combat but self defense shooting is a different matter, and while only hits count and only good hits matter, the civilian is legally responsible for ever round they fire. And that includes what and who ever gets hit.

If the round is a snappy little beast many people simply won't practice, and if you don't practice, you don't get good and real world shootings show that even good shots often aren't such good shots when faced with a life or death situation.

All in all, I'm going to pass on this new "wonder round" and just wonder...why??

(other than the profit motive, of course...)
Click to expand...
The reasons why is because there's an increased focus on the .32 caliber and its role in carry by civilians specifically for self defense. Unlike military use that's focused on combat with other trained and well equipped enemies or police and their higher likelihood of having to shoot thru barriers, the average Joe or Jane is simply looking to stop someone attacking them if they're unable to retreat.

The .32, so long as you can get the bullet to expand and penetrate 12 inches in gel is going to be acceptable for the task.

Last year I saw multiple topics about the potential of an improved .32 French Long that had near 9mm power, but higher capacities than 9mm. I didn't shoot the concept down at the time, but I didn't see it as being something that would be successful or even be able to stay alive in the market that long because I realized it was effectively going to be a semi automatic .327 Federal Magnum.

The answer for a better .32 auto has been around for years and nobody seems to want to consider it and it's .32 NAA. No, you don't get the capacity increase you would with 9mm, but what you get is a caliber that is better than .380 in all aspects outside of price and availability given only Hornady and Cor-Bon makes ammo for it.
 
44 AMP said:
So, I took a look at the linked video, as far as the case drawing, which I found interesting.

and it also explains to a degree why it needs high pressure to deliver what I consider adequate but not outstanding results.

First, the COAL of the round, is the same as the 9mm Luger, !.169" The drawing shows a very tapered bullet with a very large flat point at the max length. Clearly this length was chosen to fit in 9mm frame size guns.

Otherwise, the case is straight with a slight taper, and approximately .30 cal, so smaller in diameter than 9mm or any of the other common larger caliber rounds. And, while the case is 0.07" longer than the 9mm Luger, its also about the same amount shorter than the .38 Super or the .45ACP.

And, as to women or smaller individuals shooting it from compact guns (assuming there are compacts to handle the pressures) NOTHING pushing a 100gr bullet at 1200fps is "light recoil" or pleasant to shoot from a compact size pistol. Not a 9mm or a .30 or anything, that's just a matter of basic mass and energy.

So I feel marketing claims about how the smaller bore size round would benefit women etc, I think that's just market hype.

I think that if a 1200fps 100gr 9mm is a vicious little beast in a compact gun, a .30 cal shooting the same weight bullet at the same speed will be, as well.
Putting a lot of lead in the air often wins in military combat but self defense shooting is a different matter, and while only hits count and only good hits matter, the civilian is legally responsible for ever round they fire. And that includes what and who ever gets hit.

If the round is a snappy little beast many people simply won't practice, and if you don't practice, you don't get good and real world shootings show that even good shots often aren't such good shots when faced with a life or death situation.

All in all, I'm going to pass on this new "wonder round" and just wonder...why??

(other than the profit motive, of course...)
Click to expand...

In agreement with you...

If it takes a MAP of 50kpsi to get the .30 Super to reproduce the terminal ballistic performance of the standard pressure 9x19mm (pushing a JHP that expands to 0.53'' to a depth of 15½ inches) which operates at a much lower MAP of 35kpsi, other than an extra round or two, I don't see the point. Not sure the ''market'' will either, but who knows...maybe it'll sell to the ''hipster crowd'' who seem to always be in search of the newest ''thing''.
 
I was thinking more about this round last night. With the micro 9 craze that's currently offering 10+1 of 9mm in a small package these current guns offering the same round count don't offer much more.

They should have designed micro 30's with double stack mags. Imagine a Shield Plus with 15 round flush fit magazines! Now that would be a good seller.

Sticking with single stack guns at launch is a big mistake.
 
Last edited:
I said and no one has made mention that Federal said in their marketing the major point is the guns will be slimmer yet there is no way those 3 guns they show are narrower than a 9mm option.

So all you get is +2.

The P365 will still be smaller because it's smaller than the M&P.

Brought nothing. I'm not buying a bigger gun than the P365 to get +2 rounds in a bigger package.

No sense in doing so.
 
Another point to consider, one that the comment about double stack and 15rnd capacity just got me thinking about. Did we suddenly get rid of those horrid capacity laws??

Lots of places in the US, have laws limiting capacity to 10rnds. Some even less. (its NY that has an 8rnd limit, isn't it??)

Seems to me that a smaller caliber round's selling point of 12rnds vs 10 is kind of lost in those places. :rolleyes:
 
I think we might be missing a potential market for this-we're all (presumably) already gun owners and shooters, but one of the biggest markets these days is people buying their first gun, and often for defense and/or concealed carry.

Picture this on a shelf next to its 9MM counterpart, with the sales guy telling them, "Well, it's just about as powerful, but holds 2 extra rounds vs. the 9MM" and you can start seeing where these could sell to those folks.

Larry
 
At first I was worried about the high chamber pressure. Then I read more and "ran some numbers" to look at details.

As far as stress on guns, hoop stress on the barrel goes down as a function of both the reduced ID and the increased barrel thickness (for existing 9mm guns) so no problem here. The breech thrust is pressure time effective area. Regardless on how you calculate effective areas, it will be real close to the breech thrust of a 9mm or possibly a 9mm +P. The last piece of the puzzle is a breech face that is hard enough to take the stress. Any good heat treated steel should be ok for 50 ksi. So most any micro 9mm platform should be able to handle the 30 SC.

In order to really tempt buyers, more guns are needed. My guess is that the sweet spot for selling 30 SC guns are those that are just big enough for 8 to 10 rounds of 30 SC.

I have a 327 and know what it is to shoot "just not fun" ammo. Too much muzzle blast with standard factory ammo was actually one of my biggest initial concerns.

Then I ran some stuff through Quickload. I can not get their velocity with a 100 gr bullet, a 4" barrel, the 50 ksi and any standard powder. FYI, AA 5 is real close to an optimum burn rate for those thinking they will be loading for the round. However, for any load that I ran with 50 ksi chamber pressure, the muzzle pressure came out right about the same pressures seen in the 9mm.

Later I found info coming out (including a video with side by side testing) with recoil and muzzle blast very comparable to the 9mm.

A lot of recoil sensitive gun buyers also like smaller guns. For reduced recoil in the smaller guns, ammo makers really should offer something more like an 85 gr bullet that does 1100 fps. This would be more pleasant to shoot, but should be close enough to SD ammo to be a good practice round.
 
I like that the pressure rating is high, but it's just a limit, not a requirement.

I don't like full power .357, .327 or in this case full 30SC in an itty bitty gun, but it would be nice to find something between 32 automatic and full power 30SC that cycles well.
 
Maybe a .25S instead or possibly a sexier .257S??? Should get more than +2 in a moderate sized frame and maybe push a 65 grain to 1200+? I already have boxes of 65gr .257 bullets and I'm sure one of the powders would work so I'm already half way there (brass and pistol). And considering how .327 stacks up to older .32-20 this could be the modern .25-20 for rimless rounds.
 
According to my quick calculation, the peak bolt thrust of 30SC is 9.7% greater than that of 9x19. It is proportional to the square of the projectile diameter and to the pressure. The diameter of 30SC is smaller but not enough to offset the increase in pressure. Note, however, that a number of pistols in 9mm Luger are rated for increased pressures.
 
If it isn't sized in an LCP, all this talk about pressure, velocity, and size is just meaningless.

Federal has a .380 (new Hydra Shok DEEP) that bests some penetration/expansion of older 9mm hollow point).

If most people aren't aware of that, no one is going to buy a new round in mass to keep it alive.

Also not mentioned, 9mm is cheap because it has 115, 124, and 147gr options. This appears to have one FMJ option. No variety? Marketed for only the US market? No foreign companies making cheap and no "range" 115gr options.

It's a GAP 45 for sure. No government use it the purpose as stated by Federal in this market campaign...So it won't even be as successfully as 357 Sig (ie, not that well).

Dead caliber before it was made.
 
Super Sneaky Steve said:
I like that the pressure rating is high, but it's just a limit, not a requirement.

I don't like full power .357, .327 or in this case full 30SC in an itty bitty gun, but it would be nice to find something between 32 automatic and full power 30SC that cycles well.
Click to expand...
.32 NAA is just that and unfortunately it appears the final nail in its coffin has been set as Hornady apparently discontinued the Critical Defense ammo the offered it in. They were the last major manufacturer of the ammo.

Congratulations to the industry, you had gold in the .32 NAA and you blew it by not supporting it.
 
For sure the P3AT barrelled necked NAA was better. It never took on past the keltec forums even when it was being made. It wasn't totally easy to find either. Always in small 20 or 25 round boxes.

So a better P3AT round when the P3AT was it. If it didn't take off, but should have, a new 9mm replacement in no smaller gun than current 9mm options? Nope.
 
Last edited:
Much to my chagrin, I already had a pistol of this caliber. This is a remake of the 7.65mm French Long for the French M35 military pistol. On top of that the French copied it from the US 30 Peterson cartridge for the modified 1903 Springfields in late WW1. In fact so late they were never used in combat and most destroyed.
Just my luck that I got rid of pistol. Excellent gun, built like a 2/3 scale SIG 210. The lucky campers that have these will now be able to buy ammo. I had to manufacture mine from 32 S&W long brass. The loss rate didn’t justify the time producing them.
6cbadd4d22929ab3bfcdf3a642e350be.jpg



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
wild cat mccane said:
I said and no one has made mention that Federal said in their marketing the major point is the guns will be slimmer yet there is no way those 3 guns they show are narrower than a 9mm option.

So all you get is +2.

The P365 will still be smaller because it's smaller than the M&P.

Brought nothing. I'm not buying a bigger gun than the P365 to get +2 rounds in a bigger package.

No sense in doing so.
Click to expand...
I have to concur with your logic. I have a circa 2011 first-generation Ruger® LC9 (7+1). I'm fortunate to have three magazines. I got the MagGuts® conversion for it; now all my mags hold eight rounds. It is a fine gun and very accurate w/any 147gr ammunition. I cannot rationalize upgrading to another larger pistol for a few more rounds.
 
Last edited:
Jim Watson said:
NOOO, DON'T DO THAT. .30 SC is at least double the chamber pressure of 7.65 French contract buster.
Click to expand...


At least owners of 7.65 m35s and even the few Peterson owners will be able to get some brass. I’ve had to make brass for some old obsolete guns and form other brass for Wildcats. It’s maddening to make 7.65 French and lose half your brass everytime you shoot.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top