Handgun caliber evolution - Or its seeming absence

I don't think that energy weapons of the hand held variety are that far away. We already see lasers attached to gun rails, the only change is the power required to ramp it up to weaponized standards and the things that go with that. Your number one problem is a power source, and batteries get more efficient all the time. Soon enough you'll be able to fire a few shots of powerful laser from a charge, and after that there will only be cooling and other factors that I think we are already within our abilities to design.

High energy storage would eventually give it advantages over projectile weapons in terms of shots fired vs weight, and needing no barrel length for accuracy, range, and recharging instead of having to produce ammunition.

All that can be done with bullets either already has been done or shortly will be, the only changes being nicer guns and more efficient methods of launching the projectile.
 
No need for something new? (which seems, given the pressure to innovate in our fast modern business world, quite unlikely to me...)
Click to expand...


I'm not sure there is an actual need for something new in the world of self defense handgun cartridges unless we create the need. If we decide that we need a self defense cartridge that meets FBI standards, we already have several great choices. For a new cartridge to find a place, we would have to create a new need or it would have to meet existing needs and offer some large advantage over existing cartridges that already meet those needs.
 
Hi, Elerius,

Maybe, but in the foreseeable future, a laser "death ray" would require a pretty big holster to tote the Hoover-dam size generator needed. Not to mention the dam. ;)

Jim
 
Around 1900, improved powders (mainly smokeless powders) made it possible to attain the same degree of lethality with smaller, lighter bullets.
Click to expand...

Quite true, but let me add that the increased pressure of smokless powders also meant a change in the materials and designs of the guns to fire them.

The power available to us in handgun rounds is limited by many factors. Chief among them currently are what the gun/ammo is physically able to contain, and what humans can physically hold on to and fire.

There are many way to get around some of these limitations, and probably we will find others in the future, as our ancestors did in the past. BUT the limit of what people can actually use is a tough one.
 
yes

Those are cartridges, not "calibers". "Caliber" is a unit of measure equal to 1/100th of an inch. Cartridges, on the other hand, are used in firearms. Yes, I know, "but everybody says calibers, Bobby says calibers, and Billy says calibers, I wanna say calibers, too!" Everyone doing a foolish thing does not make it not a foolish thing to do. Cartridges. Cartridges. Cartridges.
Click to expand...

Yes! Hooray! Someone else who believes in using the right word
 
Last edited:
Elerius said:
I don't think that energy weapons of the hand held variety are that far away. We already see lasers attached to gun rails, the only change is the power required to ramp it up to weaponized standards and the things that go with that. Your number one problem is a power source, and batteries get more efficient all the time. Soon enough you'll be able to fire a few shots of powerful laser from a charge, and after that there will only be cooling and other factors that I think we are already within our abilities to design.

High energy storage would eventually give it advantages over projectile weapons in terms of shots fired vs weight, and needing no barrel length for accuracy, range, and recharging instead of having to produce ammunition.

All that can be done with bullets either already has been done or shortly will be, the only changes being nicer guns and more efficient methods of launching the projectile.
Click to expand...

Um, there is a HUGE difference between the puny little 5 mW (0.005 Watt) CW laser on your gun rail and the 5+ KW (5,000+ Watt) pulse laser--tuned for flesh--needed to inflict potentially lethal damage on an unprotected human target. You are talking about a 1 MILLION percent "ramp up" in power. And considering that lasers are horribly inefficient--a "high efficiency" laser is getting 30% power conversion--you are going to need even more juice out of the power source. With most of the energy loss being in heat, cooling is a serious issue as well. It will also have to discharge that energy insanely fast to avoid a recharge lag on repeat shots, which isn't going to help the heat issue either.

Further, batteries are NOT improving much. You may have noticed your smartphone, tablet, and laptop batteries only last a few hours under use. IIRC, battery tech is only averaging about a 6% efficiency improvement per year and the improvements are slowing down, not speeding up.

Add to that the fact that lasers are hampered by things like rain, snow, fog, smog, smoke and, airborne dust and you have a major set of problems that projectile based weapons simply do not have to contend with.

Are they potentially plausible? Sure. But they aren't going to be as simple, reliable, durable, or general purpose practical as projectile throwers for small arms. The only case I see them as being likely to prove superior would be for sniping. The lack of impact from wind, gravity, and the rotation of the Earth, combined with a functionally instantaneous hit and near-zero recoil would make ultra-extreme range (>2 miles) headshots a real possibility.
 
Last edited:
:( Sabrewolfe, you are crushing my laser based dreams. I agree with the general argument about lasers in particular. I only mention the rail laser as the most basic comparison, and lasers are probably not the best type of energy weapon to use compared to other possible beam or particle type weapons. I stand by the statement that energy requirement is by far the biggest problem; snow, rain, fog and dust become less and less of an issue the more wattage you can pump into it, blooming things away from your beam path and correcting for focus with the mirror system those big gas Boeing lasers use for shooting down missiles.

I don't want to hijack the thread, this is already a bit off topic.

Well you had your chance back in the 1960's with the Gyrojet. I remember it being .45 caliber but the Wiki article says .49 and .51 caliber.
Click to expand...

I was thinking of the Gyrojet when I wrote that, it seemed to suffer from a lot of problems though, one being low muzzle velocity that climbed the farther out the rocket flew. I'm not sure what that energy is, but it probably wouldn't make a suitable CCW in close ranges. Did those recoiless rifles use rockets or was that some other method? Again, sorry if this is too off topic.
 
Jeff Cooper once said of a gas operated prototype from Husqvarna that the design was wasted on 9mm, but might show the way to a Mach 3 .17 caliber that would burn through any feasible body armor. Strange thought from the Gunners' Guru, but he was not the horse pistol antiquarian many think.
But we aren't there yet, Mach 2 is a pretty good trick in a handgun.

Swedish game biologists once concluded that 2650 fps was needed for formation of a "pulsatile cavern." That is "temporary cavity" in English ballistic-speak, and maybe "hydrostatic shock."
Pretty much what you get with a 6.5x55, so they may have started with the answer they wanted and got the data to support it, and also agree with decades of field experience.

But that makes Mach 3 a goal for "stopping power" as well as penetration.
And gives a landmark of .223 ballistics out of a holster weapon. We are a ways from that.

I read a lot of science fiction and always track on the smallarms.

There was once a hypothetical study of an infantry rifle sized laser weapon. It was powered by short half life radioactives, sidestepping the problems of battery capacity and efficiency. It was a gas dynamic laser, firing when you flushed hot gas down the emitting tube. Delivered energy was about like a .45ACP +P at an IR wavelength not too badly absorbed by air and effective to 1000 metres.
A mathematically inclined reader concluded that the surge of gas down the tube would give it the recoil of a .458 Win Mag. Of course they could have surged it the other way, but then how do you hold on to the weapon if it kicks away from you?

Then there was the fictional Slichter railgun. About as powerful as a .338 Win Mag; and the heroine carried one in her purse. I bet that put runs in her nylons.

David Drake arms the Republic of Cinnabar with electromotive weapons., coil guns. Physically possible but requiring batteries orders of magnitude better than available on Old Earth.
 
Oh, yeah, the Gyrojet.

First production was in 13mm until somebody noticed that it would qualify as a Destructive Device, being larger than .5". So they went to 12mm. Hence the reference to .51 and .49 calibers.

Rocket burnout and maximum velocity was about 25 feet. Much closer and you were likelier to singe an assailant than to perforate him.
You could visualize a hybrid design with a little cartridge propelling charge for short range effectiveness and a booster for extreme speed and range.
Accuracy was miserable. Most firearms are rated in MOA for accuracy. The Gyrojet people talked in Mils (3.6 moa per Mil) and the numbers were still uncomfortably large.
I always thought the best application would have been a really lightweight machine gun for area coverage by paratroops.
 
The accuracy problem with the Gyrojet was essentially because it was a virtual smoothbore, and the venturi jet openings in the projectile were angled to give it some spin as it traveled downrange. IIRC. :D

Rail guns, needlers, plasma guns, etc are still a bit beyond our capabilities, at least as man portable for the near future, anyway.

It was powered by short half life radioactives, sidestepping the problems of battery capacity and efficiency.
Click to expand...

This is a common trick of SciFi writers. Note that they never explain just how that would work. Because they can't. Radioisotopes produce heat, and radiation. That's all, until you get into nuclear fission or fusion. And when you get to that level, essentially that's all they still do, produce heat and radiation, just in massive quantities, instantaneously. (and while heat is technically a form of radiation, lets not go there right now)
 
"Caliber" is a multi definition word, used in several different ways, depending on context.

Bore diameter, expressed in decimals (1/100 inch) is most common.

Gunmakers list cartridge names as "calibers".

Various legal forms use cartridge names, and call them "caliber".

And caliber is also used to describe the length of artillery barrels, expressed in multiples of bore diameter. The main guns of Iowa class battleships are referred to as 16" 50 caliber rifles.

And caliber is also used to indicate an undefined measurement, as in "the caliber of the opposition".

Truly a multi purpose word. ;)
 
And caliber is also used to indicate an undefined measurement, as in "the caliber of the opposition".
Click to expand...

Correct.

Also as in: "The circus would never 'fire' the human cannon ball as they could never find another person of his caliber."
 
We are still debating the "smaller, lighter bullet at high velocity" vs. the "larger, slower bullet". IMHO biggest impact that smokeless powder had on handgun/ cartridge design was that it made the semiautomatic feasible.
Certain forms of "evolution" are dead ends. A bottle necked or tapered cartridge in a revolver, e.g. Sounds great in theory, but....or ones like the 357 Maximum, a good example of the law of Unexpected Results rearing its head.
 
Why? Maybe because "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?". Regardless of when they came out . . . the .38 spl., 45 ACP, etc. work. But I'm an old fart. I think in today's world, people think everything needs to "change" at the same rate as the cell phone, "apps", etc. - as far as cartridges . . . again . . . if it works, why "fix" it? :rolleyes:
 
All cartridges, calibres, or whatever you want to call them are variations on a theme. The advent of the self-contained cartridge was a milestone in firearms developement, but the basic principle has remained unchanged for 150+ years. Smokeless powder was another milestone, with tremendous advantages over black powder, but, again, the basic principle remains the same, much like the basic principal of the internal combustion engine has remained the same, with only variations on a theme. At some point, development reaches a pinnacle stage and stagnates until some drastically new invention comes along.

The next great "leap forward" will be some entirely new means of delivering a fatal wound with something other than combustible cartridges.
 
Last edited:
SIGSHR mentioned that "evolution" was not the best term. I feel it is the a great definition of the progress of small arms.
It is not only linear, it is made up of more dead-ends than successes. There are good designs developed and those continue beyond those that are not successful, either in ballistics or marketing.
Some "species" go extinct almost immediately (.45 GAP), while others flourish for a long time before changing environments or other more suitable "creatures" out-compete them for the resources of the buying public (32 Auto).
Some designs evolve into something "better." (ie. 10mm auto into the .40 S+W.)
Some great designs never really catch on, but are successful in a small niche; often because they offer something different that can be used in existing guns with little modification (.357Sig)

There are even a few that live on only in captivity by those that are passionate about the animal. (.41 AE, 45 Auto Rim)

This is all a little tongue in cheek, but I think we see the analogy:cool:
 
In all honesty I would just be happy if they would get 22 lr on the shelf. I would take that over any new caliber I can think of.
As mentioned any new caliber would have to deliver something unique. Ammo companies can apparently sell every round of current calibers that they can make so I think the new caliber incentive is pretty far down the priority list at the moment. If ammo sales ever slow down you will see something new in an effort to bolster sales. Its all about the $$

Thanks
Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top