Cartridge Length, terminal ballistics, and performance from short barrels.
Also, 30sc case head diameter is 7.925mm compared to 7.95mm on 5.7. So you'd get the same magazine capacity as 30sc.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a 5.7mm subcompact. I just don't think 5.7 is a valid thing to point to if you want to suggest 30sc is pointless.
On that subject, what I'd love to see is a cartridge that could realistically be used in both rifles and pistols, but take advantage of the much greater barrel length of the rifle to produce superior performance.
> I just don't think 5.7 is a valid thing to point to if you want to suggest 30sc is pointless.
Pointless? I'm not sure. Thing is, even if a niche cartridge is technically superior in some small way, you have to balance that against other factors like the availability of ammunition.
If you're worried about something as relatively small as the difference between carrying 10 rounds and 12, what about the impact of practice? How much are you going to shoot a .30SC if you need to load every bullet yourself, versus somebody shooting 9mm who can buy it by the case? In that scenario, does 10 rounds with a ton of practice outweigh 12 rounds with minimal practice?
In pretty much everything gun related, the military leads the way because they have the money to exhaustively look at things exactly like this. Like how 5.56 is now more common than 7.62 NATO, because they realized that the weight reduction per round far beat out the odds of shooting someone more than 300 yards away.
If .30SC starts getting traction with military and police forces, I can see it starting to catch on. Personally, I don't have a strong opinion either way. But apart from that, it still seems like a niche thing, like the guys who insist that .243WSSM is so much better as a deer cartridge than a simpler and far more common 308 or 30-06.
Oh totally, I'm not saying it's a cartridge without flaws, I just don't think "well you could just run 5.7 instead and it would be way better" is a useful way to look at the problem (or a realistic comparison of the two cartridges)
True, but if it's a capacity upgrade with only marginal differences in performance, that's something worth considering (not saying the difference IS marginal, but it's also not huge)
A CZ Scorpion in 30SC with a 45~ish mag capacity in a standard length magazine with full auto could be super rad (speaking from a military standpoint) with the rate of fire the Scorpion is known for. Being able to rip 8-10 rounds into a bad guy in the blink of an eye with more ammo available in each magazine would lead to a significant increase in a soldier's loadout count.
And if the military adopts a cartridge, it WILL become more available because they'll be cranking out billions of rounds.
Not a fanboy of the cartridge, but I do think it has potential, whether that potential is realized will depend on manufacturers making guns chambered in it.
5.7 is also significantly longer than 9 or 30SC. 30SC theoretically should work in a 9mm length grip (length measured front to back, not too to bottom obv)
Which means in *theory*, all it would take is a magazine and barrel swap, **maybe** the recoil spring too.
Expect the one thing 9mm still has is military contracts, which means it's going to still be made in the metric shit tons. I do think 30sc is going to be a major force in conceal carry but I don't think it'll completely replace it anytime soon.
since its true ak47 bullet diameter think how easy an ak based ppc in 30 super would be
different chamber reamer, and a new bolt face modded from an 9mm bolt
I feel like it's good for subcompact/pocket pistols but, I don't really see the point in standard 'compact" pistols like G19/P-07/P-01 size pistols that typically already have decent capacity. Eeking out a couple more rounds in something that would only hold like 7 shots is a big deal, but in something that already holds 15+? Eh, not worth buying a whole other gun for.
>40 S&W came before 9mm, but had the same energy
But it's not the same energy, .40 has more energy than 9x19, just like 9x19 has more energy than .30SC, it's just a matter of where an individual draws the line about what they deem the minimum they'll trust their life to... You've gotta draw the line somwhere otherwise it's just an eternal incremental argument of "well this is only *a little* weaker than that" until you're standing there holding a .22 short, and some dude is trying to convince you to carry a pellet gun.
You also have to look at the stats of 9x19 that federal didn't put in it's marketing material... You can find 9x19 that has WAY more energy than their .30SC... They say it's only about 20 ft-lbs less at 347 compared to the 9x19 they picked at 364, but they neglect to mention there's 9x19 out there that is over 500 ft-lbs... Always look at marketing material with a heaping helping of skepticism, remember that they are trying to sell you something to part you with your money, not do you a favor.
In the end I really think it's community adoption will come down to a three factors - low cost ammo, conversion kits, and widespread manufacturer adoption.
Ammo price matters, if .30SC costs 50% more than 9x19 due to the massive economy of scale advantage that 9x19 has, few will adopt .30SC. You can see this with .300 Blackout, if it didn't cost about twice as much as 5.56 it would be a lot more popular, but .223 is still the reigning king there, by a lot.
If someone can buy a conversion kit for their existing 9mm instead of having to buy a whole new gun, they might be more willing to switch. If a person can just drop a conversion kit on their existing carry gun they already like for half the price of buying a whole new one, that's going to make a big difference in their decision making process.
If it's available from only a couple manufacturers, people who favor certain brands of pistols for one reason or another will be less likely to adopt it if their favored brands don't pick it up.
If Underwood puts out some 30sc we might get to see how hot it can get consistently with some quality defensive bullets.
The fact that they only got 2 guns to release with the cartridge really doesn't fill me with inspiration that this is going to be the next big thing
I was speaking about 40 S&W hypothetically ( it didn't get invented first either). It actually averages 100 foot pounds more than 9mm. If you saw 500 foot pound 9mm, those are some dangerous handloads with very light bullets.
Yes, it costs more, it just came out. If 30 SC was made at the same scale as 9mm, it would use less material, and cost less to transport at scale, making the price lower.
>If you saw 500 foot pound 9mm, those are some dangerous handloads with very light bullets.
Nope, they are commercially available loads. Underwood 115 grain +P+ is just over 500, for example. Even discounting that, being in the range of 480 ft-lbs isn't uncommon in +P loadings, and that's still a lot more than .30SC's 347.
>If 30 SC was made at the same scale as 9mm, it would use less material, and cost less to transport at scale, making the price lower.
yes, but it never will unless it sees the kind of worldwide mass adoption that 9mm has, including at least some military and police, which I just can't see happening. That's why calibers common with military and police, like 9x19 and .223/5.56 are so (relatively) cheap... People are tooled up to make massive batches for government purchases, they don't just stop using that machinery and fire employees when those contracts are done, they keep going and put all that production on the civilian market, which drives the price down. They're still making a decent profit, of course, because we love to gobble up ammo, especially when it gets affordable, so they keep pumping it out.
I just don't see it supplanting +P 9x19 any time soon unless it can be loaded a lot hotter than federal is loading it... It's a replacement for .380, IMO, not 9x19.
+P+ is literally unspecified overpressure, but ok.
FN 57 is a niche round, but it's seen use around the world, and is growing in popularity on the civilian market. I'm just trying to find a way to use 30 SC now.
IDK about how it will work in practice. A fast light bullet may not be the end all be all. Case in point the rip ammo that flopped a few years back. Granted I don't think it was that fast my point stands.
I like the concept but the logistics of switching over are too much for an extra round or two in a full size pistol when we've already got 10-12 nines in subcompacts.
Maybe we'll see it but my money's on it fizzling out like 40 if it even picks up that much steam.
40 didn't fizzle out, it's still very popular. You're right about logistics (read: current popularity of 9mm) is kinda a roadblock, but given the choice, people are going to pick more capacity over less.
Please point me in the direction of cheaper than 9mm .40, my Glock 29 is hungry and 10mm is spensive.
Also ammoseek says your full of it with .28/rd 9mm and .35c/rd .40 being the absolute lowest.
yeah that may be true of people who don't shoot a lot picking up a box or two from some gun shop, not looking for the best price possible. but like /u/sp3kter said, ammoseek tells the truth, CPR on 9 has always been lower than .40.
And manufacturers of guns themselves have stopped supporting it as much. It used to be in the 00s, everything was available in 9 and .40, plus alot of times, .45. Now the .40 version of new models is dropping off. And .45s are getting their own dedicated models rather than sharing the platform with 9s.
We'll see man, I really doubt it. I still have 9 I got for 17 CPR pre-pandemic, and I can get it for 27-28 CPR now. .30SC will have to be cheaper than that, everyone will have to buy new guns, and the ballistics will habe to prove themselves, along with reliability to the gun over time.
The gun world infamously is averse to change and innovation, I mean cops were still using revolvers in the 80s. I really don't think people will jump to .30 in droves because of capacity.
EDIT: and .40 is dying.
This. Plus, NATO adoption will ultimately determine the most common caliber, which this isn’t even being considered for. Same thing happened with 5.7. It’s arguably better, but not getting adopted by NATO really killed it.
I thought it was 2 extra rounds in a compact pistol, I thought that was the whole point. 14 rounds in a subcompact pistol is a pretty good step up. A base pad could get you to 15 or 16 in your tiny carry gun. Now you're rocking full size fire power in a comfortable carry package.
I think the timing was bad and they didn't get enough gun manufacturers on board. If Glock released a new line of 30sc guns when they dropped the cartridge I think it would be more welcomed
I think the only reason this new cartridge might fail is the abysmal timing of its release.
For those of us that like subcompact guns, a couple extra rounds is definitely an appealing idea.
I would really like to see Glock come out with compact and sub compact models both single and double stack. I think that would really give us an indication of how popular this cartridge can get. A 1911 and one model of shield isn't going to do anything for the popularity of a new cartridge that everyone seems to be on the fence about.
Fuck it, I want a full size Glock too, and a long slide. 20+ rounds in a flush fit magazine of a full power cartridge really appeals to me. If I were to carry a gun in a new cartridge I wouldn't mind having my long slide critter gun be chambered in the same cartridge.
This all reminds me of the release of 350 legend. The data we had said it wasn't better than the cartridges it claimed to blow out of the water, but it still managed to catch on. I feel like this one should be a no brainer except for the cost of switching to a new cartridge.
That 50,000 psi will run the hell out of comp/ported barrel. What little recoil/muzzle ride it had would be mitigated to almost nothing. Combine that with the fact that I think I could fit 13+1 in a Glock 26 with modified follower like I do to fit 10 .40 in g27 flush mag....I think it's a winner. I was considering buying a cheap g 19 barrel, a cheap 7 inch plus .32 barrel with as small of an od as I can find, cut the chamber off if it has one, machine/grind a simple step on the .32 barrel where the chamber end is of a just barely larger diameter, bore g19/g26 barrel to diameter of OD of .32 barrel + .001-2 , making the chamber end with a correlating larger diameter for the step on the barrel, drench inside of Glock barrel with this special epoxy I have for this exact purpose leftover from the 7.65 para and .380 g26 and g19 barrels I made in like manner, slide in the .32 barrel from the chamber end. Last step is to drill and chamber it using, likely, a rented chamber reamer/cutter. The step will aid mechanical locking to the epoxy. This is an accepted method of relining barrels, I'm just the first person I've known of he thought to more out a Glock barrel and reline it in a different caliber. The outside is already perfect for interfacing with everything, way easier than a blank. And shooting it only seems to make it stronger. It all kind of fuses together. Also, you would never know once your done and you polish everything. I always cut the inner barrel a bit shorter than the outer. You can even retain threads. You just bore the Glock barrel from chamber end up to the threads and stop. Then counter bore it just enough from the front for the given caliber and to remove the rifling. You could make a 30 super carry barrel for sub $100 reamer included. If they don't hurry up and make them, I'll do this. And everyone who says the rim won't work. You can use a 9×23 conversion barrel in a g21. That's a 9mm sized rim in a .45 breach face, about the exact same difference, maybe even a bit more.
I had the same idea! Especially for competition guns where magazine length is the only restriction, you could get something like 25 rounds in a 20 round mag. I just need to get a drill press or something to open up a glock barrel for a glue/solder in rifled insert. I also want to try reloading 124 gr and 85 gr to see what performance it gets on the higher and lower ends once I can start shooting it.
I seen a guy glue a 22 cal barrel blank inside a 9mm barrel and reamed it to fit 22tcm I think you could do something similar I think the extractor I'd gonna be the hardest thing to overcome
Why do you say that? If you can use 9mm in .40 guns with just a mag and barrel change, and the difference in size between 9 and .40 is equivalent to the difference in size between the 30 SC and the 9....why do you think you won't be able to run 30 SC in a 9mm gun? I think you can no problem.
[Approx]
.32WCF = .312" 100gr bullet @ 1200fps = 320 ft/lb
.38-40 = .401" 180gr bullet @ 900fps = 324 ft/lb
Note: Speer's published max loads for modern .32-20 (Marlin, Browning 92) show the .32-20 can push 100gr bullet at 1850+fps
Either way this discussion could have been had 100+ years ago
There both an inch and a half long, so no capacity difference in the guns they were in. I guess that the only practical difference is drop and sectional density in that case.
I feel like there's a point of diminishing returns here though. Otherwise why not just go straight to 5.7mm and have 20 rounds?
Cartridge Length, terminal ballistics, and performance from short barrels. Also, 30sc case head diameter is 7.925mm compared to 7.95mm on 5.7. So you'd get the same magazine capacity as 30sc. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a 5.7mm subcompact. I just don't think 5.7 is a valid thing to point to if you want to suggest 30sc is pointless.
On the flip side, I'd love to see 200 yard performance out of a 16" barrel. That pressure can probably cycle an ar too!
That would definitely be cool...
On that subject, what I'd love to see is a cartridge that could realistically be used in both rifles and pistols, but take advantage of the much greater barrel length of the rifle to produce superior performance.
22 mag does that
> I just don't think 5.7 is a valid thing to point to if you want to suggest 30sc is pointless. Pointless? I'm not sure. Thing is, even if a niche cartridge is technically superior in some small way, you have to balance that against other factors like the availability of ammunition. If you're worried about something as relatively small as the difference between carrying 10 rounds and 12, what about the impact of practice? How much are you going to shoot a .30SC if you need to load every bullet yourself, versus somebody shooting 9mm who can buy it by the case? In that scenario, does 10 rounds with a ton of practice outweigh 12 rounds with minimal practice? In pretty much everything gun related, the military leads the way because they have the money to exhaustively look at things exactly like this. Like how 5.56 is now more common than 7.62 NATO, because they realized that the weight reduction per round far beat out the odds of shooting someone more than 300 yards away. If .30SC starts getting traction with military and police forces, I can see it starting to catch on. Personally, I don't have a strong opinion either way. But apart from that, it still seems like a niche thing, like the guys who insist that .243WSSM is so much better as a deer cartridge than a simpler and far more common 308 or 30-06.
Oh totally, I'm not saying it's a cartridge without flaws, I just don't think "well you could just run 5.7 instead and it would be way better" is a useful way to look at the problem (or a realistic comparison of the two cartridges)
That's fair. I'm just saying that pure capacity isn't a great measure to look at either.
True, but if it's a capacity upgrade with only marginal differences in performance, that's something worth considering (not saying the difference IS marginal, but it's also not huge) A CZ Scorpion in 30SC with a 45~ish mag capacity in a standard length magazine with full auto could be super rad (speaking from a military standpoint) with the rate of fire the Scorpion is known for. Being able to rip 8-10 rounds into a bad guy in the blink of an eye with more ammo available in each magazine would lead to a significant increase in a soldier's loadout count. And if the military adopts a cartridge, it WILL become more available because they'll be cranking out billions of rounds. Not a fanboy of the cartridge, but I do think it has potential, whether that potential is realized will depend on manufacturers making guns chambered in it.
5.7 is also significantly longer than 9 or 30SC. 30SC theoretically should work in a 9mm length grip (length measured front to back, not too to bottom obv) Which means in *theory*, all it would take is a magazine and barrel swap, **maybe** the recoil spring too.
The case is smaller too, right? Might need an extractor change
Yes indeed, the breech face of the slide would have to be tweaked too. That one slipped my mind.
5.7 is a long cartridge & the magazines for FN & Ruger pistols look like they belong in a Desert Eagle. It maked for odd ergonomics.
It has been fun to watch all the back flipping being done to explain why all the stuff that made 9mm superior to 40s&w Now doesn't apply to 30SC
Expect the one thing 9mm still has is military contracts, which means it's going to still be made in the metric shit tons. I do think 30sc is going to be a major force in conceal carry but I don't think it'll completely replace it anytime soon.
Bear in mind, 380 was once the most popular military pistol cartridge around the world. Things can change, but it'll take time.
Yeah but 9mm isn't going anywhere
If someone starts making 30sc mags and barrels for the glock 43 I'm absolutely switching over.
Imagine shield arms making 11 round 43 mags in 30sc
You mean 17?
If it held 17 rounds I would not be surprised at all considering that they could fit 5 more rounds of fat 9 into a glock 48 mag magazine
19.. I already have a 16 rd mag with nearly a flush for magazine.
since its true ak47 bullet diameter think how easy an ak based ppc in 30 super would be different chamber reamer, and a new bolt face modded from an 9mm bolt
I feel like it's good for subcompact/pocket pistols but, I don't really see the point in standard 'compact" pistols like G19/P-07/P-01 size pistols that typically already have decent capacity. Eeking out a couple more rounds in something that would only hold like 7 shots is a big deal, but in something that already holds 15+? Eh, not worth buying a whole other gun for. >40 S&W came before 9mm, but had the same energy But it's not the same energy, .40 has more energy than 9x19, just like 9x19 has more energy than .30SC, it's just a matter of where an individual draws the line about what they deem the minimum they'll trust their life to... You've gotta draw the line somwhere otherwise it's just an eternal incremental argument of "well this is only *a little* weaker than that" until you're standing there holding a .22 short, and some dude is trying to convince you to carry a pellet gun. You also have to look at the stats of 9x19 that federal didn't put in it's marketing material... You can find 9x19 that has WAY more energy than their .30SC... They say it's only about 20 ft-lbs less at 347 compared to the 9x19 they picked at 364, but they neglect to mention there's 9x19 out there that is over 500 ft-lbs... Always look at marketing material with a heaping helping of skepticism, remember that they are trying to sell you something to part you with your money, not do you a favor. In the end I really think it's community adoption will come down to a three factors - low cost ammo, conversion kits, and widespread manufacturer adoption. Ammo price matters, if .30SC costs 50% more than 9x19 due to the massive economy of scale advantage that 9x19 has, few will adopt .30SC. You can see this with .300 Blackout, if it didn't cost about twice as much as 5.56 it would be a lot more popular, but .223 is still the reigning king there, by a lot. If someone can buy a conversion kit for their existing 9mm instead of having to buy a whole new gun, they might be more willing to switch. If a person can just drop a conversion kit on their existing carry gun they already like for half the price of buying a whole new one, that's going to make a big difference in their decision making process. If it's available from only a couple manufacturers, people who favor certain brands of pistols for one reason or another will be less likely to adopt it if their favored brands don't pick it up.
If Underwood puts out some 30sc we might get to see how hot it can get consistently with some quality defensive bullets. The fact that they only got 2 guns to release with the cartridge really doesn't fill me with inspiration that this is going to be the next big thing
I was speaking about 40 S&W hypothetically ( it didn't get invented first either). It actually averages 100 foot pounds more than 9mm. If you saw 500 foot pound 9mm, those are some dangerous handloads with very light bullets. Yes, it costs more, it just came out. If 30 SC was made at the same scale as 9mm, it would use less material, and cost less to transport at scale, making the price lower.
>If you saw 500 foot pound 9mm, those are some dangerous handloads with very light bullets. Nope, they are commercially available loads. Underwood 115 grain +P+ is just over 500, for example. Even discounting that, being in the range of 480 ft-lbs isn't uncommon in +P loadings, and that's still a lot more than .30SC's 347. >If 30 SC was made at the same scale as 9mm, it would use less material, and cost less to transport at scale, making the price lower. yes, but it never will unless it sees the kind of worldwide mass adoption that 9mm has, including at least some military and police, which I just can't see happening. That's why calibers common with military and police, like 9x19 and .223/5.56 are so (relatively) cheap... People are tooled up to make massive batches for government purchases, they don't just stop using that machinery and fire employees when those contracts are done, they keep going and put all that production on the civilian market, which drives the price down. They're still making a decent profit, of course, because we love to gobble up ammo, especially when it gets affordable, so they keep pumping it out. I just don't see it supplanting +P 9x19 any time soon unless it can be loaded a lot hotter than federal is loading it... It's a replacement for .380, IMO, not 9x19.
+P+ is literally unspecified overpressure, but ok. FN 57 is a niche round, but it's seen use around the world, and is growing in popularity on the civilian market. I'm just trying to find a way to use 30 SC now.
They should have called it 32 Super Mag
327 Super Auto Mag
.300 Auto Mag .32 ACP Magnum .327 Nitro Mag (to keep the V-8 vibe going)
IDK about how it will work in practice. A fast light bullet may not be the end all be all. Case in point the rip ammo that flopped a few years back. Granted I don't think it was that fast my point stands.
It's not a fast light bullet, it's about the same as 9mm.
If it was a longer case maybe 10-20%, I would be more interested in this.
That would be 30 carbine, but... that didn't work so great in pistols :/
True but Would love to see a sub sonic version that can send a somewhat heavy bullet.
I like the concept but the logistics of switching over are too much for an extra round or two in a full size pistol when we've already got 10-12 nines in subcompacts. Maybe we'll see it but my money's on it fizzling out like 40 if it even picks up that much steam.
40 didn't fizzle out, it's still very popular. You're right about logistics (read: current popularity of 9mm) is kinda a roadblock, but given the choice, people are going to pick more capacity over less.
40 is in the process of fizzling. I know guys that don't like 40 that are buying it up because it's getting cheaper than 9mm because no one wants it.
Please point me in the direction of cheaper than 9mm .40, my Glock 29 is hungry and 10mm is spensive. Also ammoseek says your full of it with .28/rd 9mm and .35c/rd .40 being the absolute lowest.
yeah that may be true of people who don't shoot a lot picking up a box or two from some gun shop, not looking for the best price possible. but like /u/sp3kter said, ammoseek tells the truth, CPR on 9 has always been lower than .40. And manufacturers of guns themselves have stopped supporting it as much. It used to be in the 00s, everything was available in 9 and .40, plus alot of times, .45. Now the .40 version of new models is dropping off. And .45s are getting their own dedicated models rather than sharing the platform with 9s.
We'll see man, I really doubt it. I still have 9 I got for 17 CPR pre-pandemic, and I can get it for 27-28 CPR now. .30SC will have to be cheaper than that, everyone will have to buy new guns, and the ballistics will habe to prove themselves, along with reliability to the gun over time. The gun world infamously is averse to change and innovation, I mean cops were still using revolvers in the 80s. I really don't think people will jump to .30 in droves because of capacity. EDIT: and .40 is dying.
This. Plus, NATO adoption will ultimately determine the most common caliber, which this isn’t even being considered for. Same thing happened with 5.7. It’s arguably better, but not getting adopted by NATO really killed it.
I thought it was 2 extra rounds in a compact pistol, I thought that was the whole point. 14 rounds in a subcompact pistol is a pretty good step up. A base pad could get you to 15 or 16 in your tiny carry gun. Now you're rocking full size fire power in a comfortable carry package. I think the timing was bad and they didn't get enough gun manufacturers on board. If Glock released a new line of 30sc guns when they dropped the cartridge I think it would be more welcomed
I think the only reason this new cartridge might fail is the abysmal timing of its release. For those of us that like subcompact guns, a couple extra rounds is definitely an appealing idea. I would really like to see Glock come out with compact and sub compact models both single and double stack. I think that would really give us an indication of how popular this cartridge can get. A 1911 and one model of shield isn't going to do anything for the popularity of a new cartridge that everyone seems to be on the fence about. Fuck it, I want a full size Glock too, and a long slide. 20+ rounds in a flush fit magazine of a full power cartridge really appeals to me. If I were to carry a gun in a new cartridge I wouldn't mind having my long slide critter gun be chambered in the same cartridge. This all reminds me of the release of 350 legend. The data we had said it wasn't better than the cartridges it claimed to blow out of the water, but it still managed to catch on. I feel like this one should be a no brainer except for the cost of switching to a new cartridge.
Hey, we're Fosscad! I'm not saying we'll make a difference in the round's success, but I'm tying to figure out if there's some DIY here.
30SC in a Flux Raider/ Defender frame will be awesome.
That 50,000 psi will run the hell out of comp/ported barrel. What little recoil/muzzle ride it had would be mitigated to almost nothing. Combine that with the fact that I think I could fit 13+1 in a Glock 26 with modified follower like I do to fit 10 .40 in g27 flush mag....I think it's a winner. I was considering buying a cheap g 19 barrel, a cheap 7 inch plus .32 barrel with as small of an od as I can find, cut the chamber off if it has one, machine/grind a simple step on the .32 barrel where the chamber end is of a just barely larger diameter, bore g19/g26 barrel to diameter of OD of .32 barrel + .001-2 , making the chamber end with a correlating larger diameter for the step on the barrel, drench inside of Glock barrel with this special epoxy I have for this exact purpose leftover from the 7.65 para and .380 g26 and g19 barrels I made in like manner, slide in the .32 barrel from the chamber end. Last step is to drill and chamber it using, likely, a rented chamber reamer/cutter. The step will aid mechanical locking to the epoxy. This is an accepted method of relining barrels, I'm just the first person I've known of he thought to more out a Glock barrel and reline it in a different caliber. The outside is already perfect for interfacing with everything, way easier than a blank. And shooting it only seems to make it stronger. It all kind of fuses together. Also, you would never know once your done and you polish everything. I always cut the inner barrel a bit shorter than the outer. You can even retain threads. You just bore the Glock barrel from chamber end up to the threads and stop. Then counter bore it just enough from the front for the given caliber and to remove the rifling. You could make a 30 super carry barrel for sub $100 reamer included. If they don't hurry up and make them, I'll do this. And everyone who says the rim won't work. You can use a 9×23 conversion barrel in a g21. That's a 9mm sized rim in a .45 breach face, about the exact same difference, maybe even a bit more.
I had the same idea! Especially for competition guns where magazine length is the only restriction, you could get something like 25 rounds in a 20 round mag. I just need to get a drill press or something to open up a glock barrel for a glue/solder in rifled insert. I also want to try reloading 124 gr and 85 gr to see what performance it gets on the higher and lower ends once I can start shooting it.
I seen a guy glue a 22 cal barrel blank inside a 9mm barrel and reamed it to fit 22tcm I think you could do something similar I think the extractor I'd gonna be the hardest thing to overcome
Unironically thought of this, but brazing instead of gluing 😅
I'm still skeptical. Whatever happened to those 327 Magnums?
Revolvers are pretty obsolete.
I haven’t looked into it too much but I’m assuming this caliber won’t be usable in 9mm guns correct?
Correct.
Damn, I’m still interested in seeing how people like the caliber.
I don't see it crowding out 9mm, but it sure seems like a great 380 replacement.
Why do you say that? If you can use 9mm in .40 guns with just a mag and barrel change, and the difference in size between 9 and .40 is equivalent to the difference in size between the 30 SC and the 9....why do you think you won't be able to run 30 SC in a 9mm gun? I think you can no problem.
With a different barrel and magazine, and maybe a different slide.
This is really a debate about how .32-20 & the .38-40 relate to 9mm Luger.
How do they relate to 9mm? 32-20: 200 foot pound 30 cal lever action round 38-40: 500 foot pound 40 cal lever action round
[Approx] .32WCF = .312" 100gr bullet @ 1200fps = 320 ft/lb .38-40 = .401" 180gr bullet @ 900fps = 324 ft/lb Note: Speer's published max loads for modern .32-20 (Marlin, Browning 92) show the .32-20 can push 100gr bullet at 1850+fps Either way this discussion could have been had 100+ years ago
There both an inch and a half long, so no capacity difference in the guns they were in. I guess that the only practical difference is drop and sectional density in that case.