Is Federal’s New 30 Super Carry a 32 ACP Magnum?

Status
Not open for further replies.
SDGlock23 said:
In which I will reply that they're all going to be very loud indoors without hearing protection, the sound is very abrupt and the doesn't travel far, I've shot indoors. Would I rather shoot a .45 indoors than a 357 Mag? Yes but that's not saying the 45 is pleasant, all are going to leave you with some form of hearing damage. One could always leave a set of electric noise cancelling earmuffs by their bed.
Click to expand...

This is not about long term damage (are handguns cartridges are doing that type of damage to some extent) this is about how sever the temporary hearing lost immediately after exposure to the report with unprotected ears. If that temporary lost is sever enough you might not being able to hear the bad-guy's potential partner moving behind you, or the cop coming to help you, or a family member trying to communicate something, immediately after discharging your firearm. From experience 45 ACP vs 357 is dramatically different on unprotected ears for the next few minutes after exposure.

The only saving aspect for 30 Super Carry that might not make it as hard on unprotected ears as 357 Mag is going to be the relatively small amount of gas volume due to the small case volume. The pressures of 30 SC are really high but that will be offset, to some extent, by the reduced amount of gas. Will it be enough to not leave your hearing severely impaired after shooting with no ear pro? I Don't know, but if I borrow or buy one I will shoot it at least once without hearing protection and that will have an influence on whether I carry it or not.
 
mcb said:
This is not about long term damage (are handguns cartridges are doing that type of damage to some extent) this is about how sever the temporary hearing lost immediately after exposure to the report with unprotected ears. If that temporary lost is sever enough you might not being able to hear the bad-guy's potential partner moving behind you, or the cop coming to help you, or a family member trying to communicate something, immediately after discharging your firearm. From experience 45 ACP vs 357 is dramatically different on unprotected ears for the next few minutes after exposure.

The only saving aspect for 30 Super Carry that might not make it as hard on unprotected ears as 357 Mag is going to be the relatively small amount of gas volume due to the small case volume. The pressures of 30 SC are really high but that will be offset, to some extent, by the reduced amount of gas. Will it be enough to not leave your hearing severely impaired after shooting with no ear pro? I Don't know, but if I borrow or buy one I will shoot it at least once without hearing protection and that will have an influence on whether I carry it or not.
Click to expand...
Part of the stunning report will be the higher frequency range of the 30s and 32s.
 
mcb said:
If that temporary lost is sever enough you might not being able to hear the bad-guy's potential partner moving behind you, or the cop coming to help you, or a family member trying to communicate something, immediately after discharging your firearm. From experience 45 ACP vs 357 is dramatically different on unprotected ears for the next few minutes after exposure.
Click to expand...
That bears repeating.
 
I have posted some of this before, but the concern about muzzle blast keeps coming up. Folks seem to be speaking up but not looking into the issue very carefully.

When I first read about the 30 SC, my biggest initial concern about the new round was about excessive muzzle blast given the 50 ksi chamber pressure and my experience with the 327. To see how bad it would be, I ran the round through Quickload (using a stretched 32 ACP with thicker walls). Even though the round has a high chamber pressure, the pressure drops off very quickly and you end up with a muzzle pressure only slightly higher than the 9mm. The amount of powder is slightly less and when combined this would tend to indicate a similar muzzle blast. Both of these guns are mild compared to the 327. I re-ran some numbers for 4" barrels with what I consider comparable bullets:

Cartridge, bullet, charge range, velocity range and muzzle pressure range for top 5 loads at SAAMI limit for chamber pressure:
30 SC, 100 gr Hornady, 5.6 grs to 7.3 grs, 1324 fps to 1356 fps, 7404 psi to 8090 psi
9mm, 115 gr Hornady, 7.5 grs to 9.8 grs, 1297 fps to 1331 fps, 6931 psi to 7841 psi
327 Fed, 100 gr Hornady, 8.5 grs to 12.9 grs, 1431 fps to 1508 fps, 13458 psi to 17329 psi

Shortly after I ran my first Quickload evaluation, I read the American Rifleman article that includes "In terms of shooting experience, the new round is said to create perceived recoil similar to an equivalent-weight 9 mm Luger load and muzzle flash similar to 9 mm Luger."

Then I saw a video of a guy shooting the same gun in both 9mm and 30 SC with self defense type ammo (I wish I had saved a link). His comments were to the effect that he could not tell the difference in muzzle blast.
 
P Flados said:
I have posted some of this before, but the concern about muzzle blast keeps coming up. Folks seem to be speaking up but not looking into the issue very carefully.

When I first read about the 30 SC, my biggest initial concern about the new round was about excessive muzzle blast given the 50 ksi chamber pressure and my experience with the 327. To see how bad it would be, I ran the round through Quickload (using a stretched 32 ACP with thicker walls). Even though the round has a high chamber pressure, the pressure drops off very quickly and you end up with a muzzle pressure only slightly higher than the 9mm. The amount of powder is slightly less and when combined this would tend to indicate a similar muzzle blast. Both of these guns are mild compared to the 327. I re-ran some numbers for 4" barrels with what I consider comparable bullets:

Cartridge, bullet, charge range, velocity range and muzzle pressure range for top 5 loads at SAAMI limit for chamber pressure:
30 SC, 100 gr Hornady, 5.6 grs to 7.3 grs, 1324 fps to 1356 fps, 7404 psi to 8090 psi
9mm, 115 gr Hornady, 7.5 grs to 9.8 grs, 1297 fps to 1331 fps, 6931 psi to 7841 psi
327 Fed, 100 gr Hornady, 8.5 grs to 12.9 grs, 1431 fps to 1508 fps, 13458 psi to 17329 psi

Shortly after I ran my first Quickload evaluation, I read the American Rifleman article that includes "In terms of shooting experience, the new round is said to create perceived recoil similar to an equivalent-weight 9 mm Luger load and muzzle flash similar to 9 mm Luger."

Then I saw a video of a guy shooting the same gun in both 9mm and 30 SC with self defense type ammo (I wish I had saved a link). His comments were to the effect that he could not tell the difference in muzzle blast.
Click to expand...
As with most things subjective there's going to be an element of cognitive bias. Some (NOT ALL) will swear they can tell the difference. But we never hear how a 3" Hellcat is a terrible choice because of muzzle pressure difference between a 3 and 4 inch 9mm
 
mavracer said:
But we never hear how a 3" Hellcat is a terrible choice because of muzzle pressure difference between a 3 and 4 inch 9mm
Click to expand...

Good observation. Peak 9mm muzzle pressure from my previous run goes from 7841 psi to 10819 psi when you drop from a 4" to a 3" barrel. There is also a lot more powder still burning as the bullet leaves the muzzle.
 
The SAAMI Max is 52,000, but the three self defense cartridges being offered are in the “mid forties”, according to a Federal Rep at the SHOT Show.

The sound/hearing thing wasn’t a problem for over a century of armed combat through multiple wars, including house clearing operations. Way too much overthinking today.
 
Zone Five said:
The SAAMI Max is 52,000, but the three self defense cartridges being offered are in the “mid forties”, according to a Federal Rep at the SHOT Show.

The sound/hearing thing wasn’t a problem for over a century of armed combat through multiple wars, including house clearing operations. Way too much overthinking today.
Click to expand...

12Bravo20 said:
And most of us veterans now have to wear hearing aids after getting out of the service, myself included.
Click to expand...

Kleanbore said:
That's absurd.
Click to expand...

It's beyond absurd, absurd is not knowing it is well documented "over a century of armed combat through multiple wars, including house clearing operations" that high level noise exposure has resulted in veterans having permanent hearing loss. Somewhat understandable is not knowing recent studies indicate that prolonged exposure to high levels of noise also damages the brain's ability to process speech that is heard. There is a reason why so many smart people would like to be using noise suppressors and it isn't because suppressors are Kombat Kool.
 
The stated concern here is about a single engagement of a handful of rounds, not an infantry man’s worth of firefights during a World War. I grew up surrounded by WWII, Korea and Viet Nam vets, a number of which, but not all, experienced different levels of hearing loss. My father was a aerial gunnery instructor on TBF’s, and was exposed six days a week for three years to .30 and .50 cal machine guns, often in aircraft turrets. He finally required hearing aids in his eighties.

Some of the posts in this thread intimate that one exposure is going to melt your brain and give you life long PTSD. Any damage from a single encounter is negligible. You are going to be far more impacted by listened to headphones with the music blasting they way many do than ventilating the lurking burglar that everyone is so worried about.

BTDT myself indoors at least a half dozen times (you probably have as well), along with many years of hunting shotguns and rifles outdoor without plugs, I can still hear just fine.

After decades of homeowners keeping shotguns at the ready for home defense without much thought, now we’re suddenly focused on excessive noise from a small caliber handgun round?

The other aspect is the focus on chamber pressures as causing excessive recoil. You want to show me the math on that? The 30SC launches a lighter or equal mass projectile at a slower velocity. How does that result in higher recoil forces that will cause rapid unplanned disassembly of a current 9mm platform that is chambered in 30SC?

Federal stated that the first products will be existing designers rechambered, followed by new designs (probably thinner), and eventually, PCC/PDW’s. The first example will likely have more barrel and slide mass than needed, tailored by recoil spring changes, then we’ll see innovation and tailoring in smaller pistols
 
Last edited:
Zone Five said:
The stated concern here is about a single engagement of a handful of rounds, not an infantry man’s worth of firefights during a World War. I grew up surrounded by WWII, Korea and Viet Nam vets, a number of which, but not all, experienced different levels of hearing loss.

Some of the posts in this thread intimate that one exposure is going to melt your brain and give you life long PTSD.

BTDT myself indoors at least a half dozen times (you probably have as well), along with many years of hunting shotguns and rifles outdoor without plugs, I can still hear just fine.

After decades of homeowners keeping shotguns at the ready for home defense without much thought, now we’re suddenly focused on excessive noise from a small caliber handgun round?

The other aspect is the focus on chamber pressures as causing excessive recoil. You want to show me the math on that? The 30SC launches a lighter or equal mass projectile at a slower velocity. How does that result in higher recoil forces that will cause rapid unplanned disassembly of a current 9mm platform that is chambered in 30SC?

Federal stated that the first products will be existing designers rechambered, followed by new designs (probably thinner), and eventually, PCC/PDW’s. The first example will likely have more barrel and slide mass than needed, tailored by recoil spring changes, then we’ll see innovation and tailoring in smaller pistols
Click to expand...

Again the objection by some of us is not long term hearing damage. The fear, that may or may not be reality with this particular cartridge, is that in the immediate time after shooting a handgun with no hearing protection and with extremely loud report, that you can have a near total lost of hearing. You usually recover nearly all of this hearing eventually but for minutes to hours after exposure to extreme sound levels you can temporarily loose your hearing. This loss of hearing in the immediate aftermath of a shooting puts you at a tactical disadvantage if the incident is not yet over.

As I have indicated before any gun I intend to carry I shoot at least once with unprotected ears. The only cartridge I have shot so far that has failed this test is 357 Magnum (not even going to try 44 Mag). I had significant temporary hearing lost for nearly an hour and ringing in my ears for the rest of that day due to the exposure to 357 Magnum. 380 ACP, 9mm, 40 S&W, 45 ACP and 38 Special and 455 Webley have all passed this test for me, its unpleasant, even panful with a few of those cartridges but no significant temporary hearing lost and ringing with any of them. Most rifles I have shot have been less abusive than 357 Magnum was, with the few that are worst (mostly my rifles with brakes) I wear electronic hearing protection while hunting with them.

The high chamber pressure of 30 Super Carry is the primary reason some of us think the report might be loud enough to cause the temporary deafness issue. Others have made well reasoned arguments why it might not be the case with this cartridge, low case volume etc. So I am still curious about this cartridge and will definitely try to rent or borrow one and see if I like it, shoot stuff with it, and even shooting it once or twice without hearing protect to see if it really is a cartridge I might carry.
 
mcb said:
Again the objection by some of us is not long term hearing damage. The fear, that may or may not be reality with this particular cartridge, is that in the immediate time after shooting a handgun with no hearing protection and with extremely loud report, that you can have a near total lost of hearing. You usually recover nearly all of this hearing eventually but for minutes to hours after exposure to extreme sound levels you can temporarily loose your hearing. This loss of hearing in the immediate aftermath of a shooting puts you at a tactical disadvantage if the incident is not yet over.

As I have indicated before any gun I intend to carry I shoot at least once with unprotected ears. The only cartridge I have shot so far that has failed this test is 357 Magnum (not even going to try 44 Mag). I had significant temporary hearing lost for nearly an hour and ringing in my ears for the rest of that day due to the exposure to 357 Magnum. 380 ACP, 9mm, 40 S&W, 45 ACP and 38 Special and 455 Webley have all passed this test for me, its unpleasant, even panful with a few of those cartridges but no significant temporary hearing lost and ringing with any of them. Most rifles I have shot have been less abusive than 357 Magnum was, with the few that are worst (mostly my rifles with brakes) I wear electronic hearing protection while hunting with them.

The high chamber pressure of 30 Super Carry is the primary reason some of us think the report might be loud enough to cause the temporary deafness issue. Others have made well reasoned arguments why it might not be the case with this cartridge, low case volume etc. So I am still curious about this cartridge and will definitely try to rent or borrow one and see if I like it, shoot stuff with it, and even shooting it once or twice without hearing protect to see if it really is a cartridge I might carry.
Click to expand...

I have read some discussions where people believe that the 357 mag's reputation as a fight stopper is in part to the massive muzzle blast and flash. In effect the target was basically hit with a flash bang which disorients the target
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcb
P Flados said:
I have posted some of this before, but the concern about muzzle blast keeps coming up. Folks seem to be speaking up but not looking into the issue very carefully.

When I first read about the 30 SC, my biggest initial concern about the new round was about excessive muzzle blast given the 50 ksi chamber pressure and my experience with the 327. To see how bad it would be, I ran the round through Quickload (using a stretched 32 ACP with thicker walls). Even though the round has a high chamber pressure, the pressure drops off very quickly and you end up with a muzzle pressure only slightly higher than the 9mm. The amount of powder is slightly less and when combined this would tend to indicate a similar muzzle blast. Both of these guns are mild compared to the 327. I re-ran some numbers for 4" barrels with what I consider comparable bullets:

Cartridge, bullet, charge range, velocity range and muzzle pressure range for top 5 loads at SAAMI limit for chamber pressure:
30 SC, 100 gr Hornady, 5.6 grs to 7.3 grs, 1324 fps to 1356 fps, 7404 psi to 8090 psi
9mm, 115 gr Hornady, 7.5 grs to 9.8 grs, 1297 fps to 1331 fps, 6931 psi to 7841 psi
327 Fed, 100 gr Hornady, 8.5 grs to 12.9 grs, 1431 fps to 1508 fps, 13458 psi to 17329 psi

Shortly after I ran my first Quickload evaluation, I read the American Rifleman article that includes "In terms of shooting experience, the new round is said to create perceived recoil similar to an equivalent-weight 9 mm Luger load and muzzle flash similar to 9 mm Luger."

Then I saw a video of a guy shooting the same gun in both 9mm and 30 SC with self defense type ammo (I wish I had saved a link). His comments were to the effect that he could not tell the difference in muzzle blast.
Click to expand...
That should not imply that 9 mm won't get your attention with its high frequency crack. I try to allow some distance from a 9mm shooter at the range, even with hearing protection. Of course, they are ejecting hot brass all over you too, if positioned to the wrong side.
 
BlueHeelerFl said:
I have read some discussions where people believe that the 357 mag's reputation as a fight stopper is in part to the massive muzzle blast and flash. In effect the target was basically hit with a flash bang which disorients the target
Click to expand...


As Kleanbore put it :
"that's absurd" :)
 
BlueHeelerFl said:
Here is a video from 22 Plinkster on the 30SC. While putting his ear pro on he does mention that the round is loud.

Click to expand...

Federal is going to need to sell direct like Hodgdon is now selling powder off their website. Otherwise, I think it is a long shot to expect dealers to stock it, until or unless there is a critical mass of guns out there.
 
RealGun said:
Federal is going to need to sell direct like Hodgdon is now selling powder off their website. Otherwise, I think it is a long shot to expect dealers to stock it, until or unless there is a critical mass of guns out there.
Click to expand...

Federal does sell direct to consumers. What they have varies, but in the past I ordered 380 Punch and 45 Colt ammo from them
 
I only had the attention span to read the first 6 pages but I am excited for this cartridge. I was going to buy a ruger max9 to go with my LC9s but I am going to wait and see if there will be a max30 with 12+1 capacity.

I live in the country and I like to carry a handgun in my pants pocket or jacket pocket when out working in the woods or out snowmobiling, camping, 4 wheeling, fishing, ect... I have a pistol range on my land and go empty a mag pretty much every time I walk by. My intended use is;

5% self defense from people,
5% self defense from black bear because I had a belligerent one I had to kill in my yard,
90% having a fun little pistol in my pocket to shoot at stuff when I feel like it. Having two more rounds worth of fun in the mag is a good thing.

This is what I would probably load in it assuming it would feed and meet OAL. Should be a very deep penetrator

https://www.gtbullets.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=9&products_id=93
 
Last edited:
someguy2800 said:
I only had the attention span to read the first 6 pages but I am excited for this cartridge. I was going to buy a ruger max9 to go with my LC9s but I am going to wait and see if there will be a max30 with 12+1 capacity.

I live in the country and I like to carry a handgun in my pants pocket or jacket pocket when out working in the woods or out snowmobiling, camping, 4 wheeling, fishing, ect... I have a pistol range on my land and go empty a mag pretty much every time I walk by. My intended use is;

5% self defense from people,
5% self defense from black bear because I had a belligerent one I had to kill in my yard,
90% having a fun little pistol in my pocket to shoot at stuff when I feel like it. Having two more rounds worth of fun in the mag is a good thing.

This is what I would probably load in it assuming it would feed and meet OAL. Should be a very deep penetrator

https://www.gtbullets.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=9&products_id=93
Click to expand...
I didn't see this gun as pocket carry or "little".
 
someguy2800 said:
I’m a big and tall sort. I know the max 9 is bigger and longer in the grip but I pocket carry an LC9s all the time.
Click to expand...
The LC9s stands 6 inches long, 4.5 inches tall and 0.9 inches wide, with a barrel length of 3.12 inches and unloaded weight of 17.2 ounces. The S&W Shield EZ weighs 23.6 oz unloaded with mag. It is 5.2 inches tall. Barrel length 3.675, overall 6.8. Capacity 12 tells you what to expect in grip length. The LC9s is a subcompact, i.e. a pocket gun candidate. The Shield EZ not so much. The M&P Shield Plus is much closer.

https://www.smith-wesson.com/subcategory/30-super-carry
 
Last edited:
RealGun said:
The LC9s stands 6 inches long, 4.5 inches tall and 0.9 inches wide, with a barrel length of 3.12 inches and unloaded weight of 17.2 ounces. The S&W Shield EZ weighs 23.6 oz unloaded with mag. It is 5.2 inches tall. Barrel length 3.675, overall 6.8. Capacity 12 tells you what to expect in grip length. The LC9s is a subcompact, i.e. a pocket gun candidate. The Shield EZ not so much. The M&P Shield Plus is much closer.

https://www.smith-wesson.com/subcategory/30-super-carry
Click to expand...

That’s great but you misunderstood me. I don’t want a shield, I want a ruger max 9 chambered in 30SC, presuming that they will make one. I don’t know if they will or not, but if they make it, I’ll buy it.
 
someguy2800 said:
That’s great but you misunderstood me. I don’t want a shield, I want a ruger max 9 chambered in 30SC, presuming that they will make one. I don’t know if they will or not, but if they make it, I’ll buy it.
Click to expand...
Max 9 looks good but fully loaded is near a pound a half, which sounds like a lot for carrying in a pocket. The double stack width would be quite a lump too. The LCP Max is 20% thinner as a single stack and half a pound lighter. Good luck, but I was just skeptical about this cartridge in existing platforms and expected to be a pocket carry.
 
RealGun said:
Max 9 looks good but fully loaded is near a pound a half, which sounds like a lot for carrying in a pocket. The double stack width would be quite a lump too. The LCP Max is 20% thinner as a single stack and half a pound lighter. Good luck, but I was just skeptical about this cartridge in existing platforms and expected to be a pocket carry.
Click to expand...

I have smaller guns for when I need to actually be concealed. I think the power factor would make this quite a handful in an LCP sized gun. It would be great I think if they made a 380 length 30 cal cartridge also for double stack micro pistols. I would be even more excited about that. Basically a 32 acp +p+
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

wcwhitey
If you were to design a new cartridge for concealed carry!
2 3 4 5
Replies
104
Views
4K
UncleEd
U
C
  • Locked
cal .40 Super - Feedback / comments?
Replies
24
Views
3K
TonyRumore
T
F
  • Locked
7.65 Browning vs. 32 ACP
2 3 4 5
Replies
113
Views
12K
rfwobbly
rfwobbly
J
  • Locked
You Asked for it, You Got It; .30 Super Carry.
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Replies
208
Views
13K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
R
  • Locked
Statistical Analysis of "Energy Transfer"
2 3 4 5
Replies
100
Views
7K
P95Carry
P
Back
Top