.30 Super or .30 Luger? *read first post*

[Jim Watson]

A&O
I might consider the .30 Super CARRY for the extra shots in a CCW.
.30 Luger is an interesting novelty, along with things like 9mm Browning Long, the 1903 FN intrigues me.

 

[Gordon]

A&O
I might consider the .30 Super CARRY for the extra shots in a CCW.
.30 Luger is an interesting novelty, along with things like 9mm Browning Long, the 1903 FN intrigues me.

You would love my "long slide" 1907 Husky . It is like new but of course I got it early imported .380 . It was not 100% reliable in that caliber. Twenty years ago I looked and found on the early E bay a NEW in wraper 9mm Long barrel and spring for it . In 30 seconds it became a 9mm long as it was created and with surplus Swdish Norma ammo of the time was 100% reliabile , snappier and very accurate ! Six years ago bought a small stash cheaply of new PPU 9mm Browning Long . Can't bring my self yet to sell it .

 

[Jim Watson]

Yup. I saw one posted and went to the vendor. He had a couple left but had sold them by the time I debated with myself over buying.

I remember seeing spare barrels for sale and then thought about getting one in case a .380 conversion showed up... which it has not.

 

[tark]

I thought what about doing to 7.65 Parabellum what the Russians did to .30 Mauser; jack up the pressure and thus the power.

They did no such thing. The persistent myth that the 7.62X25 is loaded to higher pressures than the 7.63 Mauser is just that ; a myth. There was simply no reason to load it to higher pressures just to get a few more FPS. And the German loading was already red hot, it pushed that 85 Gr. bullet at 1575 FPS. ( Source: Small Arms of the World, by Smith & Smith. ) It was loaded down by American companies to 1410 FPS.

If the 7.62X25 ammo was loaded to pressures that would be unsafe for a C-96 to safely handle, I'm pretty sure there would be warnings on the box not to shoot it in a C-96.

I've never seen any.

 

[JohnMc]

They did no such thing. The persistent myth that the 7.62X25 is loaded to higher pressures than the 7.63 Mauser is just that ; a myth. There was simply no reason to load it to higher pressures just to get a few more FPS. And the German loading was already red hot, it pushed that 85 Gr. bullet at 1575 FPS. ( Source: Small Arms of the World, by Smith & Smith. ) It was loaded down by American companies to 1410 FPS.

If the 7.62X25 ammo was loaded to pressures that would be unsafe for a C-96 to safely handle, I'm pretty sure there would be warnings on the box not to shoot it in a C-96.

I've never seen any.

Good to know.

 

[Jeremy2171]

. Modern .30-06 will wreck a Garand,

No....it won't.

 

[GooseGestapo]

FWIW; I get ~1,550fps from a 110gr .308” bullet from my 7.5” Ruger .30Carbine. That’s with 15.2gr of H110, assorted brass, and a CCI Small rifle primer.

I get 1,300+ from a load of 6.6gr of LongShot under a 100gr Hornady XTP from the 3-3/4” S&W Sheild EZ in .30SuperCarry. Factory 100gr Federal HydroShok gets advertised 1,250fps, It’s very accurate as seen in my avatar.

The .30SC isn’t longer than a .45 or 10mm. It’s the same OAL as a 9mm, so easily fits a 9mm platform. Because it operates at acutely high pressures, it’s necessary to put it in a 9mmPara format.
I’m very fond of it and would buy a barrel, slide, and magazines for my 1911’s if I could get one for less than what my 4x4 pickup is worth…

 

[CapnMac]

Dunno, for me this is like the debates over 28 ga versus 32 ga--I don't have a dog in the hunt.

All the bottlenecked 30s had their place in the sun, if places that were hard to tell apart, one from the other. And, those runs were so definitive, we saw the 357sig try and refill the niche.

Then, we recently saw the 30SC, which is basically a more modern 8mm french long (briefly seen about a century ago as the 32pedersen).

Nearly every caliber has been made, once, at least. The "reasons" for each of them will get revisited, after enough time passes.

Frankly, I'm sore surprised no company has trotted out an 11x25 or 12x20, ignoring that the 11.3x23 has been around for at least a Century (longer if we squint a bit and see it as an outgrowth of the 45 schofield).

 

[Jim Watson]

I'm sore surprised no company has trotted out an 11x25 or 12x20

A guy on 1911forum was all enthused over a .44 Russian Auto but it foundered on the usual difficulty in getting an odd caliber barrel made.

 

[tark]

The Russians didn't care; the Germans used 7.65 Mauser in captured Russian guns (safe), while the Red Army didn't need to worry about the reverse AFAIK. Modern .30-06 will wreck a Garand, current European loads of 6.5x55 Swede can damage Swedish Mausers, etc.

Where did you get this information, because it is all wrong. The Russians didn't use captured 7.63 Mauser ammo in their Toks and PPSH41s...probably because there wasn't very much around. The Germans had ditched the Mauser round in 1908 when they adopted the Luger and the 9X19 round. Using the Mauser round in captured Russian weapons was also unlikely for the same reasons.

As Jeremy 2171 has stated, correctly, Modern 30-06 ammo will not wreck a Garand. Just keep bullet weights 165 Gr. or under.

And European loaded 6.5 X 55 ammo is loaded to the same pressures it always was. There are too many Swedish Mausers still in use that shoot the stuff just fine. As you can see in the pic, they were ( are ) pretty tough guns.

 

[TTv2]

Dunno, for me this is like the debates over 28 ga versus 32 ga--I don't have a dog in the hunt.

All the bottlenecked 30s had their place in the sun, if places that were hard to tell apart, one from the other. And, those runs were so definitive, we saw the 357sig try and refill the niche.

Then, we recently saw the 30SC, which is basically a more modern 8mm french long (briefly seen about a century ago as the 32pedersen).

Nearly every caliber has been made, once, at least. The "reasons" for each of them will get revisited, after enough time passes.

Frankly, I'm sore surprised no company has trotted out an 11x25 or 12x20, ignoring that the 11.3x23 has been around for at least a Century (longer if we squint a bit and see it as an outgrowth of the 45 schofield).

I think the reason a .43 or .47 caliber semi pistol has never been made is it doesn't offer much more than what 10mm and .45 already do and I doubt capacity would be increased at all. These would suffer a fate worse than the .45 GAP, which, while unpopular, had two major things going for it: it was created and supported by Glock and it was a .45 caliber.

It's tough to get any interest in new handgun calibers going, probably easier with revolvers that can build off parent cases like .327 does. 5.7 and .357 Sig are some of the newer ones that have been around long enough to build a following and the .357 Sig is fading due to ammo cost, while 5.7 is gaining popularity due to cheaper pistol options now being available and the appeal of increased ammo capacity and low recoil.

Where .30 Super is going to go, who knows. It can't go anywhere if the only two pistols available for it are the Shield EZ and a Nighthawk.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

I'd rather see Ruger offer an LCP II in .32 ACP.

 

[golden]

I would vote for neither!

I have not shot the .30 Super Carry, but the published ballistics equal the 9m.m., so recoil will be the same. I have shot the .30 Luger and the reduction in recoil is small.

When the .30 Super Carry came out, I was curios and read several articles about it. For me, it was a no-go .

I would like a caliber with distinctly LESS RECOIL than the 9m.m. has. With the 100 grain HST, you get +p+ velocities, so no reduction in recoil. In the 115 grain Gold Dot, you duplicate 9m.m. standard pressure loads. I can already get this level of performance AND RECOIL in the 9m.m. for much less money.

None of the .30 Super Carry pistols are any smaller than their 9m.m. micro pistol counterparts, so what is the advantage?
Yes, I know I can get 2 extra rounds, but I get even more by using a pistol with a dual stacked magazine like the SIG 365.

What I want in my SIG 365 is the same size and LESS RECOIL, but more performance than the .380ACP version of the 365. I use 9m.m. HORNADY Lite 100 grain ammo in my SIG 365 and it is still a handful.
If this is not a problem for you, good, but that does no help me. As I get older, by ability to deal with recoil is getting less and less. I sold off my .44 and .41 magnums and .45ACP and 10 m.m. handgun. I now max out at an L-frame or GP-100 in .357 magnum or a full or medium size .40 S&W like BERETTA 96, SIG 229 or STOEGER 8040 (BERETTA 8040 COUGAR clone).
I would love to see a modern version of the 9m.m. ULTRA/POLICE brought out. It would work in a blowback like the SIG 232 or WALTHER PP or BERETTA 84 giving you more performance than a .380ACP without worrying about a load being over-pressure or in a small 9m.m. pistol like the SIG 365 and the many other micro 9m.m.

I think S&W proved that there could be a market for pistols like this with their EZ line. I know that many people have bought them and even dedicated .38 Special snub nose carrier have gone to the EZ with no regrets.
I have shot the 9m.m. POLICE and it has heavier recoil than the .380ACP, but I think there enough of a gap in the recoil level between the .380ACP and 9m.m., neither the .30 Super Carry or .30 Luger offer this.

To me, the .30 Super Carry should have been closer to the old .32 H&R magnum load that was a distinct step down from the .38 Special recoil.

Jim

 

[P5 Guy]

I thought the 30 SC sounded familiar.

 

[Mosin77]

.30 Luger because it’s my understanding that .30 Super is basically 9mm recoil level. Whereas I hear (not from personal experience unfortunately) that .30 Luger is a delight to shoot.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I only recently began playing with .30 SC in a Shield EZ, a likeable compact gun.

Primary reason was to see how the round does suppressed, which it unfortunately proved to have a pretty significant sonic crack. Not as offensive as supersonic 9mm loads, but enough that there's no point in developing a new .32 can around it. The EZ also unfortunately cannot handle much rigid mounted weight, requires a booster with suppressors over 3 ounces to run reliably.

Anyway, as far as .30 Luger vs .30 SC, unless the gun itself is a Luger, that's really a no-brainer. Hopefully we'll see more options for the .30 SC in both compact and full size pistols. A 9mm pistol which takes 17-18 9mm rounds could hold 22-24 .30 SC rounds.

 

[TTv2]

.30 Luger because it’s my understanding that .30 Super is basically 9mm recoil level. Whereas I hear (not from personal experience unfortunately) that .30 Luger is a delight to shoot.

That's probably because all the .30 Luger pistols are larger and heavier while the Shield EZ is lighter and smaller.