Carbine ballistics question...

[seeker_two]

Does anyone have the ballistic numbers (or know where to find them) for the following calibers when fired from carbines?...

9mm 115gr. FMJ
.22Mag 40gr. FMJ
.30 Carbine 110gr. FMJ

The main things I need are the velocity & energy for each at 100 & 200 yds. as well as the drop in trajectory for each.

Many thanks in advance...

 

[Preacherman]

Seeker, your best bet is to check out ammunition companies' catalogs and/or Web sites. These will provide ballistic information on their cartridges at various ranges (velocity, energy, bullet rise/drop from zero range, etc.). The Remington website has a particularly useful ballistics calculator, which you can see here online, or download your own version to your home computer. However, I haven't found any of these sites that cater to 9mm. in carbines - only handguns. If you look at (say) .357 Magnum or .44 Magnum in rifles and in handguns on the Remington site, and compare ballistics for the same round in each platform, this will give you a basis for comparison. If (say) these rounds are on average 20% "hotter" out of a carbine than a handgun, you could apply the 20% factor to the 9mm. handgun ballistics and get a pretty fair idea of the difference a carbine might make. However, you'd have to test this on the range to be sure...

An example from the Remington Web site, using their 275gr. .44 Magnum Core-Lokt round:

HANDGUN (6½" barrel):

Velocity: Muzzle 1235; 50 yd. 1142; 100 yd. 1070 fps
Energy: Muzzle 931; 50 yd. 797; 100 yd. 699 fpe
Trajectory: 50 yd. 0.8"; 100 yd. 3.3" (presumably, this is bullet drop from a 25-yard zero, although the handgun chart doesn't specify this).

CARBINE (20" barrel):

Velocity: Muzzle 1580; 100 yd. 1293; 200 yd. 1093; 300 yd. 976; 400 yd. 896; 500 yd. 832 fps
Energy: Muzzle 1524; 100 yd. 1020; 200 yd. 730; 300 yd. 582; 400 yd. 490; 500 yd. 422 fpe
Trajectory: 50 yd. +1.4"; 100 yd. (zero) 0.00"; 150 yd. -6.6"; 200 yd. -19.4"; 250 yd. -39.2"; 300 yd. -67.5"; 400 yd. -210.8"; 500 yd. -280.8".

This example shows a gain in velocity of about 21% and in energy of about 46% at 100 yards for the same round when fired from a carbine rather than a handgun. Other rounds will probably show slightly different figures. I'd suggest you use all three manufacturers' Web sites and/or catalogs to get a broad range of figures, take an average for each round (of equivalent bullet weight, for example), and you'd have a rough idea of overall performance. You could then apply this to any of the rounds you asked about that don't have specific information on the tables for handgun/carbine performance. However, your only sure bet is to chronograph your own loads' performance and calculate from there. Have fun!

 

[cratz2]

In regards to the 9mm in a carbine, I'd be willing to bet that you will see substantially less increase in velocity than in Preacherman's example with the 44 Magnum. I might almost believe that it would be no faster or possibly even slower than out of a 5" handgun. Of course, with a longer sight radius, I'm sure you could hit better with a carbine than a Beretta at 100 yards.

Regarding the 22 Magnum - I've shot plenty of 22 Magnum, probably more than any centerfire rifle. Granted, I've never done any chrono work or anything like that, but real world shooting, you're not going to cause tremendous damage to anything at 200 yards. I do mostly close in work so I have mine zeroed at 75 yards and at 150 yards, I hold over about 2 inches. My cheapie Marlin 882SSV rifle groups at about 2.5" at 100 yards with Winchester Premium ammo. According to Winchester's page, the remaining energy at 100 yards is only 155 ft/lbs so at 200 yards, it's probably somewhere just under 100. Really, an extremely well placed shot in the eye of an adversary would no doubt slow him down quite a bit, but other than that, you should probably wait until he gets a lot closer.

No experience with the 30 Carbine other thay plinking. Neat gun, M1 Carbine... kinda poor cartridge.

 

[Matthew_Q]

well, as for the .30 carbine... it's way underrated.

It can pack more energy at 100 yards than a .357 at the muzzle.


The problem with the .30 Carbine that gave it a bad name, is that it penetrates, but doesn't 'knock down' a target (bad guy, enemy soldier) well. Use a soft point or soft hollow point, and voila, problem solved. Much greater wounding capacity.

 

[DMK]

Some interesting info on the 9mm here:

http://members.aol.com/fourn6/camp95.html

Obviously slower burning powders will perform better in a longer barrel so YMMV depending on the ammo used.

 

[Preacherman]

Thanks for the link, DMK. I've copied over some tests with 9mm. from a Ruger P85 pistol and a Marlin Camp 9 carbine, and calculated the energies using the Remington online calculator linked above:

CCI Blazer 115 gr FMJ:
P85 - 1165 fps (=347 fpe); Carbine - 1274 fps (=414 fpe); velocity increase 9.4%; energy increase 19.3%.

Rem UMC yellow box 115 gr FMJ:
P85 - 1089 fps (=303 fpe); Carbine - 1229 fps (=386 fpe); velocity increase 13%; energy increase 27.4%.

Handload 6.0 gr HS-6 115 gr cast lead rn:
P85 - 1031 fps (=271 fpe); Carbine - 1264 fps (=408 fpe); velocity increase 23%; energy increase 50.5%.

Cor Bon +p 115 gr:
P85 - 1311 fps (=439 fpe); Carbine - 1482 fps (=561 fpe); velocity increase 13%; energy increase 27.8%.

Georgia Arms +p 124 gr:
P85 - 1220 fps (=410 fpe); Carbine 1377 fps (=522 fpe); velocity increase 13%; energy increase 27.3%.

Looks like, as a rule of thumb, for the examples cited on that Web site, the energy increases just over 2% for every 1% of velocity increase. I notice, too, that the two +P rounds referenced are pushed well into .357 Magnum handgun territory (at least for muzzle velocity and energy) by the extra length of the carbine barrel - not too shabby...

 

[cratz2]

OK... so I was wrong about the 9mm stuff in carbines.

I'd be willing to bet that with enough playing around with bullet weights and slower powders, you could get some pretty impressive results out of a 9mm carbine.

 

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

I concur with Matthew on the .30 Carbine as a sleeper. In my .30 Blackhawk it is pretty lively, especially with a dose of 4227 and a FNHP in front of it. With H110 on a hot, humid day is makes a day at the range exciting for those on either side of you and it controlls pesky mosquitoes as well with the muzzle flash.

The same loads are great in a GI carbine, btw.


Regards,
Rabbit.

 

[Sven]

Where is this jonesing for a .30 Carbine Blackhawk revolver coming from? I better go see a doctor.

 

[Bobarino]

Kel-Tec has a ballistics chart for their 16" barrelled Sub 2000 for 9mm. they claim about 1600fps with 115 gr +P. i'll post the actual figure from their manual in a few hours. i don't have it with me here at work.

Bobby

 

[Bobarino]

ok a little later than i planned but here's what the 9mm Sub 2000 ballistics chart says.

115gr FMJ: 1350 fps, 430 ft/lbs at the muzzle
sights zeroed for 100yds give about 2.5 inches high at 60 yards. at 200 yards the drop is about 27 inches. about 300 ft/lbs at 100 yards, 210 ft/lbs at 200 yards.

115gr JHP +P: 1520 fps, 590 ft/lbs at the muzzle
zeroed for 100yds give about 2 inches high at 60 yards
200 yard drop is about 23 inches. about 350 ft/lbs at 100 yards and 220 ft/lbs at 200 yards.

these are Kel-Tec's figures, not mine, so no hootin' and hollerin' at me that i'm wrong.

Bobby

 

[Art Eatman]

The standard for the GI Carbine is a 110-grain bullet at 1,900 to 2,000 ft/sec.

I disremember if it's Speer or Hodgdon, but there's a .357 load listed that shows a 110-grain bullet at around 1,800 or better, from a six-inch barrel...I noticed a bit of muzzle flash.

Art

 

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

Speer makes a FNHP that weighs 110 grains. It'll expand in a coyote at M1 carbine velocities pretty easily. Sven, I saw that. I took my Blackhawk to the range last weekend and frightened folks who were shooting a 629 on the other end of the line. They thought from the blast it was one of those 'new .500 Magnums' but then these guys' tattoes wern't spelled correctly.

It did help out on mosquito eradication, by the way.

Regards,
Rabbit.