completely theoretical handgun idea

[mr.trooper]

I like the concept of the FN 5-7, but hate the idea of its costly proprietary ammo.

I got to thinking tonight... the 30 carbine is about the same base diameter as the 5.7x28, and the maximum overall length is only slightly longer. Maximum chamber pressure is actually 10,000 PSI lower, and it generates 4 times as much kinetic energy.

I CAN see why it would be problematic to try and re-chamber a 5.7 for the 30 carbine round.

What I CANT see is why a factory built clone hasn't been made yet.

A gun the size, magazine capacity, and weight of a 5-7, but with LOWER operating pressures and ammo cost is feasible, but nobody has tried it yet?

 

[Quiet]

AMT Automag III (.30Carbine)

 

[1911Tuner]

.30 Carbine ammo fired in a pistol or a revolver is LOUD!

 

[mr.trooper]

haha, yea Im aware of the AMT automag.

I was referring to using the 30 carbine cartridge in a more modern auto pistol design. The AMT is a single stack, 1911 inspired design, but the cartridge seems a prime candidate for a modern design.

 

[roscoe]

.22 mag pistol seems closer. The old .22 mag Grendel with the 30-round mags seemed cool, but I have never shot one. If someone made steel-core ammo, I bet it would do a lot of what the 5.7 is designed for.

 

[mr.trooper]

The Grendel was indeed a unique piece, but mags are worth their weight in gold, and they are FUGLY as all get out.

 

[RyanM]

The length of the grip on that thing seems reason enough to not try it again.

Also, the veritable dearth of modern, double stack 7.62x25mm Tokarev firearms tells you how interested most people are in high-velocity .30 caliber pistols. Or at least how interested the pistol companies are in making them.

 

[Majic]

The AMT is a single stack, 1911 inspired design, but the cartridge seems a prime candidate for a modern design.

There is no real modern design. Most pistols made today are based off the 1911's basic design and operation. Materials used may be new today but the basic concept in operation is still 100 years old.

 

[RyanM]

There is no real modern design. Most pistols made today are based off the 1911's basic design and operation. Materials used may be new today but the basic concept in operation is still 100 years old.

Eh? If you mean the Browning tilt-barrel recoil action, perhaps.

Other than that, I look at 9 out of 10 "modern" pistols and I see:

*No locking lugs, chamber hood and ejection port instead
*Full length recoil spring guide rod
*No seperate barrel bushing
*Machined slot in the barrel tilty whatchamacallit instead of a swinging link
*External extractor tensioned with a coil spring, instead of a self-tensioned internal extractor
*No "controlled feed" (though still controlled Mauser-style feeding rather than push-feed) the round briefly "jumps" from the magazine to the extractor
*One-piece feed ramp integral to the barrel
*Striker fired, or has a firing pin that's retained by a pin under the rear sight, rather than a backplate

Really, the 1911's "basic design and operation" survives only inasmuch as today's pistols are still recognizable as magazine-fed semi-automatic reciprocating slide pistols. And you can hardly credit the 1911 with that.

As to whether the above changes have resulted in a truly "modern" pistol, well... ask 10 different 1911 fanatics what internal parts you should use for maximum reliability, and you get 10 completely different answers, and usually all of them are a confusing hodgepodge of manufacturers. Ask the same of 10 Glock, SIG, Kahr, XD whatever kool-aid drinkers, and what happens? They all say to go 95-100% OEM, for reliability (me, I'd say heavier recoil spring if it's a .40 and everything else OEM).