My new dream CCW revolver that does not exist yet.

[mcb]

I want a 6-shot short-frame/cylinder J-frame chambered in the new 30 Super Carry. Cut for moonclips of course! Now that would be a handy if noisy little revolver. Something akin to the old S&W Terrier (an I-frame) in 32 S&W Long but in the new 30 Super Carry. But instead of steel I want a scandium-aluminum frame and titanium cylinder, it has got to weigh less than 12 oz unloaded, closer to 10 oz would be nice. It should be the same overall size of a 642/442 but with the shorter frame/cylinder it would have a ~2-3/8 inch barrel rather than a 1-7/8 inch barrel. Hammerless, double action only configuration is all I need. All black/gray finish like the 340 PD but with a pencil-thin barrel. Super low profile fixed sights.

 

[UncleEd]

.30 Super Carry was DOA.

You didn't get the memo?

 

[mcb]

.30 Super Carry was DOA.

You didn't get the memo?

I saw the memo but I am not sure I believe it, yet. I think 30 Super Carry (despite the bad name) has a chance. It has as much if not more of a chance than any handgun cartridge introduced since the 40S&W. For the all the reasons that 9mm is better than 40S&W; 30 Super Carry is better than 9mm (assuming terminal performance is acceptable a detail that needs more data). I like the concept of the cartridge with my only caveat being the pressure/report but that might not be an issue do to the small bore and case volume.

If the above revolver gets made I will very likely buy it and carry it. Once I have the gun, moderate supply of brass, and reloading dies the cartridge can't die for me despite what the market does. I am still hunting with a 30 Remington AR and that cartridge is deader than most obsolete cartridges and arguably was never as alive and widely accepted as 30 Super Carry already is.

 

[NeroM]

Like the concept, 12 ounces is going to be quite a handful when the shooting starts ?

 

[mcb]

Like the concept, 12 ounces is going to be quite a handful when the shooting starts ?

I have shot a 11.8 oz 357 Magnum and its was very unpleasant. I figure this is cartridge is going to have noticeable less recoil. I was shooting 125 gr bullet at roughly 1000 fps from the 357 Magnum. 30 Super Carry is a 100gr bullet at slightly higher velocity. Most are showing around 1250 fps but I suspect that is from a longer non-vented barrel. If 30 Super Carry does 1100 fps from a snub nose that is a 12% reduction is recoil base on bullet/velocity alone and its going to use less propellent to reducing recoil more. Its going to be snappy no doubt, but its going to be more pleasant to shoot that 357 Mag is a similar revolver and probably have better terminal performance that 38 Special +P and gets one more round in the same size cylinder.

 

[halfmoonclip]

For the OP, I've seen it argued that revolvers pick up some velocity while the bullet is still in the cylinder; something I've seen in some I've chronoed.
As regards recoil, shooting 1100'sec 115 9mm in a S&W 940, as compared to say, a .38 Spl in a 640, the 9mm has a noticeably sharper recoil. Now 147 gr 9mms feel pretty much like a .38....go figure.
Time will tell what a 30SC actually feels like in a small revo.
(Have an 11oz 340, and .357s are God's wrath in that thing!)
Moon

 

[BobWright]

Already found my "dream CCW piece."



Bob Wright

 

[mcb]

For the OP, I've seen it argued that revolvers pick up some velocity while the bullet is still in the cylinder; something I've seen in some I've chronoed.
As regards recoil, shooting 1100'sec 115 9mm in a S&W 940, as compared to say, a .38 Spl in a 640, the 9mm has a noticeably sharper recoil. Now 147 gr 9mms feel pretty much like a .38....go figure.
Time will tell what a 30SC actually feels like in a small revo.
(Have an 11oz 340, and .357s are God's wrath in that thing!)
Moon

Yeah when I was shopping for what became my S&W 442 purchase I tried some Gold Dot 357 Magnum in a friend's 340 PD. I cursed the gun and him for good measure. I think 30 SC in a revolver is going to be sharp but not as bad as that 340 PD. The big thing is, once I have the revolver, I can if needed reload it to a power level of my choosing. I want a six shot, short J-frame and one in 30 SC would allow me a huge pressure range to play with.

Already found my "dream CCW piece."

View attachment 1053140

Bob Wright

Pretty revolver and nice leather, but... as much as I love revolvers I am very much a modern revolver fan and I have little love for or use for single action revolvers. I own only one single action all the rest are double action or double/single action. If all my revolvers magically became double action only I would probably not even notice for quite some time. Moonclips don't work with side gate loading...

 

[mavracer]

Wouldn't have the short cylinder you're looking for but you could machine/ream a 327 Mag. If done properly you could still shoot 327 might be a little hard on brass.

 

[mcb]

Wouldn't have the short cylinder you're looking for but you could machine/ream a 327 Mag. If done properly you could still shoot 327 might be a little hard on brass.

This would be a close second in my book. More bulk due to the longer frame and cylinder but the added flexibility of being able to shoot 32 S&W Short and Long and 327 Federal Magnum.

 

[Tallball]

There's another thread with pictures of the LCR in 327 federal magnum.

 

[beag_nut]

Just for ha-ha's, this is the second recent thread which mentioned DOA. That means "dead on arrival". I believe what is wanted is DAO, "double action only".
Regarding the subject gun of this thread, I have shot an S+W with the lightweight frame, and no way I would get one of those blister-makers. But that's just me.

 

[mcb]

My current snubby is a S&W 442. 14.7 oz unloaded, even with +P loads I find it very manageable. I do think 30 SC in a similar or slighter lighter weight revolver is going to be more snappy but not 357 Mag snappy. I am interested enough to buy one and try it but I am not going to hold my breath waiting for S&W to make it.

 

[Monac]

.30 Super Carry was DOA.

You didn't get the memo?

I sure didn't. What did it say?

 

[TransAmConvert]

632?

I wish for an alloy K frame. Nothing fancy, just a 6 shot .357 K but lighter.

 

[somethingbenign]

I think you have a pretty good idea on your hands. Been holding off on jumping to moon clips but a 30SC could pull me over. I'll be holding off to see how the blast is out of an auto first. I'm not too terribly concerned considering my 327 revolvers don't bother me unless I'm dealing with a migraine or sinus infection. Be nice if one of the competitive scenes would adjust their rules to allow the smaller diameter and then I'd be looking for a larger revolver in whatever frame size it would take to get 8-10 shots as well.

 

[cfullgraf]

.30 Super Carry was DOA.

You didn't get the memo?

What memo?

A link please.

 

[.455_Hunter]

.30 Super Carry was DOA.

You didn't get the memo?

Yes- By social media influencers who are so emotionally and psychologically invested in the 9x19mm that the concept of a cartridge even potentially challenging it's "suprememess" is traumatizing.

I do agree that a .32 revolver with more pop than the underloaded .32 H&R, but not paint peeling like the .327, would be very interesting.

 

[mavracer]

Yes- By social media influencers who are so emotionally and psychologically invested in the 9x19mm that the concept of a cartridge even potentially challenging it's "suprememess" is traumatizing.

And it's hilarious. Apparently now hole size matters and a couple extra rounds with reduced recoil aren't the end all be all of importance.

 

[Stumper]

I don't consider the OP's dream a nightmare but my own similar dream differs a bit. I wish S&W would reintroduce the I frame as a 6 shot .32 H&R mag. I would like a 5 shot .38 S&W +P also but given the large numbers of old weak .38 S&W revolvers I don't think that is likely. Of course I want a snubby AND a 4 inch trail/kit gun. Somebody probably wants a 6 inch and a 3inch would tempt me greatly.

 

[Pudge]

I want a 6-shot short-frame/cylinder J-frame chambered in the new 30 Super Carry. Cut for moonclips of course! Now that would be a handy if noisy little revolver. Something akin to the old S&W Terrier (an I-frame) in 32 S&W Long but in the new 30 Super Carry. But instead of steel I want a scandium-aluminum frame and titanium cylinder, it has got to weigh less than 12 oz unloaded, closer to 10 oz would be nice. It should be the same overall size of a 642/442 but with the shorter frame/cylinder it would have a ~2-3/8 inch barrel rather than a 1-7/8 inch barrel. Hammerless, double action only configuration is all I need. All black/gray finish like the 340 PD but with a pencil-thin barrel. Super low profile fixed sights.

I think we're more likely to see what you're wanting to come from Ruger in the form of an LCR.

 

[mcb]

I think we're more likely to see what you're wanting to come from Ruger in the form of an LCR.

If I am going to have to buy a Ruger I think I would rather have it on an SP101, but I guess I could live with an LCR.

 

[Monac]

I don't consider the OP's dream a nightmare but my own similar dream differs a bit. I wish S&W would reintroduce the I frame as a 6 shot .32 H&R mag. I would like a 5 shot .38 S&W +P also but given the large numbers of old weak .38 S&W revolvers I don't think that is likely. Of course I want a snubby AND a 4 inch trail/kit gun. Somebody probably wants a 6 inch and a 3inch would tempt me greatly.

I thought the J-frame replaced the I-frame to give S&W a small-frame revolver with a cylinder long enough for 38 Special. 38 Special overall length is quoted as 1.550 inch; 32 Magnum is given as 1.350 inch. That's a difference of 0.2 inch, or .05 under 1/4 inch. Why bother to give up 38 Special capability for that?

No, if I wanted a purpose built 32 Magnum revolver, I would want it to be a 5-shot, which would give it a slimmer cylinder than a 5 shot 38 Special gun without much loss of cartridge power, at least as measured by kinetic energy.

Of course, I'd want it to be a top break with a Hopkins & Allen style frame catch, so you know I'm crazy!

Oh, and if I wanted a revolver for 38 S&W +P, what I would really want would be a revolver properly designed around 9mm Parabellum. By properly designed I mean with a short cylinder and an S&W Model 547 style extractor, so moon clips would not be needed (although it would also be easy to make a version with a simpler extractor that could use clips, for the people that like them). No top break here, I am willing to accept that 9mm Para might be too much for that.

 

[mcb]

I thought the J-frame replaced the I-frame to give S&W a small-frame revolver with a cylinder long enough for 38 Special. 38 Special overall length is quoted as 1.550 inch; 32 Magnum is given as 1.350 inch. That's 0.2 inch, or .05 under 1/4 inch. Why bother to give up 38 Special capability for that?

30 Super Carry is only 1.169 that would allow a frame and cylinder shorter than the original I-frame but I would settle for an I-frame size revolver. They could start making 9mm revolvers on the same short frame along with 32 S&W long and 38 S&W for the old school.

 

[Monac]

30 Super Carry is only 1.169 that would allow a frame and cylinder shorter than the original I-frame but I would settle for an I-frame size revolver. They could start making 9mm revolvers on the same short frame along with 32 S&W long and 38 S&W for the old school.

Oh, yes, that is fine. I was responding to Stumper, who wanted new I-frame style revolver with a cylinder just long enough for 32 Magnum. 30 Super Carry is a different animal, and more in line with my thinking about a properly designed 9mm Parabellum revolver, which we have never had.