Why not a .50 carry cartridge?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Flechette

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
481
Right off the bat, I am NOT talking about carrying a .500 S&W for self defense. I am wondering why a cartridge like a .45 ACP is not increased in bore diameter and fired at similar velocities.

Imagine a 260 gr bullet, .499 inch diameter, 900 fps. It wouldn't kick much more than a normal .45 ACP but would be the largest bore diameter allowed by law.

Then put a good hollow point design and you might get a 0.7 inch hole in the target.
 
Bigger gun, more recoil, fewer shots, less ammo availability, unusual cleaning equipment requirements and the likelihood that you're not getting any practically significant benefit in terminal performance over other commonly available cartridges.
 
It's been done:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_GI

http://www.tactical-life.com/firearms/combat-test-gi-glock-21-50/

Keep in mind that with today's hollow point technology, you can get .7" expansion with a 9x19mm. Some modern .45 ACP loads expand to right at .9" in diameter.

"Designing a gun around a bullet is sort of like GE building the GAU-8/A Avenger Gatling Gun and then Fairchild Republic building the A-10 Warthog aircraft around it."

LOL! That is essentially what GE/Fairchild did, but I digress...

The .50 GI is very close to what I was thinking about (thanks!). However, it appears that it has only been used as a conversion cartridge. Like the A-10, someone needs to design a gun around it. :cool:
 
It seems like the .50 Action Express has been around a while. Not sure why it never really took off.:)
 
Right off the bat, I am NOT talking about carrying a .500 S&W for self defense. I am wondering why a cartridge like a .45 ACP is not increased in bore diameter and fired at similar velocities.

Imagine a 260 gr bullet, .499 inch diameter, 900 fps. It wouldn't kick much more than a normal .45 ACP but would be the largest bore diameter allowed by law.

Then put a good hollow point design and you might get a 0.7 inch hole in the target.

You already might get a 0.70 inch hole out of a good hollow point design.

Why not? Cost, ammo availability, grip size, capacity, likely marginal terminal benefit (at best) especially after accounting for capacity and recoil control/multiple shots...
 
Diminishing returns. You give up too much to gain little if anything in return.
By the time you scale the round to fit in a reasonably sized gun with manageable recoil,
You have the .50GI...which doesn't really offer much in effectiveness over a .45acp...which really doesn't offer much over a 9mm.

There is a limit to what can be reasonably accommodated in a practical defense auto handgun, and .45 in various calibers has pretty much established that upper limit.

Maybe a .50 Rowland, that would be interesting, but then you'd be out of the realm of practical concealed carry
 
The .50 GI and .500 Special* come to mind, though neither are real common for CCW.

* The one on the left is Special, the other is .500 Mag.

Ross-15.jpg
 
..........You have the .50GI...which doesn't really offer much in effectiveness over a .45acp...which really doesn't offer much over a 9mm....................

Wait, wait, I need to go to the store and get a bigger bag of popcorn. This is about to get interesting.:neener:
 
The .50 GI is very close to what I was thinking about (thanks!). However, it appears that it has only been used as a conversion cartridge. Like the A-10, someone needs to design a gun around it.

The .50 GI and the gun for it were designed by Guncrafter Industries. Although the pistol is of 1911 format, it is scaled, designed, and built around the cartridge. You can get a .45 conversion for the .50 GI, not vice versa. (They do offer a Glock 20/21 40/41 conversion if you want a half inch bullet on the cheap.)

I think Bowen will make you a .50 GI revolver in addition to the .50 Special but that is going to be a BIG gun.

I was under the impression that .50 was the largest legal diameter you could go

Bowen built a .577 Ruger but cannot sell it, there is no Sporting Exemption from the Destructive Device restrictions for an oversize revolver.
 
They do offer a Glock 20/21 40/41 conversion if you want a half inch bullet on the cheap.
Correct.

http://www.brownells.com/magazines/...i-conversion-system-for-glock--prod27083.aspx

It offers a great comparison to see what one gives up in capacity. The Glock 20 conversion comes with magazine that has an extended baseplate. With the extended baseplate, the converted pistol has a 9+1 capacity. For comparison, the Glock 20 in its native caliber with an extended baseplate would have a 17+1 capacity.

Unless each .50GI round offers twice the terminal effect of a 10mm round, that's clearly a losing proposition.

And, by the way, I forgot to mention ammo cost in my initial post. I didn't do a thorough survey of .50 GI ammo prices, but based on some quick checking, 50GI ammo will run you nearly double the cost of good quality self-defense 10mm ammo.

If you were converting a Glock 21, you'd lose only 4 or 5 rounds of capacity but the 50GI ammo cost would be nearly triple.
 
You could always search the auction sites for an LAR Grizzly or AMT Automag V in .50 Action Express.

LAR slapped the "Grizzly" name on everything from 1911-ish pistols to single-shot rifles, which makes searching by name a bit awkward...

Both are slightly larger than a 6" 1911.
 
Most would agree penetration is king, when you push a 50 Cal bullet the same velocity as a 45 cal, your ballistic coefficient goes in the crapper.
 
If enough folks would buy it, it would become available.
I can't see the need as .45 230s at 900 are enough to try to quickly overcome, and depending on the target, .45 Gold Dots are already at .7" & HSTs are usually closer to .875".
 
Correct.

http://www.brownells.com/magazines/...i-conversion-system-for-glock--prod27083.aspx

It offers a great comparison to see what one gives up in capacity. The Glock 20 conversion comes with magazine that has an extended baseplate. With the extended baseplate, the converted pistol has a 9+1 capacity. For comparison, the Glock 20 in its native caliber with an extended baseplate would have a 17+1 capacity.

Unless each .50GI round offers twice the terminal effect of a 10mm round, that's clearly a losing proposition.

And, by the way, I forgot to mention ammo cost in my initial post. I didn't do a thorough survey of .50 GI ammo prices, but based on some quick checking, 50GI ammo will run you nearly double the cost of good quality self-defense 10mm ammo.

If you were converting a Glock 21, you'd lose only 4 or 5 rounds of capacity but the 50GI ammo cost would be nearly triple.

It is the fact that the 10mm is a whole tenth of an inch (which is a lot) thinner that makes the conversion go from 17+1 rounds to 9+1. If the Glock was scaled up properly (grip made a little wider) then it should be able to hold 13+1.

If this round is to take off someone needs to bite the bullet (pun intended:p) and build a new gun around the cartridge rather than convert a gun designed for a skinnier cartridge.
 
If they made the grip any wider, very few people would have big enough hands to shoot it.

We have had over 100 years to develop a better combat pistol and caliber then the Colt 1911 in .45 ACP.

Many people, myself included, do not think a .50 pistol would in any way be an improvement.

Especially if you have to carry extra mags and ammo for it.

rc
 
Design it, build it, test it. Supply me with reloading dies and components for it. And I'll buy one for what I paid for my carry pistol in 45acp which is a 13+1 XD45.
 
Let's face it, .50 GI is the closest you're going to get.

There is simply not a market for what you're talking about, a pistol purpose built for this kind of cartridge.
 
It is the fact that the 10mm is a whole tenth of an inch (which is a lot) thinner that makes the conversion go from 17+1 rounds to 9+1.
Precisely. The bigger round means a smaller capacity if you keep external dimensions the same.
If the Glock was scaled up properly (grip made a little wider) then it should be able to hold 13+1.
Few people who have held a Glock 20/21, would be likely to comment that it should have a bigger grip, or to use the word "properly" in the context of scaling its grip up. :D

But yes, if you don't mind a larger grip then the capacity issue can be ameliorated somewhat. Heck, why stop at 13+1? Go ahead and make it a 17+1 to match the standard capacity of a Glock 17.

So that takes capacity out of the equation but now size and weight begin to figure into the equation in a big way. You never get something for nothing.
 
Oddly enough, Oklahoma prohibits concealed carry of handguns larger than .45 caliber.

"TITLE 21 § 1290.6 PROHIBITED AMMUNITION
Any concealed or unconcealed handgun when carried in a manner authorized by the provisions of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act and when loaded with any ammunition which is either a restricted bullet as defined by Section 1289.19 of this title or is larger than .45 caliber or is otherwise prohibited by law shall be deemed a prohibited weapon for purposes of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act. ...)"
 
.45 is already much bigger than optimal given modern ammo characteristics.

.50GI and any further development along that line is just "for fun because you can" territory, and would be completely unable to address any mass market appeal or need, because there is none.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top