What To Do With A New Ammo ?

[Semper Fidelis]

Hello,

I have to react to the OP named "30 Super Carry vs. 9mm" ( https://www.texasguntalk.com/threads/30-super-carry-vs-9mm.123552/ ) that like said benenglish expected "non-serious answers intended to be funny", but please take the time to read because her "will be serious answers".

As a gun designer, when you want to create a NEW gun (not a 1911’s custom), and make the best one of its kind, the first think you have to do is to choose the right ammo for it (HOW TO CHOSE AN AMMO). Then, you will decide how will have to work your new gun around this ammo. Remember, the ammo is the center of your mechanism’s world.

In the past, meaning around the 70’s the 308 was "wildcatted" a lot. How many "new" brass bottoms have a 12mm diameter ? Many ! Why ? Because it is so simple to cut an existing brass base, and most of the time the simplest way is the cheapest way too. If I do not mistake, even the 44 AutoMag is based on a 308. Wildcat ammos are fun and some are ballistically very interesting. Remember, the 223 was a wildcat. (BETWEEN CREATIVITY AND ORDER) The 222 too. The 223 was adopted by the Army, and the 222 by some sharpshooters. Witch one is the best and witch one is the cheapest ? Got it ? OK maybe not, let me explain.

Developing a new ammo is as interesting as expensive. Money is the sinews of war. Once an investor (like the Army) choose an ammunition, this one will be developed. See today the 6.8 ! All the others will stay kind of "wildcat ammo" for curious and relics enthusiasts. The army is probably the best contributor for new market. It choose a new ammo, a new weapon, it will be filmed, being in a movie, into video games and at the end some guys will enter a gun shop and asking for it. Good deal.

Some creators (I immediately think about CheyTac) are brave enough to developpe a brand-new ammo, like in this case 408 then 375, for a very specific application (very long range precision shooting). How much those calibers had costed to be developed ? There is only two possible answers… A LOT or TOO MUCH FOR YOU !

In the 90’s, I was thinking about a powered smaller as 9mm ammo. Then, for a pistol to carry, having a 30 cal could be interesting but 32ACP was to small and 30 Carbine to big. Having a PHD is not needed to get a quick solution. I’ve cuted the 30 Carbine brass and putted a 32ACP projectile on it. The fact is that the brass was thicker than necessary, but it was a prototype. Looking at the 30 Super Carry specs and at my 30yo prototype, it look pretty much the same.

My mentor in carabine shooting told me "one thing at the time". Having a new gun with a new ammo, and why not with a new color, will be hard to introduce into the market… Except if the Army decide to take it. As an inventor, everyday I have to fight with my self to develop new guns on "good old existing ammo". As an innovation lover, I’ll buy a new gun using a new ammo with 4 mags and 1’000 rounds, just in case. (Like buying Bitcoin 20 years ago)

Let’s talk about new guns. In 1982 started Glock. If you are old enough to have been curious at this time, you should remember that it was difficult to remove a loaded mag because of the plastic, the recoil spring axis brock, the percussion on the primer did not work always. Those are youthful defects. Today, how many Glocks are not functioning like they should ? Not a lot, but 40 years after the first one.

With a new ammo like the 30 Super Carry (and many others), you should ask your self at what point you are motivated to participate at an 1:1 scale developing period just because YOU BELIEVE IN IT ?! And how much you are ready to afford for it ?


HOW TO CHOSE AN AMMO

As a manufacturer
the list is short and looks like this :

22lr
9Para
357Mag
44Mag
45ACP
223
308
338
50
PERIODE !

The next on the list will probably be the 6.8.


As an Army
You should ask the manufacturer and listen to him !!! (NO COMMENT)

As a precision shooter
You should take the best projectile to fly for the range you will shoot, then the "engine" understanding the brass needed for the power, then the twist… And enjoy shooting !

As a hunter
You should take the right ammo to stop the game you will face.

As a civilian for your protection/response power
You should take the gun you do feel comfortable with (even if it is an old revolver). Pay attention, comfortable do not means "I want a 44mag", it means the one you feel naturally good for a safe handling and easy carrying, remembering that it is 3 shots, 3 meters, 3 seconds, no more is needed.


BETWEEN CREATIVITY AND ORDER
I recently answered the USSOCOM. Their wanted specs had no practical logic and many small arms factories in the US (I did not say industries), would love to realize something just to have their name on the list. They would make a crap with no innovation, and finally probably just useless.


CONCLUSION
I do hope this OP will help you to decide what to do and what to choose, knowing that today, for many reasons, I do hope that the 30 Super Carry will finally take place into my "manufacturer’s ammo list" because civilians like you showed in 2024 that they trusted it, even if it was at the time much more expensive than other ammos.

Best regards from Switzerland !

Simper Fidelis

 

[V-Tach]

It was marketed to new shooters when demand was high. New shooters didn't know anything about 30SC. It wasn't because they chose it over 9mm.........

jmho...

guess we need a 30SC forum afterall................ @zackmars

 

[zackmars]

It was marketed to new shooters when demand was high. New shooters didn't know anything about 30SC. It wasn't because they chose it over 9mm.........

jmho...

guess we need a 30SC forum afterall................ @zackmars

Tbh i don't know if this would fit in my brand new, 100% real subforum. After i post this reply and chuck a 1911 at a pile of rocks I'll decide.


To op, there's a million and one cartridges out there, and each one of those cartridges has a million and one reasons why and a million and one reasons why not. You aren't always starting with a gun, sometimes you're given the cartridge and told to build the gun around it (.30 carbine), sometimes you build a gun around a COTS cartridge, but the guys who want the rifle (but they really dont) decide they want something a little different (5.56). Sometimes you have a cartridge that works perfectly fine (.30-06), but it just doesn't play well with certain firearm features so you shrink it down a bit to work better (.308). Sometimes you want to tread new ground, and your competition wants a piece of the pie but doesn't want to use your name on their gun (colt vs s&w, marlin vs winchester).

I would also like to point out that if the military listened to the manufacturers, we wouldn't have 9mm, which came about because the Germans and the US weren't impressed by the 7.63 mauser, nor would we have .223 without the gov't moving the goal posts during the adoption of the M16

We wouldn't have .357 or .44 mag without Elmer Keith blowing up tons of revolvers and harassing S&W and Remington to make guns and ammo in those calibers.

Without gov't designing the .30-06, we wouldn't have .50bmg or .308.

 

[Moonpie]

Like most endeavors in life you think you’re blazing a new trail but if you look down you’ll see a rather well beaten path.
All told there are probably over a thousand different cartridges out there.
Someone beat you to it. The vast majority didn’t catch on.
IMO the 30SC is just the latest fad. A few years from now it will be relegated to the dust bin of history. Why? It just doesn’t do anything that much better than what is already out there.
You mentioned costs. Your point is valid but one factor you should consider is that most shooters are cheapskates. They do not have unlimited budgets like a military. Many of the most popular cartridges today started life as military. Surplus ammo was cheap and available. This led to lots of guns produced to fire that ammo. These guns filtered out into the hands of your average Joe shooter who used them and was happy. And still is. Joe isn’t going to rush out and buy new shiny unless it works much better than what he already has.
For example: 6.5 Creedmore vs. 270 Winchester.
Sure, there is always the gun nerd crowd that will try new stuff but they are limited in numbers. Not enough to make a new cartridge a commercial success. Just for fun look at the very long line of propriety cartridges Winchester has produced that are now forgotten.
A new and unique cartridge MUST be very low cost now to catch on in a crowded market. Cheap military surplus ammo has gone the way of the passenger pigeon thanks to paranoid governments.

 

[TEXAS "All or nothing"]

Many have gone the way of the dodo for sure for many and untold reason(s)(ing). Technology plays a part also on what gets changed/updated. OR, it's Army vs Navy vs AF vs Marines on what they want (military standpoint), but military doesn't always know best. BA's are the easy designs along with shotguns, but AR style weapons need reliability over function/design and done with a bad moa requirement as not intended to be a precision rifle. So, I'd go/start with cartridge design 1st to meet requirements. Shrinking of the 30-06 to the 308win ended up being about weight and yet wooden stocks were still used. Military cuts weight in 1 way only to add weight elsewhere (more ammo, body armor, night vision and the list continues). 9mm and 45acp have been a fad for decades before 38spl and 357mag were and way more before 44mag, 40s&m and 10mm. People are cheap and want to shoot with the lowest cost possible when it comes to plinking (I feel included in that statement). Mil-surp drives the market on new to firearms. Too much typing for me right now, continue later.

 

[zackmars]

Many have gone the way of the dodo for sure for many and untold reason(s)(ing). Technology plays a part also on what gets changed/updated. OR, it's Army vs Navy vs AF vs Marines on what they want (military standpoint), but military doesn't always know best. BA's are the easy designs along with shotguns, but AR style weapons need reliability over function/design and done with a bad moa requirement as not intended to be a precision rifle. So, I'd go/start with cartridge design 1st to meet requirements. Shrinking of the 30-06 to the 308win ended up being about weight and yet wooden stocks were still used. Military cuts weight in 1 way only to add weight elsewhere (more ammo, body armor, night vision and the list continues). 9mm and 45acp have been a fad for decades before 38spl and 357mag were and way more before 44mag, 40s&m and 10mm. People are cheap and want to shoot with the lowest cost possible when it comes to plinking (I feel included in that statement). Mil-surp drives the market on new to firearms. Too much typing for me right now, continue later.

The switch from .30-06 to .308 had 2 main factors

#1, you could not get .30-06 to function reliably in a detachable magazine in a firearm that had a fast cyclic rate like the M1/M14. The BAR had a reliable magazine, but the bolt speed on the M1918 even at its highest possible rate of fire was much slower than the M1's.

#2 the M2 ball cartridge was ballisticaly inefficient and could be shortened with little to no loss in velocity or bullet weight, this also made it easier to design a reliable magazine.

There was also hope that the M14 and M15 would replace everything, the M1919, M1918, M1 Garand, M1 carbine, and the M3 grease gun, so i wouldn't be shocked if cutting 12mm of case maybe gave them some false confidence in the rifle and cartridge.