.30supercarry
- Thread starter redram99
- Start date
Round capacity is a huge selling point. It's one of a few features that close a sale, or don't. If you can make a compact that carries more rounds than anyone in a compact length magazine, your product is going to generate a lot of interest.
nick112288
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2017
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 3
For those who have invested in 30 Super Carry, I just noticed last night that there is a rebate currently going on.
Covers Federal, Speer, Blazer, and Remington brand 30 Super Carry.
Covers Federal, Speer, Blazer, and Remington brand 30 Super Carry.
MPWhite
US Veteran
I tried one today out at the range, and while it was fun to play with, I too will have to give this one a total PASS. It's only plus is the extra rounds it holds over the .380 Shield EZ that I use as a carry some of the time. The bullet is just not that much better than being a bit more powerful than the .380 but not as powerful as the 9mm Shield it just does not really fit that well between the two.
I do not see where I would be better with it, than with either of the other two which I already own. Now, if I did not have the .380 and the 9mm then I would for sure give it better marks; as the current cost for the ammunition would not matter. I am sure the price of ammunition will drop as others manufacture in the .30 to be able to compete in this new segment of the market.
I do not see where I would be better with it, than with either of the other two which I already own. Now, if I did not have the .380 and the 9mm then I would for sure give it better marks; as the current cost for the ammunition would not matter. I am sure the price of ammunition will drop as others manufacture in the .30 to be able to compete in this new segment of the market.
Model 15-4ever
Member
As I posted above some months ago, I've had two of these guns since they first came out. I think the .30 Super Carry is a very useful cartridge: less recoil and slightly more capacity than 9mm, and reasonable power for a defensive cartridge. Reloading for it is easy.
I'm also a .32 nut, so it also appeals to me on a subjective level. But having said all that, I think the cartridge is going to be dead sooner than later. It failed to gain traction initially for a number of reasons, and that window is long closed:
1. Ammuniton Crisis. It was introduced in the middle of the worst ammunition crisis in our lifetimes, when shooters, hunters and gunsumers could not obtain existing calibres. This did nothing to endear itself to the market, and highlighted the of arrogance of the Vista Outdoors domestic ammunition monopoly.
2. Limited Firearm Selection. It lacked wide-spread industry acceptance, as only one manufacturer chambered guns for it (Niche Nighthawk does not count). If you did not care for MIM-laded S&W plasticated autos, you weren't looking twice at .30 Super Carry.
3. Pricing. For a new cartridge trying to gain traction, the ammunition was grossly overpriced. Even as 9mm ammunition became available and the prices dropped (largely due to imports btw), .30 Super Carry range ammo was considerably more expensive than 9mm. When you are looking at two calibres at the sales counter - in otherwise identical guns - and the ammunition for one is 50% more than the price of the other, nearly every gunsumer (the majority buyer) is picking the cheaper ammo.
4. Cranky Old Farts. Curmudgeons - of all ages - that don't care for anything that upsets their personal world-view, pooped all over .30 Super Carry as "not doing anything my (Insert favorite cartridge/gun) already does". Well guess what, that is true of the majority of cartridges of all types, as there is massive overlap in practical capability. If you were a dictator and solely interested in Soviet-style utility, you could eliminate 90-95% of all cartridges on the market. While that isn't the point of either the shooting industry or the community, the Cranky Old Fart argument did influence a number of people to not even consider the .30 Super Carry.
5. Marketing Debacle. Finally... the marketing was terrible. Incredibly bad timing, and even the YouTube shills they had pushing it looked pained to be involved with it.
If Vista had waited a year or two until the ammo crisis eased and the gun-buying market cooled down somewhat, lined up more manufacturing partners, and put the ammo out at attractive prices, it would have gotten more traction.
Vista right now is having a refund offer which is three for the price of two: essentially 33% off. On my checking, this brings the .30 Super Carry ammo down to cheaper than domestic 9mm, and within $2/box of imported 9mm.
A very good deal, but in my opinion - too little, too late. The lack of other gun options makes .30 Super Carry the new 9mm Federal.
RIP
I'm also a .32 nut, so it also appeals to me on a subjective level. But having said all that, I think the cartridge is going to be dead sooner than later. It failed to gain traction initially for a number of reasons, and that window is long closed:
1. Ammuniton Crisis. It was introduced in the middle of the worst ammunition crisis in our lifetimes, when shooters, hunters and gunsumers could not obtain existing calibres. This did nothing to endear itself to the market, and highlighted the of arrogance of the Vista Outdoors domestic ammunition monopoly.
2. Limited Firearm Selection. It lacked wide-spread industry acceptance, as only one manufacturer chambered guns for it (Niche Nighthawk does not count). If you did not care for MIM-laded S&W plasticated autos, you weren't looking twice at .30 Super Carry.
3. Pricing. For a new cartridge trying to gain traction, the ammunition was grossly overpriced. Even as 9mm ammunition became available and the prices dropped (largely due to imports btw), .30 Super Carry range ammo was considerably more expensive than 9mm. When you are looking at two calibres at the sales counter - in otherwise identical guns - and the ammunition for one is 50% more than the price of the other, nearly every gunsumer (the majority buyer) is picking the cheaper ammo.
4. Cranky Old Farts. Curmudgeons - of all ages - that don't care for anything that upsets their personal world-view, pooped all over .30 Super Carry as "not doing anything my (Insert favorite cartridge/gun) already does". Well guess what, that is true of the majority of cartridges of all types, as there is massive overlap in practical capability. If you were a dictator and solely interested in Soviet-style utility, you could eliminate 90-95% of all cartridges on the market. While that isn't the point of either the shooting industry or the community, the Cranky Old Fart argument did influence a number of people to not even consider the .30 Super Carry.
5. Marketing Debacle. Finally... the marketing was terrible. Incredibly bad timing, and even the YouTube shills they had pushing it looked pained to be involved with it.
If Vista had waited a year or two until the ammo crisis eased and the gun-buying market cooled down somewhat, lined up more manufacturing partners, and put the ammo out at attractive prices, it would have gotten more traction.
Vista right now is having a refund offer which is three for the price of two: essentially 33% off. On my checking, this brings the .30 Super Carry ammo down to cheaper than domestic 9mm, and within $2/box of imported 9mm.
A very good deal, but in my opinion - too little, too late. The lack of other gun options makes .30 Super Carry the new 9mm Federal.
RIP
Last edited:
The .32 is the reason why I would go broke manufacturing firearms.
I thought (well still do think) the .32 Magnum would be a big hit for self-defense especially in J-Frame revolvers. One additional round than the .38 Special, lighter recoil and excellent performance with right ammunition. Yet it has languished.
The 30 Super is the same. Additional round, potential better bullet performance. Yet Gun 'righters and Internet 'xperts have pronounced it useless.
The majority of shooters have been convinced in the superiority of the .38 Special in the J-Frame revolver when actual real world testing shows it gives marginal performance.
Likewise the .380. Real world testing proves it is a marginal performer.
So the 30 Super is a attempt to give better performance than the .38 Special and .380. But it remains to be seen if it's real performance is enough for it to become popular.
I thought (well still do think) the .32 Magnum would be a big hit for self-defense especially in J-Frame revolvers. One additional round than the .38 Special, lighter recoil and excellent performance with right ammunition. Yet it has languished.
The 30 Super is the same. Additional round, potential better bullet performance. Yet Gun 'righters and Internet 'xperts have pronounced it useless.
The majority of shooters have been convinced in the superiority of the .38 Special in the J-Frame revolver when actual real world testing shows it gives marginal performance.
Likewise the .380. Real world testing proves it is a marginal performer.
So the 30 Super is a attempt to give better performance than the .38 Special and .380. But it remains to be seen if it's real performance is enough for it to become popular.
Last edited:
Model 15-4ever
Member
I agree with your points about the .32 calibre in post-war (WWII) American gun minds.
However, the .30 Super Carry was never intended to compete with the .380 Auto. It was intended to be an alternative to the 9x19mm, in guns of the same size and strength.
You read people writing, "Yeah, if they put the .30 SC in a .380 sized gun I would be interested." Well, that was never going to happen. You can't put a 50,000 psi cartridge in a little light-duty .380 like the Little Crappy Pistol or the Maximum Little Crappy Pistol. Impossible. Yet this was bandied about by various half-witted "gunwriters" because there was no well-managed marketing direction.
Also, both the .380 and .38 Special have accounted for many more self-defense successes than failures, so calling them "marginal" is not accurate. Many factors contribute to the outcome of a deadly force encounter, and the power of the cartridge used - real or perceived - is often not the primary one.
PS. I frequently use the .32 H&R Magnum. However, it has less muzzle energy than .38 Special +P, so by your reckoning the .32 H&R Mag should be considered marginal as well. How does that replace the .38 Special?
Last edited:
All handgun cartridges are marginal performers depending on what they are being compared too.
I agree that there are other factors that contribute "to the outcome of deadly force encounter".
As for the cartridge and bullet style you use "you pay your money and take your chances".
I agree that there are other factors that contribute "to the outcome of deadly force encounter".
As for the cartridge and bullet style you use "you pay your money and take your chances".
AJ
US Veteran
To my mind the biggest factor in an encounter with any firearm is shot placement. If you can hit a vital area any handgun will do. The biggest problem is most folks can not hit a vital area with their first shot or even the second.
Folks who've been around the block for 6 or 7 decades will note that for several years now (and at a seemingly increasing rate) there are always "new and improved" cartridges coming out. While not a "bad" thing the simple fact is that neither the 4 legged or 2 legged animals walking this planet are any different than they were 100 years ago. Many many fine new cartridges pop up, bloom for a few years and then disappear ( or nearly so). Most of these are good, solid, functional rounds. Problem is, they really don't do anything much different than one or more existing rounds already accomplishes. I personally really like .32's and really hoped the .32 H&R or .327 would take off. Of course they did not. To many existing common rounds already fill the niche. I suspect the .30 SC will meet a similar fate (think .45 GAP). Countless new rifle cartridges are already in this limbo. Nothing wrong with them, just nothing truly special either. Ammo for these limited appeal weapons is always going to be (1)expensive and (2) harder to find. Accept that up front and you can enjoy your new blaster. Expect ammo to become cheap and plentiful and you will more than likely wind up sorely disappointed. If you go with any such cartridge, invest quickly in a loader and stock up on brass and you'll still be shooting when many contemporaries have moved on. Enjoy your .30. It's a very cool little round.
Last edited:
Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,068
- Reaction score
- 7,909
I honestly feel that the firearms market has pretty well stagnated at this point, hence why even when a new cartridge is introduced with an actual tangible benefit or compelling features, it goes largely overlooked.
For example, consider the .357 SIG, a cartridge designed to duplicate the performance of a .357 Magnum FBI Load out of a 4" Barrel. It was relatively powerful, penetrated hard barriers like autoglass while maintaining a flat trajectory with enough energy to reach vitals, and could fit in the same size frame as the popular 9mm/.40 firearms of the time, yet only a few police departments adopted it, so it never really caught on and has since faded into relative obscurity. (Last I heard, SIG stopped chambering the P320 in .357 SIG.)
Another example would be .458 SOCCOM in Rifles, a cartridge designed to duplicate the performance of a modest .45-70 load out of a standard AR-15 Pattern Rifle, using standard, unmodified AR-15 Magazines. It's one of the most powerful cartridges you could possibly fire out of an AR-15, yet it never really caught on, always overshadowed by otherwise gimmicky AR cartridges which only featured a minor increase in performance if any, with some benefit which was only situationally useful for specific builds like higher velocity out of shorter barrels or better accuracy.
Of course, there are many other examples of cartridges with otherwise compelling, entirely tangible benefits, yet they were completely overlooked. So it's really not surprising that .30 Super Carry didn't catch on either when it really didn't have much at all going for it besides marginally higher magazine capacity in 9mm sized pistols.
It honestly seems like the only way to make a splash in the civilian firearms market is to first score a major government contract which in turn becomes widely adopted by law enforcement agencies across the country, since civilians mostly turn to law enforcement for an example of what they would be best suited to carry, ergo cartridges like .30 Super Carry which were designed to appeal towards the civilian concealed carry market don't stand a chance.
Granted, since there's clearly a demand for it, if .30 Super Carry could somehow be finangled into a smaller frame pistol comparable to that of .380 Pocket Pistols, then it could sell, but seeing as it was clearly never designed with Pocket Pistols in mind, that's pretty well impossible. Perhaps if it were shortened, downloaded to less extreme pressures, and rebranded as ".30 Micro Carry" then it might be more compelling, but that would come at the expense of being comparable to 9mm in power, thus likely making it too similar to .380 ACP.
Still, I think that it would be possible to accommodate .30 Super Carry in an intermediate frame size between a Pocket Pistol like the Ruger LCP and a Micro Compact like the SIG P365, or perhaps just a beefed up, Ruger LCP, but then it would likely inherit the same degree of limited longevity which many of the popular Pocket Pistols such as the LCP are known and ridiculed for.
Unfortunately, there's just no such thing as a free lunch in that regard. You can either have a durable pistol that can hold up to a lifetime of weekend shooting, or you can have a featherweight pistol that can be comfortably carried 24/7.
For example, consider the .357 SIG, a cartridge designed to duplicate the performance of a .357 Magnum FBI Load out of a 4" Barrel. It was relatively powerful, penetrated hard barriers like autoglass while maintaining a flat trajectory with enough energy to reach vitals, and could fit in the same size frame as the popular 9mm/.40 firearms of the time, yet only a few police departments adopted it, so it never really caught on and has since faded into relative obscurity. (Last I heard, SIG stopped chambering the P320 in .357 SIG.)
Another example would be .458 SOCCOM in Rifles, a cartridge designed to duplicate the performance of a modest .45-70 load out of a standard AR-15 Pattern Rifle, using standard, unmodified AR-15 Magazines. It's one of the most powerful cartridges you could possibly fire out of an AR-15, yet it never really caught on, always overshadowed by otherwise gimmicky AR cartridges which only featured a minor increase in performance if any, with some benefit which was only situationally useful for specific builds like higher velocity out of shorter barrels or better accuracy.
Of course, there are many other examples of cartridges with otherwise compelling, entirely tangible benefits, yet they were completely overlooked. So it's really not surprising that .30 Super Carry didn't catch on either when it really didn't have much at all going for it besides marginally higher magazine capacity in 9mm sized pistols.
It honestly seems like the only way to make a splash in the civilian firearms market is to first score a major government contract which in turn becomes widely adopted by law enforcement agencies across the country, since civilians mostly turn to law enforcement for an example of what they would be best suited to carry, ergo cartridges like .30 Super Carry which were designed to appeal towards the civilian concealed carry market don't stand a chance.
Granted, since there's clearly a demand for it, if .30 Super Carry could somehow be finangled into a smaller frame pistol comparable to that of .380 Pocket Pistols, then it could sell, but seeing as it was clearly never designed with Pocket Pistols in mind, that's pretty well impossible. Perhaps if it were shortened, downloaded to less extreme pressures, and rebranded as ".30 Micro Carry" then it might be more compelling, but that would come at the expense of being comparable to 9mm in power, thus likely making it too similar to .380 ACP.
Still, I think that it would be possible to accommodate .30 Super Carry in an intermediate frame size between a Pocket Pistol like the Ruger LCP and a Micro Compact like the SIG P365, or perhaps just a beefed up, Ruger LCP, but then it would likely inherit the same degree of limited longevity which many of the popular Pocket Pistols such as the LCP are known and ridiculed for.
Unfortunately, there's just no such thing as a free lunch in that regard. You can either have a durable pistol that can hold up to a lifetime of weekend shooting, or you can have a featherweight pistol that can be comfortably carried 24/7.
45,000 PSI MAP in a small, plastic-frame pistol doesn't much appeal to me. 9x19 +P is bad enough. For that reason alone, I'll pass. That round in a 1911-size pistol just seems… 
Alk8944
US Veteran
I didn't understand why they called the .30 S.C. when it is really a .32. But then .32 caliber cartridges have not been very successful in the U.S. although Europeans have thoroughly embraced it! Basically it is the 7.65 French MAS loaded to much higher pressure.
If I were younger and not living on a pension and Social Security I would be interested in playing with if it was chambered in other guns Since I have always been a ".32 Guy" since I bought my first S&W .32-20 about 60 years ago. Only other .32 fans would understand, and if you aren't, you won't! But don't bad mouth this cartridge because you aren't one.
I just wish all of you that think you are authorities would just shut-up and let the market decide instead of trying to discourage new shooters with your biased comments!
The same with so many who claim the .40 S&W dead or worthless because it isn't the 10mm, it wasn't intended to be! It has been around 33 years now and still going strong in spite of your constant harping/carping!
That is pretty successful in the firearms field!
If I were younger and not living on a pension and Social Security I would be interested in playing with if it was chambered in other guns Since I have always been a ".32 Guy" since I bought my first S&W .32-20 about 60 years ago. Only other .32 fans would understand, and if you aren't, you won't! But don't bad mouth this cartridge because you aren't one.
I just wish all of you that think you are authorities would just shut-up and let the market decide instead of trying to discourage new shooters with your biased comments!
The same with so many who claim the .40 S&W dead or worthless because it isn't the 10mm, it wasn't intended to be! It has been around 33 years now and still going strong in spite of your constant harping/carping!
That is pretty successful in the firearms field!
Last edited:
Rpg
Member
There's nothing wrong with this new cartridge.
But it isn't an improvement on an existing cartridge as the 40 cal is to the 10mm, and it doesn't offer better performance as the 357 does compared to the 38 special.
I have no interest in buying one: it doesn't do anything better than a 9 mm except hold an extra round or two.
That's not worth the money I'd have to spend on the gun.
But it isn't an improvement on an existing cartridge as the 40 cal is to the 10mm, and it doesn't offer better performance as the 357 does compared to the 38 special.
I have no interest in buying one: it doesn't do anything better than a 9 mm except hold an extra round or two.
That's not worth the money I'd have to spend on the gun.
Hi-point is making it in their carbine.
Now there's a quality option
. Nothing says"quality firearm" quite like a zinc alloy
AJ
US Veteran
Now there's a quality option
Not that I am advocating the High Points, but the statement reminds me of the old "Saturday Night Specials". The price and quality is what most determine a SNS to be. I look at it from an economic standpoint. Folks that can afford s $1000 firearm tend to look down on a very less expensive firearm. If you make a 100+K a year you buy what you can afford Someone making less than 25K a year buys what they can afford. So "Zinc Alloy" vs Stainless Steel is just where you fit in the Social-Economic scale.
I agree to a point. Thing is there are an awful lot of "used" weapons of much higher quality on the market that I'd feel a lot better defending home and family with. With that said, the Hi Points DO work. They're butt ugly, physically large and cumbersome pistols but they do seem to function. Neighbor has one of the 9 mm carbines and he seems to like it. It's surprisingly accurate.
AJ
US Veteran
It all boils down to what you can afford. I can buy any of the major manufacturers guns that I want, as I can afford them, heck maybe even a Korth if I wanted one and saved a few ducats to do so. However, the folks in the lower economic stratosphere can not, hence the need for High Points, Jennings, etc.... Getting off the subject now. PM me if you want to continue this discussion.
AJ
STORMINORMAN
Member
The HighPoint JPX10 has proven (at least to me?) to be an excellent, affordable, reliable and very accurate 10mm platform... A BIG TIME Bang for the Buck!
Their 10mm carbine is equally very highly reviewed and is a huge seller.
Cheers!
P.S. More expen$ive does not ALWAYS insure that something is actually "better"...
Their 10mm carbine is equally very highly reviewed and is a huge seller.
Cheers!
P.S. More expen$ive does not ALWAYS insure that something is actually "better"...
smithra_66
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2020
- Messages
- 1,307
- Reaction score
- 2,140
People want a tiny, tic-tac sized gun nowadays but with massive capacity. Power is no longer a factor nowadays.
Everyone believes they simply cannot carry anything bigger than a Sig 365 and they will be slaughtered at wal-mart if they don't have 20 rounds in the mag.
This thinking is where the 30 Super Carry came from. It came from trends in the consumer market itself!
