.30supercarry
- Thread starter redram99
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
N4KVE
Member
I was under the impression it's sole purpose was to stuff an extra few rounds into a 9mm handgun. It's the new caliber of the month. I'm not falling for it. GARY.
Paul in Nevada
Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2021
- Messages
- 870
- Reaction score
- 1,020
Several forum members have expressed positive impressions of the cartridge but it's still something of a niche. There aren't a lot of pistols currently chambered for it. The only ones that come to mind are the Shield and the EZ. You can find ammo on the shelves but it is quite a bit more expensive than 9mm. Time will tell, I suppose. It's supposed to equal the ballistics of 124gr 9mm while allowing 1-2 more rounds in a compact magazine. If it had come out in 2018-2019 it would probably be more popular. The market is somewhat saturated right now and the industry has already abandoned several cartridges to focus on 9mm.
Erich
Member
I'm sure a search on this forum will get you a lot more detail, since people who've spent time typing up their experiences and discussing them with others are unlikely to see this post of yours and duplicate all their valuable insights.
Since you ask, my thoughts are... I personally don't see why anyone would want it or want to pay the inflated cost of a designer round, with the .380 and 9mm available. But some like new things, good for them.
But more importantly I don't understand why Smith & Wesson is offering new firearms in a designer caliber, while not offering new products like the Shield Plus, or the M&P FPC in the proven and popular .40S&W. Makes no sense.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2015
- Messages
- 1,365
- Reaction score
- 1,597
If you compare 30 SC FMJ to 380 or 40 FMJ from the same manufacturer the cost is about the same, about $.46/round. The problem is only ammo companies such as CCI, Hornady and Federal make 30 SC ammo and lower cost manufacturers like S&B and Magtech offer 380 and 40 for as low as $.36/round. Prices are based on what sgammo is asking for the ammo. Not many people consider 380, 40, 38 Special and all the other cartridges that cost about the same per round as designer rounds, unless they consider anything except 9mm a designer round.
The price of 9mm is much lower than any other centerfire cartridge. Which is one reason I shoot a lot of 9mm. But I do own and shoot other calibers despite the higher prices, just not in the same volume.
Its a lot easier to modify a gun to work with a less powerful cartridge than a more powerful one. Boutique ammo makers like Underwood offer 40 ammo that is is the same ballpark as a 357 Magnum when it comes to muzzle energy, nearly 600 ft-lbs (40 S&W 155gr. eXtreme Terminal Performance (XTP(R)) Jacketed Hollow Point Hunting & Self Defense Ammo). If a Shield Plus chambered in 40 wouldn't handle it reliably the internet would be full of complaints about it not being able to handle "real" 40. Ammo from bigger companies isn't that strong but is still more powerful than 9mm by a big margin. That is probably why S&W only chambers larger, heavier guns in 40.
The original Shield was designed from the start to work with 40. I don't have one to measure but I bet if you weighed the slide of the original Shield it would significantly heavier than the one in the 9mm only Shield Plus.
I do think a FPC carbine in 40 would be interesting but since it is blowback it would need a heavier bolt and spring. For a lot of people the extra power would be worth the increase in weight.
Guns like the original Shield and Glock 43 have mostly been replaced with guns like the Shield Plus and P365 because they offer 3 to 4 more rounds. Companies like Magguts do nothing except sell products that allow an extra round or two. Somehow I never hear complaints about them trying to solve a non-existent problem. Running out of ammo could be a real problem.
The extra cost of of ammo compared to 9mm and small selection of both guns and ammo in 30 SC mean it will not be nearly as popular as 9mm but it does fill a useful niche for many people. The biggest threat to its future would be laws banning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
Last edited:
cmj8591
Member
The main purpose of the 30SC is to separate gun buyers from their hard earned money. The only advantages it offers over other, more available and less expensive alternatives, exists only in the minds of people who enjoy contemplating how many angles can sit on the head of a pin. Buy a 9.
Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,069
- Reaction score
- 7,911
It's an intriguing cartridge which I would be interested in owning a firearm chambered in if there were a cheap means available, but I'm not about to purchase a brand new firearm at full price.
The problem with .30 Super Carry is that it's really nothing new, it's ballistically similar to at least three .30cal cartridges that I'm aware of and all three of them have fallen by the wayside.
Also, .380 ACP, 9mm Luger, and .45 ACP are just too firmly entrenched in the concealed carry market to ever be dislodged by another cartridge, especially not one that merely duplicates the performance of older cartridges which have since fallen into obscurity.
The problem with .30 Super Carry is that it's really nothing new, it's ballistically similar to at least three .30cal cartridges that I'm aware of and all three of them have fallen by the wayside.
Also, .380 ACP, 9mm Luger, and .45 ACP are just too firmly entrenched in the concealed carry market to ever be dislodged by another cartridge, especially not one that merely duplicates the performance of older cartridges which have since fallen into obscurity.
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,083
- Reaction score
- 1,609
As others have said, .30 Super Carry is a way to pay more rounds into a more compact form factor. It's longer than a 9mm cartridge, but since the overall diameter is smaller you can "stack" more in a magazine.
It's rather pleasant to shoot. It kicks less than the 9mm (I have the Shield Plus in both 9mm and .30 SC and have compared them side-by-side), and has much less "snap" than the .40 S&W. If I was judging based on that alone, the .30 Super Carry would win hands-down.
There's a very good reason for this cartridge: right now, the hot ticket item is the compact carry pistol. Guns like the Sig P365 started the trend, and it was inevitable that gunmakers would eventually run out of space in which to pack more rounds. Ergo, the new round with the smaller diameter.
Whether this is worth the cost of upgrading one's carry pistol and moving to a more boutique cartridge (especially when we're comparing it to the ubiquity of the 9mm cartridge) is another discussion point, of course. Many of us are already heavily invested in 9mm, and there won't be a strong urge to buy into another cartridge. But for people that are new to the sport and without any biases, I think the .30 Super Carry could be an appealing option.
Of course, that assumes that ammunition remains available and reasonably priced. Which it may not. That's the wild card here.
I think the only other manufacturer making guns in .30 SC is Nighthawk—purveyor of very high end ($2,500+) 1911 pistols. That one left me scratching my head; I love Nighthawk, but I just can't imagine investing in an über-high-end 1911 in .30 SC.
To each their own!
Mike
It's rather pleasant to shoot. It kicks less than the 9mm (I have the Shield Plus in both 9mm and .30 SC and have compared them side-by-side), and has much less "snap" than the .40 S&W. If I was judging based on that alone, the .30 Super Carry would win hands-down.
There's a very good reason for this cartridge: right now, the hot ticket item is the compact carry pistol. Guns like the Sig P365 started the trend, and it was inevitable that gunmakers would eventually run out of space in which to pack more rounds. Ergo, the new round with the smaller diameter.
Whether this is worth the cost of upgrading one's carry pistol and moving to a more boutique cartridge (especially when we're comparing it to the ubiquity of the 9mm cartridge) is another discussion point, of course. Many of us are already heavily invested in 9mm, and there won't be a strong urge to buy into another cartridge. But for people that are new to the sport and without any biases, I think the .30 Super Carry could be an appealing option.
Of course, that assumes that ammunition remains available and reasonably priced. Which it may not. That's the wild card here.
I think the only other manufacturer making guns in .30 SC is Nighthawk—purveyor of very high end ($2,500+) 1911 pistols. That one left me scratching my head; I love Nighthawk, but I just can't imagine investing in an über-high-end 1911 in .30 SC.
To each their own!
Mike
smithra_66
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2020
- Messages
- 1,307
- Reaction score
- 2,140
30 SC was born out of the current trends in the firearms industry:
1. people don't care much about power anymore. 9mm is just fine. 380 is just fine. Even 32 acp is just fine. In years past, people were much more likely to care about power and bullet diameter.
2. people want tiny, tiny, tic tac sized guns. We are enamored with guns built for a child's hands, made of plastic, and weighing very little. We want to carry them in our sweatpants instead of wearing a proper pair of pants with a proper belt.
3. We absolutely must have massive capacity. 15, 17, 20 etc. The more the better. Spare mag in the sidecar too. You'd think that this would be antithetical to the tiny gun desires, but manufacturers have figured out how to stuff high capacity mags into tic tac sized guns.
Someone said well hey, why not make a 32 caliber "magnum" so that we can put even more rounds into a tiny gun?!?
Lastly, in the internet age, it's common to pile on criticism of something "new," so that's why you see so many people who don't like it. But it's just a response to the trends that manufacturers are seeing.
There you have it.
1. people don't care much about power anymore. 9mm is just fine. 380 is just fine. Even 32 acp is just fine. In years past, people were much more likely to care about power and bullet diameter.
2. people want tiny, tiny, tic tac sized guns. We are enamored with guns built for a child's hands, made of plastic, and weighing very little. We want to carry them in our sweatpants instead of wearing a proper pair of pants with a proper belt.
3. We absolutely must have massive capacity. 15, 17, 20 etc. The more the better. Spare mag in the sidecar too. You'd think that this would be antithetical to the tiny gun desires, but manufacturers have figured out how to stuff high capacity mags into tic tac sized guns.
Someone said well hey, why not make a 32 caliber "magnum" so that we can put even more rounds into a tiny gun?!?
Lastly, in the internet age, it's common to pile on criticism of something "new," so that's why you see so many people who don't like it. But it's just a response to the trends that manufacturers are seeing.
There you have it.
Last edited:
CAJUNLAWYER
Member
NO THANKS!!!!! I'll stick with my .45 GAP
OldGoat
Member
The comments and insights on this 30 Super Carry are genuinely appreciated. This is what makes this Forum so enjoyable and worthwhile ! Thanks.
People from outside of firearms have been consulting the shooting sports for several years now, trying to bring ideas that work in other industries and trying to shoe horn them into industries where they don't work or aren't relevant. At best "try this in your industry, it worked in ours" and at worst mindless mouth breathing cargo cultism.
Forcing new products on the market, wither a good idea or not, has been the hot tactic in many markets and industries for decades, and of course this means that it will be pushed on those where it is not relevant. Meaning, get ready for new products being pushed on everyone, because that's the current herd mentality.
From constant overhype of big nothings like Shot Show, to the push to make "social influences" in the shooting sports that nobody really actually listens to, we see a lot of examples of this.
The flurry of new cartridges seem to follow two patterns, either people pushing their own personal custom cartridge for vanity, or more often things like the 30 Super Carry or whatever they call it, with all the endless hype of "new" and "improved" even though it is a big nothing in and of itself.
It doesn't matter that small arms are a place where things have not changed or improved in the last 30 years (hollow point handgun ammunition was the last and only aspect to improve in the shooting sports in the last half century), or for the most parts not for the last 60 years (auto loading rifles like the FN FAL or G3 or AK) or even 120 years (bolt action rifle designs, smokeless gunpowder, copper jacketed lead bullets).
So, it will always be some new gun, wither it is a change or not. Another caliber, that has no purpose and does nothing better than something that came to the market in the last 100 years that is virtually the same. Another direct to obsolescence caliber or design, for the sake of hype and "newness".
The 30 Super Carry is just another good example of bad trends from the industry, that were pushed by the wrong elements, for all the wrong reasons. Ignore it carry on.
Forcing new products on the market, wither a good idea or not, has been the hot tactic in many markets and industries for decades, and of course this means that it will be pushed on those where it is not relevant. Meaning, get ready for new products being pushed on everyone, because that's the current herd mentality.
From constant overhype of big nothings like Shot Show, to the push to make "social influences" in the shooting sports that nobody really actually listens to, we see a lot of examples of this.
The flurry of new cartridges seem to follow two patterns, either people pushing their own personal custom cartridge for vanity, or more often things like the 30 Super Carry or whatever they call it, with all the endless hype of "new" and "improved" even though it is a big nothing in and of itself.
It doesn't matter that small arms are a place where things have not changed or improved in the last 30 years (hollow point handgun ammunition was the last and only aspect to improve in the shooting sports in the last half century), or for the most parts not for the last 60 years (auto loading rifles like the FN FAL or G3 or AK) or even 120 years (bolt action rifle designs, smokeless gunpowder, copper jacketed lead bullets).
So, it will always be some new gun, wither it is a change or not. Another caliber, that has no purpose and does nothing better than something that came to the market in the last 100 years that is virtually the same. Another direct to obsolescence caliber or design, for the sake of hype and "newness".
The 30 Super Carry is just another good example of bad trends from the industry, that were pushed by the wrong elements, for all the wrong reasons. Ignore it carry on.
OldGoat
Member
Great points! Another - and the worst example - comes from the "driverless" cars and trucks being put on the roads.
Pointblank2U
US Veteran
Buy one and a box of ammo as soon as you can. Put it in your safe. It will be a collectible someday.
My 1st Gen Shield is .40S&W
I don't have Shield Plus to weigh but here are the numbers for mine…
25.2 Loaded with 7+1 Federal 180 GR. HST
20.6 with Empty 7 round mag
12.7 Slide with barrel
9.6 Slide Only
The increase in weight couldn't possibly be enough for me to care. This is a Pistol Caliber Carbine and all my carry M&P's are in 40S&W. That's more important.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2015
- Messages
- 1,365
- Reaction score
- 1,597
That's closer than I thought it would be. I would have lost that bet. The numbers for my Shield plus are:
24.2 Loaded with 10+1 Speer Gold Dot 124 grain +P
19.1 with Empty 10 round mag
12.0 Slide with barrel
I don't own a 40 but don't have anything against the round. It is more powerful and effective than 9mm but not enough to make up for the lower capacity and higher price of ammo in my opinion. I also don't shoot the 40s I have tried as well as 9s, I might feel differently if I did.
While it used to be you just lost one round going from 9mm to 40 now you four since the Shield Plus, P365, etc are not offered in 40. And I am not willing to carry a larger gun.
I don't have anything against the 9mm. I have a PC CORE for a target gun. But all my Self Defense semi-autos are in .40S&W. I have a Shield40, M&P40 M2.0 COMPACT 4", and a M&P40 LE FULL SIZE depending on what I want to carry and where I am going.
I don't notice any real difference in shooting a full size 40 or a 9. Neither does my daughter or has a full-size M&P9 or my grandson who shots them all.
It just makes me mad that S&W appears to have decided to not offer new offerings in .40S&W and cut back on the ones they have. If that's a marketing decision, so be it. My Shield is only 11 years old. I'll hang onto it until an American manufacturer gives me a reason to change.
I especially liked this….Once upon a time, pro-9mm people argued that the 0.096-inch difference in hole size with the .45 ACP didn't matter. Now pro-9mm people are arguing that the 0.042-inch difference with the 30 SC does matter.
Federal's New 30 Super Carry…Better Than the 9mm? | Shoot On
I don't think the 30SC was intended to change anyone's mind about switching from their current 9 or 40 cal choice of carry piece. I think it was specifically intended for new shooters, especially the ladies and elderly that were buying their first handgun for home protection or their first and likely only ccw tool. The entire S&W EZ line of products are specifically targeting this segment of the market. Given the sales numbers it's hard to argue that they are wrong.
DonD
Member
Not interested, the 9mm works just fine, will probably be years before the 30 Supercarry ammo is anywhere near as available as 9mm as N4KVE remarked.
It's a good round but I doubt that it can completely match the 9mm, load for load.
I have four 9mms semi autos, all of which I like, I'm not going to buy another that is somewhat similar. Don
Model 15-4ever
Member
The amount of hate piled on this cartridge, by people who neither own nor shoot it, but obviously feel threatened by it in some bizarre fashion, is very amusing.
I've had the S&W Shield EZ in .30 SC since it came out. I rather like it. In function it's basically a high-pressure long-cased .32 ACP Magnum. Bullets are .312". The round requires a substantial locked-breech pistol of the same size as equivalent 9mm pistols.
Bullets being lighter than 9mm - 100 to 115 grains - in the same guns there is somewhat less recoil than 9mm, although the muzzle blast is somewhat greater. The case being smaller in diameter, magazine capacity is increased somewhat, although in the case of the EZ, the magazine baseplate is made a tad longer to bring capacity to 10 rounds.
Not sure what is so upsetting about that, or why innovation and new cartridges make certain people angry. If you don't want/need/like it, you're not being forced to buy it.
Accuracy is a function of the cartridge/firearm/shooter... and while the EZ is not known for being match-grade, it is not inaccurate either. The Federal American Eagle 100 grain FMJ practice load will not be winning any National Matches. Nonetheless, groups with the Remington and Federal JHP loads are right at 1.5" @ 50 feet. More than adequate for self-defense. I shot 100% with it on an old-school police-style qualification course using the FBI Q target, and the 6 rounds at 50 yards prone were all well-centered.
I have not had a single malfunction over the course of 900+ rounds through two of these guns, and that includes my own handloaded ammunition.
Is the round good for self-defense? Of course it is. The Remington and Federal 100 grain JHP loads average 1200 fps for 320 ft lbs of energy. That is more energy than most .38 Special +P loads, which have been shown to be quite effective in many LE shootings. My testing in ballistic gel was quite satisfactory, with both the Remington and Federal 100 grain JHP loadings penetrating 19-20" and expanding to .55-.56". Since the Remington is much less expensive, I use that as a defensive load.
The Hornady 100 grain FTX ammunition is loaded a bit lighter and offers less blast and recoil, but still giving energy figures equal to .38 Special +P, and penetration of 15.5" and expansion to .48".
It's true this cartridge was heavily hyped - but so is every new cartridge, firearm, scope, etc. Yet, people are SHOCKED that the gun industry uses marketing techniques to sell stuff and make money. It has ALWAYS been that way - it's more "in your face" today because everything is more in your face in the social media age. This ain't the bygone days of a monthly magazine that you read cover to cover 6 times over before you were able to buy new content next month. And those old writers were all bought and paid for with guns and hunting trips, just the same as the new media.
Folks, guns last a long time if properly cared for. That's not a good recipe for continuing new sales, unless you can convince people they need to replace their unbroken gun with a new one. Again, this is not a new phenomenon in the industry.
One of the marketing hypes right now is - MORE BULLETS! Despite the fact that the Rules of Threes really hasn't changed. I watched a video today of a LE shooting in which the officer dumped an entire gun load of 15+ rounds into a single suspect. Unknown how many of those rounds hit the latter, but if you have more rounds, you often end up shooting more rounds if you are undisciplined, panicked, or inaccurate. Back in the day, 2-3 rounds would have sufficed... and still do, as the Rule of Threes by and large still holds true.
In any event, the 10 rounds of .30 SC in the EZ Shield are plenty, and certainly accurate and powerful enough for self-defense. The pistol shoots quite well. Viva la difference!
PS. I'm also still enjoying all my many other guns and cartridges, including the magnificent .45 GAP!
I've had the S&W Shield EZ in .30 SC since it came out. I rather like it. In function it's basically a high-pressure long-cased .32 ACP Magnum. Bullets are .312". The round requires a substantial locked-breech pistol of the same size as equivalent 9mm pistols.
Bullets being lighter than 9mm - 100 to 115 grains - in the same guns there is somewhat less recoil than 9mm, although the muzzle blast is somewhat greater. The case being smaller in diameter, magazine capacity is increased somewhat, although in the case of the EZ, the magazine baseplate is made a tad longer to bring capacity to 10 rounds.
Not sure what is so upsetting about that, or why innovation and new cartridges make certain people angry. If you don't want/need/like it, you're not being forced to buy it.
Accuracy is a function of the cartridge/firearm/shooter... and while the EZ is not known for being match-grade, it is not inaccurate either. The Federal American Eagle 100 grain FMJ practice load will not be winning any National Matches. Nonetheless, groups with the Remington and Federal JHP loads are right at 1.5" @ 50 feet. More than adequate for self-defense. I shot 100% with it on an old-school police-style qualification course using the FBI Q target, and the 6 rounds at 50 yards prone were all well-centered.
I have not had a single malfunction over the course of 900+ rounds through two of these guns, and that includes my own handloaded ammunition.
Is the round good for self-defense? Of course it is. The Remington and Federal 100 grain JHP loads average 1200 fps for 320 ft lbs of energy. That is more energy than most .38 Special +P loads, which have been shown to be quite effective in many LE shootings. My testing in ballistic gel was quite satisfactory, with both the Remington and Federal 100 grain JHP loadings penetrating 19-20" and expanding to .55-.56". Since the Remington is much less expensive, I use that as a defensive load.
The Hornady 100 grain FTX ammunition is loaded a bit lighter and offers less blast and recoil, but still giving energy figures equal to .38 Special +P, and penetration of 15.5" and expansion to .48".
It's true this cartridge was heavily hyped - but so is every new cartridge, firearm, scope, etc. Yet, people are SHOCKED that the gun industry uses marketing techniques to sell stuff and make money. It has ALWAYS been that way - it's more "in your face" today because everything is more in your face in the social media age. This ain't the bygone days of a monthly magazine that you read cover to cover 6 times over before you were able to buy new content next month. And those old writers were all bought and paid for with guns and hunting trips, just the same as the new media.
Folks, guns last a long time if properly cared for. That's not a good recipe for continuing new sales, unless you can convince people they need to replace their unbroken gun with a new one. Again, this is not a new phenomenon in the industry.
One of the marketing hypes right now is - MORE BULLETS! Despite the fact that the Rules of Threes really hasn't changed. I watched a video today of a LE shooting in which the officer dumped an entire gun load of 15+ rounds into a single suspect. Unknown how many of those rounds hit the latter, but if you have more rounds, you often end up shooting more rounds if you are undisciplined, panicked, or inaccurate. Back in the day, 2-3 rounds would have sufficed... and still do, as the Rule of Threes by and large still holds true.
In any event, the 10 rounds of .30 SC in the EZ Shield are plenty, and certainly accurate and powerful enough for self-defense. The pistol shoots quite well. Viva la difference!
PS. I'm also still enjoying all my many other guns and cartridges, including the magnificent .45 GAP!
Last edited:
CAJUNLAWYER
Member
Doing a little math I calculate that the actual area of the cross section of the entrance wound by the various calibers is as follows:
.45 .159" Cost per round $.475
.9mm .0989" cost per round $.265
.30 superduper .0769" cost per round $.46
and for comparison, the .22 RF .0380" $0769
Data indicates that you would have to shoot someone twice with the 9mm to achieve a bit over the cross sectional perforation (the "csp") of the .45; twice by the 30 super duper to come in just under the CSP of the .45.
The .22 on the other hand requires four shots to achieve a .152 CSP.
Considering the actual cost per round od each CPR divided by CSP we get the DCPAOH (dollar cost per area of hole-in inches) of each cartridge as follows:
.45 2.9245
9mm 2.679
30 super duper 5.98
.22rf 2.023
So ot get comparible hope size with each calibre the cost would be as follows:
.45 2.9245
9mm (shoot twice) 5.358
30 super duper (again shoot twice) a whopping 11.96
.22 rf (four shots) a surprising 8.092.
Clearly as far as cost per cross section of hole favors heavily the .45 ACP by almost a factor of two-which coincides with the averafe twice te capacity of the magazines holding 9mm over the .45.
Couple that with the increased cabbon footprint and pollution othe increased propellant gasses and scrap led, the .45 is clearly the best choice both from an ecological as well as a hole point of view.
I get paid to know this stuff.
.45 .159" Cost per round $.475
.9mm .0989" cost per round $.265
.30 superduper .0769" cost per round $.46
and for comparison, the .22 RF .0380" $0769
Data indicates that you would have to shoot someone twice with the 9mm to achieve a bit over the cross sectional perforation (the "csp") of the .45; twice by the 30 super duper to come in just under the CSP of the .45.
The .22 on the other hand requires four shots to achieve a .152 CSP.
Considering the actual cost per round od each CPR divided by CSP we get the DCPAOH (dollar cost per area of hole-in inches) of each cartridge as follows:
.45 2.9245
9mm 2.679
30 super duper 5.98
.22rf 2.023
So ot get comparible hope size with each calibre the cost would be as follows:
.45 2.9245
9mm (shoot twice) 5.358
30 super duper (again shoot twice) a whopping 11.96
.22 rf (four shots) a surprising 8.092.
Clearly as far as cost per cross section of hole favors heavily the .45 ACP by almost a factor of two-which coincides with the averafe twice te capacity of the magazines holding 9mm over the .45.
Couple that with the increased cabbon footprint and pollution othe increased propellant gasses and scrap led, the .45 is clearly the best choice both from an ecological as well as a hole point of view.
I get paid to know this stuff.
I have to agree with most of the replies to this Post...the .30 Super Carry was not needed. It sits somewhere between a .380 and 9mm- fairly soft shooting and can carry more rounds than a comparable 9mm. So what? To me it's a boutique caliber, like the 5.7x28. Apologies to any Forum members that really like the .30SC or 5.7, but I think that you folks are really in the minority of shooters. From what I've read, only S&W and Nighthawk Custom are manufacturers of .30SC handguns, and it doesn't look like there are any other manufacturers ready to jump on the bandwagon. If you do own and shoot a .30SC, there may be a lot of discount ammo on the market soon!
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2015
- Messages
- 1,365
- Reaction score
- 1,597
That's like saying a 308 sits somewhere between 223 and 30-06. It's true but implies it is about half way between the other two cartridges but is in reality much closer to the more powerful one.
Schadenfreude is a German term used to describe taking gleeful joy in the failure or misfortune of others. It perfectly describes what I see in a lot of 30 SC threads.
Deciding the modest increase in capacity and small reduction in recoil is not worth the small loss of power and significantly higher cost of ammo compared to 9mm I get. Hoping the 30 SC is a total failure and dies quickly because it doesn't fit your needs I do not.
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,083
- Reaction score
- 1,609
It makes me scratch my head—but it sadly seems to be very prevalent. People seem to be quick to develop deep religious convictions around technologies ... and then they seek out information that supports their biases (ergo the term: "confirmation bias"). I guess they hope that the strength of their convictions—however unfounded they are—comes across as expertise.
I guess that's easier than being open to new ideas.
Sticking with tried-and-trued technologies can be a good thing—especially when one's life is on the line and success or failure can be determined by the smallest of factors.
But most of the shooting sports aren't about life-and-death. And if we never tried new things, we'd still be shooting musket balls out of smooth bore flintlocks.
So far I've found the .30 SC round to be very pleasant to shoot. I haven't done any ballistic gelatin work with it yet, so my jury is still out on how it would compare to a good .38 Special or 9mm defensive round (which are the two that I most commonly carry). That said, the reviews I've read from sources that I consider to be reputable show that it performs comparably.
Whether .30 SC will take the place of 38 Special and 9mm (my two preferred carry rounds) is anyone's guess at this point, but I'm nowhere close to ruling it out either.
Mike
OldGoat
Member
It is kinda fun and amusing - as in entertaining - to read some of the comments by very opinionated, but otherwise good shooting sports enthusiasts (and law abiding citizens) over some topics like the new 30SC.
If you want to see a topic that gets a REAL trap shooter going, just mention you had fun shooting skeet.
I got permanently banned on another forum when I posted that a particular discussion reminded me of the therapy session from the movie "One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest".
So, Lighten up, Francis .... It is a hobby - have fun.
If you want to see a topic that gets a REAL trap shooter going, just mention you had fun shooting skeet.
I got permanently banned on another forum when I posted that a particular discussion reminded me of the therapy session from the movie "One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest".
So, Lighten up, Francis .... It is a hobby - have fun.
Last edited:
+1 on lighten up Francis. If someone wants to buy a .30SC pistol and shoot it, more power to them- it's their right, their decision, and their money. However, with that said, I just talked with my son who manages several gun stores/ranges in Florida. He says that based on their clientele, they only sell a few boxes of .30SC ammo every month, and only stock the S&W .30SC Shield EZ. Just sayin'...
