-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
S&W Introduces the new SHIELD EZ 30 SUPER CARRY in the new 30 SUPER CARRY Caliber
- Thread starter Rockrivr1
- Start date
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
356 TSW
Did they release firearms with the caliber as well? I've never seen one. I know the round was targeted toward shooting sports. Was this caliber released with the hopes people would just re-chamber their guns?
An NRA Shooting Sports Journal | .356 TSW: A Comeback Kid?
Released in 1993 for IPSC and USPSA Limited-division competitive shooters as a major power factor round, the .356 TSW produces a 182-power factor. Later on, IPSC and USPSA would rule that a cartridge had to be at least .40 cal. to qualify for major power factor in Limited division, leaving the...
Sparkey
NES Member
I believe they made some j frames and 5906’s they may have been all performance center models. You are correct it was geared towards IDPA and other shooting sports
SJan
NES Member
The added capacity in open could be a significant advantage.
What is the bullet diameter of this 30 super carry?
The rules show
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 38,167
- Likes
- 33,124
I believe the bullet diameter is 0.312" and the bullet weight (from what I've seen on the Federal website) is 100 grains. So this won't meet rules 3 and 4 for Open right?
Even if it did, where are you going to get an Open gun chambered in 30 super carry right now?
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
I know it's brand new so nothing chambered in it aside from a S&W Shield and a Nighthawk 1911.I just can't see you dumping your 38 super comp open guns for an open gun in 30 super carry so you can gain an extra couple rounds?? Your 38 super comp guns already hold like 26 or 28 rounds right?
I may be missing/overlooking something
SJan
NES Member
@andrew1220
Believe me, if it meant 35 rounds fit in a 170mm mag, builders would start making 2011s in that caliber immediately. (Assuming it was within the rules and made major)
Believe me, if it meant 35 rounds fit in a 170mm mag, builders would start making 2011s in that caliber immediately. (Assuming it was within the rules and made major)
SJan
NES Member
32 rounds/stage is the max at a level 3 match. But you're absolutely right.
I'm glad the 30 super carry is too small diameter, so no need to worry about this.
It's bad enough there is a small push to lower major PF.
I'm glad the 30 super carry is too small diameter, so no need to worry about this.
It's bad enough there is a small push to lower major PF.
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 38,167
- Likes
- 33,124
Imagine how bad it'll be when some guy shows up at the range with that thing.
"It's my Super Easy Carry Shield. Wait. My Easy Super Shield Carry. . . . . Shield Carry Super Easy? Super Easy Carry Shield - SECS. I want SECS!!!"
"It's my Super Easy Carry Shield. Wait. My Easy Super Shield Carry. . . . . Shield Carry Super Easy? Super Easy Carry Shield - SECS. I want SECS!!!"
Quite_Exasperated
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2020
- Messages
- 2,793
- Likes
- 5,315
Bore and stroke, that’s what she said…
SJan
NES Member
Just major. Nobody wants to change minor.
Getting off topic here, but I'll go on
The idea of lowering major for open division started with a well known gun builder, who sometimes has to warranty broken guns. The builder claims his reasoning is based on safety.
Parker Schreiber
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2020
- Messages
- 1,735
- Likes
- 2,519
I see this as another attempt as a "Goldilocks" round, much like 6.5 Grendel, 6.8 SPC, .357 Sig, and .40, only this time, it's between 9mm and .380. Oddly, .40 is the most derided one of those "just right" rounds and also the most commercially successful, so I won't make any predictions for "super carry." If a .380 is a mouse pistol, would this be for a gerbil pistol? Gere up, everyone!
I’d say it’s more like a 9mm mini, rather than being slotted between 9mm and 380 since it has nearly the energy of 9mm. It’s just narrower.
I think the only reason why 40 took off was because the FBI adopted it. So lots of other LEAs hopped on the bandwagon, trusting the FBI’s testing. Which filtered down to civilian buyers. Without FBI adoption it would have died (forgetting that it wouldn’t exist without the FBI).
You can literally launch a 230 gr head out of a slingshot and still make major p.f.
SJan
NES Member
I spent way too much time researching if this is possible.
According to Wikipedia the world record sling shot was 135 joules. No mention of the mass of the projectile or it's speed.
Back to your 230g.... at 718fps is 165pf, and 355 joules. Way more than any slingshot
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2020
- Messages
- 1,607
- Likes
- 1,886
Funniest post of the day but the day is young. Any challengers.
![[devil2]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/017.gif "Devil2 [devil2]")
No love for 7.62 x38R Nagant?Lot of people are asking why this exists and the obvious answer right now is the .30 Super has increased capacity of 9mm without sacrificing performance and the possibility of dedicated pistols built from the ground up for .30 Super that will be slimmer than current 9mm's.
The downside is .30 Super is never going to be as cheap as 9mm and that turns off like 90% of the civilian market who aren't willing to pay more for a caliber that does the same thing 9mm does. For people in capacity restricted states the .30 Super makes absolutely no sense to own, not unless they want a pistol the size of the Ruger LC9, but is as slim as an LCP and holds 10 rds of .30 Super.
As big a propnant of .32 that I am even I'm struggling to justify the startup costs in terms of the gun, holster, and ammo will run me. I have never believed for a semi auto that holding 2 more rounds is going to make a difference, one reason I haven't given up on .40, I still think it's more capable than 9mm. If anything the reason I'm likely to move away from .40 is price of ammo and really the crux of why people are so resistant to a new handgun caliber is because it's always going to cost more.
I've said it before and I'll say again that the point of .32 (in a semi auto, in a revolver it's debatable) is not to enhance capacity, but to lower recoil. In that vain the .32 NAA is the perfect .32 because it's fits in the same pistols .380 does, yet has the velocity to get hollow points to expand and because the bullets have a higher ballistic coefficient the penetration is better. .32 NAA would be more effective than .380, yet in larger pistols have less recoil than 9mm.
This .30 Super achieves none of that and that's why I really don't care about it. If it succeeds, great, if it doesn't, whatever. For those who are obssessed with capacity literally at all cost, then the .30 Super is for them.
The downside is .30 Super is never going to be as cheap as 9mm and that turns off like 90% of the civilian market who aren't willing to pay more for a caliber that does the same thing 9mm does. For people in capacity restricted states the .30 Super makes absolutely no sense to own, not unless they want a pistol the size of the Ruger LC9, but is as slim as an LCP and holds 10 rds of .30 Super.
As big a propnant of .32 that I am even I'm struggling to justify the startup costs in terms of the gun, holster, and ammo will run me. I have never believed for a semi auto that holding 2 more rounds is going to make a difference, one reason I haven't given up on .40, I still think it's more capable than 9mm. If anything the reason I'm likely to move away from .40 is price of ammo and really the crux of why people are so resistant to a new handgun caliber is because it's always going to cost more.
I've said it before and I'll say again that the point of .32 (in a semi auto, in a revolver it's debatable) is not to enhance capacity, but to lower recoil. In that vain the .32 NAA is the perfect .32 because it's fits in the same pistols .380 does, yet has the velocity to get hollow points to expand and because the bullets have a higher ballistic coefficient the penetration is better. .32 NAA would be more effective than .380, yet in larger pistols have less recoil than 9mm.
This .30 Super achieves none of that and that's why I really don't care about it. If it succeeds, great, if it doesn't, whatever. For those who are obssessed with capacity literally at all cost, then the .30 Super is for them.
The .40 was a good middle ground between 9 and 45 and at the time hollow points worked in .40 while they struggled in 9mm. It didn't hurt that 10mm and .40 were both designed specifically around using hollow points.
Today the .40 is as capable as it ever was, but ammo will never be as cheap as 9mm is and because it recoils more it turns off many who are obsessed with shooting as fast and accurately as possible.
Also to everyone who is musing that .30 Sup would be decent in an LCP sized pistol... how you gonna fit a cartridge that's as long as 9mm in magazine meant for .380?
The .30 Super is not meant to compete with or replace .380 pocket pistols, it's basically "New look, same great taste!" 9mm.
The .30 Super is not meant to compete with or replace .380 pocket pistols, it's basically "New look, same great taste!" 9mm.
Similar threads
