Does it have enough stopping power to carry?
>>61449172Yeah.
Straight walled cartridges with taper are truly disgusting. Like, make up your mind.
>>61449172it's actually too much imo. minmax is 30 SC. the poors will continue to shill 9mm though since more supply = lower prices for them, so you can safely ignore nu-fudds on this board that claim it's the be all end all.
>>61449427min max is 5.7max ammopentrates level 3 like 10mm
>>61449427>minmax is 30 SCUntil someone comes out with a .257super at 1.6"OAL, which would simultaneously outflank .30 and 5.7.
>>61449205Slight taper is good.
>>61449467wouldnt have the low recoil of 5.7
>>61449507The slight taper only exists because Georg's excellent bottleneck cartridge was diddled by ordnance.
>>61449427Ok, post yours
>>61449521It would have higher capacity, more projectile energy, less flash, and low recoil.It would also make fudds cream their pants, partly because "corderbore", and it would very closely resemble a slim .30carbine.
>>61449172Muh stoppin, how about you stop talking. Shot placement is king.
>>61449467>25 SMC (Super Magnum Compact)Fund it
>>61449586Then why aren’t you a millionaire? What about your idea is so retarded no one has done it? Can you figure it out yourself or should I spoon feed you?
>>61449600Personally I'd brand it something like .25slim. Only four non-clashing syllables, describes the form, isn't fucking gay like "supercarry". Everyone likes the word "slim"."Super Magnum Compact" makes me think of about 10 different failed magnum calibers, most of them by Ruger and Remington.
>>61449205Slight taper is better for sounding
>>61449946somehow not an issue in 5.7
>>61449172its been "stopping" people for 120 years.
>>61449427When can I get a single stack 30sc with the thinnest sheet metal frame possible?
>>61449172plenty
>>61449600
>>61449205Sorry if you're offended by superior reliability.
>>61449467>>61449600>>614494671.6 COAL would be a mistake: it would then only fit in 5.7x28 frames, which probably need a revised recoil system. Basically, you'd obstruct adoption like 5.7x28 did at the start.Instead, you should probably go with the ~29.7mm COAL of 9x19mm, which means it fits in most standard handguns and magazines. This keeps the guns compact and helps with market adoption. According to GRT, with a 4.2 inch barrel you'd get about 1900FPS from this shorter cartridge. With the longer cartridge it might get you 100-150FPS more, but it requires a lot more powder and doesn't burn as efficiently, so it doesn't just hurt the packaging, it also makes for either terrible muzzle flash (bad in a carry gun) or you end up with the lower velocity anyways. A compromise could be a .45 ACP-length cartridge, but there's only very minor gains there (probably around 50FPS)., Oh, and of course the shorter cartridge works better in shorter barrels, which are better for carry.>>61449645It should just be called .25 Super, keep it simple. It evokes the name of the excellent .38 Super, and hopefully none of the .30 ''Super'' Carry nonsense.
Itll get the job done, but I'll always take a .45 over a 9.
>>61452195>t. has no idea what the ballistics of a .45 areIt literally drops like 2 feet travelling to 100 yards>but ill never shoot that farbut you might and the drop is still awful at shorter ranges. Its a literal paintball bullet
>>61449172Yes. Anyone who tell you differently should work on their shot placement.
>>61449600For me it's the .250 JAWS
>>61452153>1.6 COAL would be a mistake: it would then only fit in 5.7x28 framesYeah, that's the idea. It should straddle rifle performance and be useful in things like bolt action varmint rifles to ranges of ~150yds, longer if wildcatters want to make .22/.17 versions out of it. If some people want a shorter one they can always cut down longer brass. The problem with starting from a shorter cartridge is that you can't lengthen it.>With the longer cartridge it might get you 100-150FPS moreFrom a 4.5" barrel. Here's the thing though: people are not concerned about powder efficiency in their carry weapons, just as top fuel dragsters don't care about fuel efficiency. But even so, it will be more efficient than 5.7, something people have already demonstrated they'll tolerate.All of the drawbacks of 5.7 are less so in this theoretical 1.6" .25, but something like S&W's tempo system (made for 5.7) would be a perfect for it.
>>61452237With a 6in barrel it drops much less and it’s easier to get long range hits with, out of a 4.whatever, it does lob quite a bit.
>>61449467.22 TCM
>>61453004"Supers" are straight-wall rimless cartridges.
>>61453099.38 Super begs to differ
>>61453099.40 super is a bottleneck.
>>61453123Huh, I did not know that. OK, well I wasn't talking about "outflanking" 5.7 with a cartridge which has the same mag capacity as 9mm.The theme of the conversation was that 30sc is not "minmax" because it's simply the smallest people have dared to go so far. A 1.6OAL .257 straight wall with a .300 rim diameter would truly be minmax.
indeed even .40 .45 and revolver rounds have a very slight taper but probably to avoid a reverse taper due to manufacturing imprecisions. maybe 9mms taper is a little much but who cares>>614517285.7 only works because its coated with plastic that gets sripped off with every extraction, otherwise it would not be possible to have a completely straight walled cartridge with such a high pressure work reliable out of blowback guns5.7 is actually a good example for a round that would be better off being tapered, along with a completely different weapon concept. kinda like 4.6 and the mp7
>>61452237>this nigga said a 45 behaves the same as a paintball It's okay anon, I won't judge you for your low IQ. You can stick to 9 and ill stick to 45 because clearly it's a skill issue holding you back and I'm not that guy to help you. Best wishes.
no
>>61449427>minmax is 30 SCThe mental gymnastics this cartridge has forced 9mm fags into have been pretty entertaining>magazine capacity and shot placement are more important than terminal ballistics >but the extra magazine capacity of 30sc doesn't matter because it expands marginally less than 9mm>but also better terminal ballistics doesn't matter for 40 or 45 because you lose a round or two in the magazineTurns out people only buy 9mm because it's in vogue and not for anything related to its performance>>61449467>>61449600>blow 5.7 bottleneck out to maximize internal ballistics >get 6.5-7mm straight wall case with basically no bullets available 30SC will already get higher velocities than 5.7 out of a pistol while using heavier bullets in a shorter barrel. Having to develop bespoke bullets doesn't make the potential advantages worth it imo.>>61452237>>t. has no idea what the ballistics of a .45 are>he thinks all 45 is 230gr at 800fps 45ACP
I think overpenetration is a bigger concern than stopping power.
>>61449172Going by the last 80+ years I’m not sure the jury is out yet… Give it another century for it to catch on a little more, and then we’ll see.
>>61454653>>blow 5.7 bottleneck out to maximize internal ballisticsZero people said this.>>get 6.5-7mm straight wall case with basically no bullets availableYes, if you do the thing which no-one proposed doing, you get to .264 at a minimum, but probably .277, that's why it's been deliberately and repeatedly said that it should be .257, for which there is a wide variety of 60-80gr bullets.You get to .257 by shaving .002 off the 25acp rim (.300, intentionally the same diameter as .22magnum), and blowing out the base to .298 tapering to ~.284-.288 depending on how thick you want the neck brass to be. This taper is best absorbed in a longer case of ~1.3".Next time something doesn't make immediate arithmetic sense, just examine the assumptions you're making before telling everyone they got it wrong.
>>61449172>stopping power>pistolYou stamp holes.Make sure you stamp the right places.
>>61449645Slim sounds weak.
>>61454653This entire post reads like you're arguing with people you just made up about shit nobody cares enough to talk to you about.9mm is king because it's there. As is 5.56.No need to cope about either.
>>61455002This.Under ~2200fps, tissue adjacent to the bullet's path is not displaced beyond it's elastic limits and you don't get the wounding mechanism which makes rifle injuries less survivable than pistol ones.
>>61449172No. 10mm or nothing
>>61454912>You get to .257 by shaving .002 off the 25acp rim (.300, intentionally the same diameter as .22magnum), and blowing out the base to .298 tapering to ~.284-.288 depending on how thick you want the neck brass to be. This taper is best absorbed in a longer case of ~1.3".>Starting from a 25acp case>I'm the silly oneSimpsons did it, you just described 25 k hornet almost exactly. Trim the neck back and cut an extractor groove a la 22 SCAMP and you'll have your perfect autism cartridge. Reamers and reloading dies are available so it'd be a pretty straightforward cartridge to make. It'd make a fantastic varmint and deer rifle cartridge or pdw cartridge but from a pistol the small bore is literally the bottleneck preventing Mach 2 velocities with bullets that aren't hopelessly light. In quickload 25 hornet and 30sc produced the same velocities with the same bullet weights at 55,000psi out of a 5" barrel. Yeah there's less sectional density but it's also a shorter cartridge. Neither broke the magic 2200fps. 30 carbine necked to .312 would be pretty great with loadings optimized for pistols. 55 grain solid copper bullets should be able to easily break 2200fps out of a 5" barrel
>>61449600>tfw you buy the last box of hardcast 25 SMC+p+ at the LGS
>>61454653Thats why I dig my 80x cheetah. .380 is fine and the gun is a friggin laser beam, you feel like you can’t miss and there’s practically no recoil. A ragged hole to the solar plexus in like a second. Also its the same size as a P365xl
>>61449172how many people are you shooting per day
>>61456197>>Starting from a 25acp caseOnce again you just cannot be honest about what you've read. I'm describing the physical size of the case and why it's important. You didn't accuse me of "starting" with 22mag did you? Right? So in some instances you're able to follow a theme, but you selectively like to pretend it doesn't exist when it's time to strawman what's being said to you.>you just described 25 k hornet almost exactlyYes, I'm aware, except every variant of 25 hornet (and there seem to be as many as there are reamers) was never loaded to full pressure. I'm also describing ballistics similar to 25-20. You know what 25 hornet doesn't do? It doesn't have a .300 rim. It doesn't have the same rim diameter as the cartridge all rimfire rifle receivers are built to physically accommodate in two critical dimensions.It's almost as if, and bear with me here, I'm describing putting a class of performance which already exists, in a package smaller than it exists today. I'm not claiming to have theorized a new speed.>In quickload 25 hornet and 30sc produced the same velocities with the same bullet weights at 55,000psi out of a 5" barrel.And this proposed cartridge would hold more rounds than 30sc. In fact we don't need to guess how much more because 22mag guns with 30-round mags already exist, and the maximal dimension determines how much magazine space the cartridge occupies.>Yeah there's less sectional density but it's also a shorter cartridge.And for the same sectional density the 25 will be faster. And as barrel length increases the 25 will continue pulling ahead.>Neither broke the magic 2200fps.In a carbine some loadings will definitely exceed 2200fps, not that I ever claimed it would in a pistol. All I'm saying is that this theoretical cartridge is closer to the minmax than 30sc. I think 30sc is great but suffers from terrible marketing.
>>61456899Most based compact to come out in a while.
>>61452153super? more like stupor
>>61454839that french cartoon was so fucking weird.
>>61458131Aeon Flux wasn't French, if you can believe it.
>>61458166well, i'll be damned. I remembered it on liquid television but I thought it was foreign.
>>61454653Nah, because nobody makes pistols in .30 SC. And those that do are nobodies. So nobody uses them. 9mm is high cap, with ideal terminal ballistics, and most of all, COMMON. Get your non-NATO spec ass outta here
>>61449602hypothetical cartridges and wildcatery are for the most part just concentrated autism. cartridges have crazy inertia because of compatibility (both ways) and because guns stick around forever and doesnt become obsolete the way IT does, and you dont really need a super minmaxed thing 99% of the time
>>61449177Nah.
