Handgun caliber evolution - Or its seeming absence

[darkgael]

Those are cartridges, not "calibers". "Caliber" is a unit of measure equal to 1/100th of an inch. Cartridges, on the other hand, are used in firearms. Yes, I know, "but everybody says calibers, Bobby says calibers, and Billy says calibers, I wanna say calibers, too!" Everyone doing a foolish thing does not make it not a foolish thing to do. Cartridges. Cartridges. Cartridges.

Yes! Hooray! Someone else who believes in using the right word

[Sabrewolfe]

Originally Posted by Elerius

I don't think that energy weapons of the hand held variety are that far away. We already see lasers attached to gun rails, the only change is the power required to ramp it up to weaponized standards and the things that go with that. Your number one problem is a power source, and batteries get more efficient all the time. Soon enough you'll be able to fire a few shots of powerful laser from a charge, and after that there will only be cooling and other factors that I think we are already within our abilities to design.

High energy storage would eventually give it advantages over projectile weapons in terms of shots fired vs weight, and needing no barrel length for accuracy, range, and recharging instead of having to produce ammunition.

All that can be done with bullets either already has been done or shortly will be, the only changes being nicer guns and more efficient methods of launching the projectile.

Um, there is a HUGE difference between the puny little 5 mW (0.005 Watt) CW laser on your gun rail and the 5+ KW (5,000+ Watt) pulse laser--tuned for flesh--needed to inflict potentially lethal damage on an unprotected human target. You are talking about a 1 MILLION percent "ramp up" in power. And considering that lasers are horribly inefficient--a "high efficiency" laser is getting 30% power conversion--you are going to need even more juice out of the power source. With most of the energy loss being in heat, cooling is a serious issue as well. It will also have to discharge that energy insanely fast to avoid a recharge lag on repeat shots, which isn't going to help the heat issue either.

Further, batteries are NOT improving much. You may have noticed your smartphone, tablet, and laptop batteries only last a few hours under use. IIRC, battery tech is only averaging about a 6% efficiency improvement per year and the improvements are slowing down, not speeding up.

Add to that the fact that lasers are hampered by things like rain, snow, fog, smog, smoke and, airborne dust and you have a major set of problems that projectile based weapons simply do not have to contend with.

Are they potentially plausible? Sure. But they aren't going to be as simple, reliable, durable, or general purpose practical as projectile throwers for small arms. The only case I see them as being likely to prove superior would be for sniping. The lack of impact from wind, gravity, and the rotation of the Earth, combined with a functionally instantaneous hit and near-zero recoil would make ultra-extreme range (>2 miles) headshots a real possibility.

[DaleA]

If they are going to innovate, I wouldn't mind having me a nice, modern recoiless large caliber pistol

Well you had your chance back in the 1960's with the Gyrojet. I remember it being .45 caliber but the Wiki article says .49 and .51 caliber.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyrojet

[Elerius]

Sabrewolfe, you are crushing my laser based dreams. I agree with the general argument about lasers in particular. I only mention the rail laser as the most basic comparison, and lasers are probably not the best type of energy weapon to use compared to other possible beam or particle type weapons. I stand by the statement that energy requirement is by far the biggest problem; snow, rain, fog and dust become less and less of an issue the more wattage you can pump into it, blooming things away from your beam path and correcting for focus with the mirror system those big gas Boeing lasers use for shooting down missiles.

I don't want to hijack the thread, this is already a bit off topic.

Well you had your chance back in the 1960's with the Gyrojet. I remember it being .45 caliber but the Wiki article says .49 and .51 caliber.

I was thinking of the Gyrojet when I wrote that, it seemed to suffer from a lot of problems though, one being low muzzle velocity that climbed the farther out the rocket flew. I'm not sure what that energy is, but it probably wouldn't make a suitable CCW in close ranges. Did those recoiless rifles use rockets or was that some other method? Again, sorry if this is too off topic.

[Jim Watson]

Jeff Cooper once said of a gas operated prototype from Husqvarna that the design was wasted on 9mm, but might show the way to a Mach 3 .17 caliber that would burn through any feasible body armor. Strange thought from the Gunners' Guru, but he was not the horse pistol antiquarian many think.
But we aren't there yet, Mach 2 is a pretty good trick in a handgun.

Swedish game biologists once concluded that 2650 fps was needed for formation of a "pulsatile cavern." That is "temporary cavity" in English ballistic-speak, and maybe "hydrostatic shock."
Pretty much what you get with a 6.5x55, so they may have started with the answer they wanted and got the data to support it, and also agree with decades of field experience.

But that makes Mach 3 a goal for "stopping power" as well as penetration.
And gives a landmark of .223 ballistics out of a holster weapon. We are a ways from that.

I read a lot of science fiction and always track on the smallarms.

There was once a hypothetical study of an infantry rifle sized laser weapon. It was powered by short half life radioactives, sidestepping the problems of battery capacity and efficiency. It was a gas dynamic laser, firing when you flushed hot gas down the emitting tube. Delivered energy was about like a .45ACP +P at an IR wavelength not too badly absorbed by air and effective to 1000 metres.
A mathematically inclined reader concluded that the surge of gas down the tube would give it the recoil of a .458 Win Mag. Of course they could have surged it the other way, but then how do you hold on to the weapon if it kicks away from you?

Then there was the fictional Slichter railgun. About as powerful as a .338 Win Mag; and the heroine carried one in her purse. I bet that put runs in her nylons.

David Drake arms the Republic of Cinnabar with electromotive weapons., coil guns. Physically possible but requiring batteries orders of magnitude better than available on Old Earth.

[Jim Watson]

Oh, yeah, the Gyrojet.

First production was in 13mm until somebody noticed that it would qualify as a Destructive Device, being larger than .5". So they went to 12mm. Hence the reference to .51 and .49 calibers.

Rocket burnout and maximum velocity was about 25 feet. Much closer and you were likelier to singe an assailant than to perforate him.
You could visualize a hybrid design with a little cartridge propelling charge for short range effectiveness and a booster for extreme speed and range.
Accuracy was miserable. Most firearms are rated in MOA for accuracy. The Gyrojet people talked in Mils (3.6 moa per Mil) and the numbers were still uncomfortably large.
I always thought the best application would have been a really lightweight machine gun for area coverage by paratroops.

[44 AMP]

The accuracy problem with the Gyrojet was essentially because it was a virtual smoothbore, and the venturi jet openings in the projectile were angled to give it some spin as it traveled downrange. IIRC.

Rail guns, needlers, plasma guns, etc are still a bit beyond our capabilities, at least as man portable for the near future, anyway.

It was powered by short half life radioactives, sidestepping the problems of battery capacity and efficiency.

This is a common trick of SciFi writers. Note that they never explain just how that would work. Because they can't. Radioisotopes produce heat, and radiation. That's all, until you get into nuclear fission or fusion. And when you get to that level, essentially that's all they still do, produce heat and radiation, just in massive quantities, instantaneously. (and while heat is technically a form of radiation, lets not go there right now)

[micromontenegro]

"Caliber" is a unit of measure equal to 1/100th of an inch

That is a new one

[44 AMP]

"Caliber" is a multi definition word, used in several different ways, depending on context.

Bore diameter, expressed in decimals (1/100 inch) is most common.

Gunmakers list cartridge names as "calibers".

Various legal forms use cartridge names, and call them "caliber".

And caliber is also used to describe the length of artillery barrels, expressed in multiples of bore diameter. The main guns of Iowa class battleships are referred to as 16" 50 caliber rifles.

And caliber is also used to indicate an undefined measurement, as in "the caliber of the opposition".

Truly a multi purpose word.

[DaleA]

And caliber is also used to indicate an undefined measurement, as in "the caliber of the opposition".

Correct.

Also as in: "The circus would never 'fire' the human cannon ball as they could never find another person of his caliber."

[SIGSHR]

We are still debating the "smaller, lighter bullet at high velocity" vs. the "larger, slower bullet". IMHO biggest impact that smokeless powder had on handgun/ cartridge design was that it made the semiautomatic feasible.
Certain forms of "evolution" are dead ends. A bottle necked or tapered cartridge in a revolver, e.g. Sounds great in theory, but....or ones like the 357 Maximum, a good example of the law of Unexpected Results rearing its head.

[bedbugbilly]

Why? Maybe because "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?". Regardless of when they came out . . . the .38 spl., 45 ACP, etc. work. But I'm an old fart. I think in today's world, people think everything needs to "change" at the same rate as the cell phone, "apps", etc. - as far as cartridges . . . again . . . if it works, why "fix" it?

[gyvel]

All cartridges, calibres, or whatever you want to call them are variations on a theme. The advent of the self-contained cartridge was a milestone in firearms developement, but the basic principle has remained unchanged for 150+ years. Smokeless powder was another milestone, with tremendous advantages over black powder, but, again, the basic principle remains the same, much like the basic principal of the internal combustion engine has remained the same, with only variations on a theme. At some point, development reaches a pinnacle stage and stagnates until some drastically new invention comes along.

The next great "leap forward" will be some entirely new means of delivering a fatal wound with something other than combustible cartridges.

[Jo6pak]

SIGSHR mentioned that "evolution" was not the best term. I feel it is the a great definition of the progress of small arms.
It is not only linear, it is made up of more dead-ends than successes. There are good designs developed and those continue beyond those that are not successful, either in ballistics or marketing.
Some "species" go extinct almost immediately (.45 GAP), while others flourish for a long time before changing environments or other more suitable "creatures" out-compete them for the resources of the buying public (32 Auto).
Some designs evolve into something "better." (ie. 10mm auto into the .40 S+W.)
Some great designs never really catch on, but are successful in a small niche; often because they offer something different that can be used in existing guns with little modification (.357Sig)

There are even a few that live on only in captivity by those that are passionate about the animal. (.41 AE, 45 Auto Rim)

This is all a little tongue in cheek, but I think we see the analogy

[MSD Mike]

In all honesty I would just be happy if they would get 22 lr on the shelf. I would take that over any new caliber I can think of.
As mentioned any new caliber would have to deliver something unique. Ammo companies can apparently sell every round of current calibers that they can make so I think the new caliber incentive is pretty far down the priority list at the moment. If ammo sales ever slow down you will see something new in an effort to bolster sales. Its all about the $$

Thanks
Mike

[44 AMP]

Evolution is a fair word, as an analogy. But not perfect.

Remember Nature's only measurement for success is each generation surviving long enough to reproduce. And nothing else.

With a given cartridge, or firearm, it is somewhat more complicated, but still essentially the same overall process.

New ideas emerge (mutations), get tested in the environment (the market), and if they are good enough to survive they continue. If they are actually a superior product (dominant mutation?) they will flourish.

Do this long enough, and they become the dominant species.

[simonrichter]

Those are cartridges, not "calibers". "Caliber" is a unit of measure equal to 1/100th of an inch. Cartridges, on the other hand, are used in firearms.

So if someone hands you a pistol, stating it was a, say, .40 caliber, would you...

a.) ... expect it to utilize any cartridge with a 0,40 inch-diameter bullet OR

b.) ... expect it to be made for the .40 S&W cartridge in particular?

The pragmatic use of language is oblivious of formal definitions. Reckon we all here know that caliber in a narrower sense can refer to the diameter as such, yet it is not wrong to equal "cartridge" and "caliber". Language is changing, matter of fact.

[Skans]

Handgun cartridges have evolved considerably. Just because 9mm and .380 have been around for years doesn't mean that today's 9mm and .380 resemble the weak ball ammo cartridges of your granddaddy. Today's 9mm+p+ and .380 defensive cartridges make concealed carry easy, with the power of a .357 or .38 special revolver respectively.

[simonrichter]

maybe I didn't really convey the point I wanted to make, so one more try: What I wanted to point out is that it seems that there IS a kind of new generation of low-recoil, minimal weight, long range, optimal penetrating, high cap rounds (5,7 x 28 / 4,6 x 39 / 6,5 x 25 cbm / .22tcm...) , but obviously the mass market (more or less) ignores them or they never even made it to civilian use at all.

It is to say that for all these calibers an energy transfer rate (due to tumbling after impact) and wound channel etc. much higher than for 9mm is claimed. So a lack of the much-trumpeted "stopping power" can't be the reason either, can it?

[Jim Watson]

Since most of the named cartridges (except for the .22 TCM) were developed for military and militarized police use and incorporate armor piercing bullets, MY government does not trust me with them. The 5.7 FN is available in denatured commercial form, but I have seen no case studies of its use. Except of course for murder by the Traitor Major at Ft Hood in 2009.

I read a lot of enthusiastic internet reports on the TCM, but they do not include actually shooting man or beast.

There were two programs to develop Super .32s for European armed government employees. The emphasis was on penetration equal to 9mm P with less recoil. See 7.92x24 VBR and 7mm Penna

Then there was the .224 Boz. Derived from 10mm Norma necked down to .22, it would do about all that could be done with a .22 caliber handgun. Its British backers seemed more concerned with keeping it out of civilian hands, especially those American gun nuts, than fielding it.

[s3779m]

Must be a real hard market to crack. The 327 magnum is not a new caliber but as a new cartridge ( hope I used them two words right)I believe its future is in doubt. IMHO I thought it had a real good chance to make it. The longest post I have ever read on the firing line had to do with this cartridge, so people did know about it, just did not take off.

[johnwilliamson062]

It's historical because it was the first repeating rifle issued by a Government (Switzerland on January 8, 1869).

May have been the first repeating firearm, but it wasn't the first repeating rifle. About 75 years late on that.
Even that is arguable as about 15,000 Henry rifles were issued during the civil war and about 50000 Spencers. The Henry rifle was never close to a standard issue arm such as the Vetterli.

As Jo6pack noted, all those light fast bullets of the last fifty years or so were designed to penetrate armor. They don't perform any better against unarmored targets. It turns out only a few countries can afford body armor and they don't usually fight each other directly. Even those countries deal with a lot of expiration issues. I read awhile back about half the kevlar and similar soft armor vests in the US LE are past their 5 year expiration and have significantly degraded protection.

The last really "new" cartridge that has established itself was the 40 S&W.

Even there I think 40 SW will fade in the future. 40 SW is only really suitable for "shooters," of which there are a lot on this forum. If you are shooting less than 150 rounds a year, as most LEO in the US, it is a terribly difficult round to control, especially if you don't have the brute strength to He-man it. Get rid of LEO support and the round fails. With the advances in 9mm bullet design I think things will tend towards 9mm. Already a lot of neutered 40 being used and as guns are replaced I think 40 will slowly fade.

I wrote something about the advent of energy weapons, but Sabre wolf covered all my points more eloquently.

The 327 mags failure has somewhat surprised me, but I think it failed b/c Ruger never gave it a chance. How is there STILL not a 327 LCR? A hammered LCR before the 327?

GAP was a great idea, but I don't think you will ever see another successful cartridge with a firearm company in its name. Even GLOCK can't force a caliber without other manufacturers using it also. Maybe with heavy .gov support, but that isn't going to happen with a pistol round any time soon. Trademarks and patent protection has tightened a lot to reduce the parrallel compatible cartridges solution.

Make it legal to put a folding stock or wrist brace on a handgun without NFA hassle and you will see more powerful cartridges take off. Most casual shooters cant handle more than a 9mm+P+. I'm not talking about slow fire from a static position at the range. I'm talking shooting 1+ round per second while moving or shooting from irregular positions. I can go months without shooting a handgun and pick-up a 9mm and rapid fire a mag pretty well one handed laying on my back shooting to my right under a car. I can't do that with a 40 SW. Add a brace a la wrist rocket and I might give it a try.

[B.L.E.]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

"Caliber" is a multi definition word, used in several different ways, depending on context.

Bore diameter, expressed in decimals (1/100 inch) is most common.

Gunmakers list cartridge names as "calibers".

Various legal forms use cartridge names, and call them "caliber".

And caliber is also used to describe the length of artillery barrels, expressed in multiples of bore diameter. The main guns of Iowa class battleships are referred to as 16" 50 caliber rifles.

And caliber is also used to indicate an undefined measurement, as in "the caliber of the opposition".

Truly a multi purpose word.

And, if I'm not mistaken, it originates from the Arabic word for mold, used to cast bullets.

You can also "gauge" the opposition.

[Model12Win]

I disagree with whoever said modern 9mm +P+ performs the same as .357 magnum. SORRY! Not in this universe buddy, ain't gonna happen.

I think the next big shift in handgun cartridges probably will be caseless/electrically fired rounds with bullet sizes/weight/velocities close to traditional metallic cartridges but with all the benefits of caseless technology.

[barnbwt]

Lack of evolution? Nah... Haven't you seen the quantum leap of boundless, mind-blowing innovation known as the 9mm "+P"

Oh, wait, there's a plus-P-plus, now? Oh, do go on! What will they think of next?

TCB