GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-11-2013, 20:47   #1
brokenprism
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 280
Is a .43 Feasible? Is it a Waste?

I got some great answers about bullet weights in .40 in another post, and I consider the .40 in a high capacity semi-auto to be the best of all worlds as a defensive round (within the limits a handgun brings to the table vs a rifle), but I'm curious about ammo development generally. Someone saw the need for a .40 and the planets aligned for caliber and cartridge length. Since the design was basically a downloaded 10mm trying to solve a recoil problem, it makes me wonder what would have happened if they had started with a clean sheet of paper.

The .45 ACP is a proven round, but it's too long a cartridge for a 9mm frame (apparently), but how far up could a designer go in bullet diameter before the return on investment would be irrelevant? How much, if anything, would be gained by a slightly larger diameter bullet while still keeping it in the medium frame platform? Would the increased weight of a larger diameter put us back in the recoil territory that drove the 10mm down to the .40 in the first place?

I've paid only passing attention to new calibers like .327 and .480 Ruger, and I automatically wonder "Why bother when you have .357 and .44 mg?" but here I am speculating on something similar. Had the 10mm not been the starting point, might we have had the .43 S&W...? Is it mechanically possible?
brokenprism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 21:04   #2
greenlion
Senior Member
 
greenlion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 930
Umm.... 45 Gap....
greenlion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 21:08   #3
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Considering the ".44" is actually .429 ...........
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 07:18   #4
Wil Terry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 313
YOU SIR, are in dire need of a fresh copy of "Cartridges Of The World."
Wil Terry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 09:51   #5
fredj338
Senior Member
 
fredj338's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: so.cal.
Posts: 22,216
Blog Entries: 3
The 40 wasn't so much an answer to recoiol of th 10mm, the ammo manuf did that by just reducign the load. It was more about getting smaller size guns. The 1006 the FBI was using is quite a large gun.
Developing new or wildcat rounds is fun, but an exercise in futility trying to make something to fill the tiny holes left in the cartridge community. SO in your project, a 44cal bullet would be in order. It couldn't be any heavier than about 200gr to fit into a case large enough to have a good powder volume & fit into a 40 frame. The likely case would be a 45acp necked down slightly, sort of like a fat 357sig. I am sure it would be useful, maybe 1100fps w/ a 200gr bullet, but why? You can get close to 1000fps in the 40 w/ a 200gr bullet.
That would be the cheapest way to start, design the case, have a reamer made, have the dies made with the reamer, have a bbl made. BUy a Glock in 45GAP, you could probably get into it the entire project for under $2000.
__________________
"Given adequate penetration, a larger diameter bullet will have an edge in wounding effectiveness. It will damage a blood vessel the smaller projectile barely misses. The larger permanent cavity may lead to faster blood loss. Although such an edge clearly exists, its significance cannot be quantified".
fredj338 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 09:54   #6
gatorboy
Senior Member
 
gatorboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,253
43Super? Use with 180-200 gr. .429 bullets? Large frame pistols (45ACP/10mm).

43GAP? same as above with small frame pistols (9mm/40).

Not a waste but not available. It would be simple to ream and bore a 10mm or 40 barrel. Brass is the tricky part!

When 45 ACP, Super & GAP and 10mm are available it's not really necessary. If you're mega wealthy and want to have a few million cases made up and maybe some drop-in barrels for Glocks, reloaders here would try it out I'm sure of it. You could name it the 44prism.
gatorboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 09:56   #7
rustytxrx
Senior Member
 
rustytxrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,068
what was the 44 b&d (or sumpin like that_)

edit - nope that was a 44 mag necked to 357. I thought I remembered a 45 win mag or something necked to 44 cal. Hmmmm????

if not and you are going for an auto round 45 win mag might be a place to start
__________________
Rusty
Texas, I luv u

Last edited by rustytxrx; 05-12-2013 at 10:17..
rustytxrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 12:04   #8
brokenprism
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenlion View Post
Umm.... 45 Gap....
It's been done, huh? Pity.

Somebody mentioned the 20/21 frame size -- I like those calibers but I hate the frames. Too fat. It makes me wonder if the G21 really has to have such a big slide for such a mild cartridge. If they could squeeze the .45 ACP into a G17 sized gun, I'd be all over it (I know, .45 GAP).

On the other hand, one of the things I value in my Glock 23 is capacity; you'd have a single stack .45 and there are plenty of those out there. The more stories I read about violent aggressors -- sometimes working in crews -- the more respect I have for high capacity magazines. As a guy said in another thread, handgun bullets are like bees. They'll kill you, but it might take the whole hive to do it. Well said.

A 200 gr .44 wouldn't leave much room for powder. Of course, widening the case would create a scoche more powder space, wouldn't it?
brokenprism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 12:18   #9
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokenprism View Post
It's been done, huh? Pity.

Somebody mentioned the 20/21 frame size -- I like those calibers but I hate the frames. Too fat. It makes me wonder if the G21 really has to have such a big slide for such a mild cartridge. If they could squeeze the .45 ACP into a G17 sized gun, I'd be all over it (I know, .45 GAP).

On the other hand, one of the things I value in my Glock 23 is capacity; you'd have a single stack .45 and there are plenty of those out there. The more stories I read about violent aggressors -- sometimes working in crews -- the more respect I have for high capacity magazines. As a guy said in another thread, handgun bullets are like bees. They'll kill you, but it might take the whole hive to do it. Well said.

A 200 gr .44 wouldn't leave much room for powder. Of course, widening the case would create a scoche more powder space, wouldn't it?
Just how are you going to come up with a WIDER case AND a NARROWER frame?

This is getting recockulous
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 13:20   #10
Tiro Fijo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,281
The one thing that has changed somewhat is the powders. I used to think that in the future we would see huge breakthroughs in new powders, and we have to some extent, however very little powder is made in the USA today and I'd imagine as a result little if any R&D. I also thought caseless ammo was the future in the 80's and I still believe that the Military nixing it will be remembered in 100 yrs. not unlike those who scoffed at repeaters during the Civil War.

FWIW, the Military is testing a weapon somewhat similar as I type.
Tiro Fijo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 13:48   #11
cowboywannabe
you savvy?
 
cowboywannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: on a planet near you
Posts: 22,321
with all the usual suspects in the caliber arena, rounds like the 45gap struggle to stay relavant.
__________________
with Sarah Jane, Leela, Romana, Nyssa, and Tegan.

Facts are no match against enthusiasm and ignorance...
cowboywannabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 14:10   #12
Michael Rye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustytxrx View Post
what was the 44 b&d (or sumpin like that_)

edit - nope that was a 44 mag necked to 357. I thought I remembered a 45 win mag or something necked to 44 cal. Hmmmm????

if not and you are going for an auto round 45 win mag might be a place to start
Bain and Davis. Interesting cartridge, but it never went anywhere.
Michael Rye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 14:52   #13
fredj338
Senior Member
 
fredj338's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: so.cal.
Posts: 22,216
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokenprism View Post
It's been done, huh? Pity.

Somebody mentioned the 20/21 frame size -- I like those calibers but I hate the frames. Too fat. It makes me wonder if the G21 really has to have such a big slide for such a mild cartridge. If they could squeeze the .45 ACP into a G17 sized gun, I'd be all over it (I know, .45 GAP).

On the other hand, one of the things I value in my Glock 23 is capacity; you'd have a single stack .45 and there are plenty of those out there. The more stories I read about violent aggressors -- sometimes working in crews -- the more respect I have for high capacity magazines. As a guy said in another thread, handgun bullets are like bees. They'll kill you, but it might take the whole hive to do it. Well said.

A 200 gr .44 wouldn't leave much room for powder. Of course, widening the case would create a scoche more powder space, wouldn't it?
Well, while handgun rounds are less effective tha rifle rounds, bee stings, not. It's why many of us advocate bigger if you can shoot it. Mag cap is nice, but if it were all about number of rounds, get a high cap 22lr & call it good.
Again, the only available brass for necking down to 43 would be the 45acp or variation. You could trim a 45acp, neck it down ala the 357sig or 40Corbon & have a 44cal round that fits into a 45GAP gun. All it would need is a bbl. I just don;t se a ballistic advantage of a 200gr 43 vs a 200gr 40. You might get a tiny bit mroe vel, maybe 50fps, out of the larger case & bore, but I still think a 200-210gr bullet is max.
__________________
"Given adequate penetration, a larger diameter bullet will have an edge in wounding effectiveness. It will damage a blood vessel the smaller projectile barely misses. The larger permanent cavity may lead to faster blood loss. Although such an edge clearly exists, its significance cannot be quantified".
fredj338 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 15:08   #14
barth
six barrels
 
barth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The Free Zone
Posts: 5,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
Considering the ".44" is actually .429 ...........
Aww crap you beat me to it LOL!
barth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 17:59   #15
brokenprism
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredj338 View Post
...Again, the only available brass for necking down to 43 would be the 45acp or variation...
Well... before the 10mm was shortened to .40 S&W, there was no 10mm brass, so my question assumed that 'blank piece of paper' meant blank everything. Fresh start. Design and make the brass without necking anything down.

I know they were working to the OAL of the 9mm to get the .40, but what if they could lengthen the case, proportionately lengthen the grip frame, magazine, and chamber, and really drive a .40 caliber bullet to smoking hot velocities? Like a semi-auto .41 mag.
That would be outstanding!

Oh yeah... they did that. It's called the 10mm.

Do the Glock 20 and 21 really have to be that fat to safely handle the pressures of those rounds? I know that slide mass is part of it, but it's too bad they couldn't make a slimmer 10mm. I'd love a gun like that, screw recoil.
brokenprism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 18:11   #16
Michael Rye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,317
Prism, why not just go with a 20SF or 21SF?
Michael Rye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 18:20   #17
brokenprism
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Rye View Post
Prism, why not just go with a 20SF or 21SF?
I never had trouble with the depth of the grip. It's the width that I don't like. The SF models aren't any slimmer side-to-side are they...?
brokenprism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 18:54   #18
NewportNewsMike
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokenprism View Post
The SF models aren't any slimmer side-to-side are they...?
Nope, the Gen 3 SF and the Gen 4 with no backstrap are no slimmer side-to-side. All the size reduction is front-to-back.
NewportNewsMike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 20:19   #19
greenlion
Senior Member
 
greenlion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 930
If you are concerned with:

1. Stopping power
2. Grip size
3. Capacity

and are not concerned with recoil...

Then the hotter 40S&W loads or the 357 SIG sound like what you are looking for. They perform as well as the 45ACP in real shootings, and fit in the frame size you are looking for. Are you simply interested in larger calibers for the sake of having larger calibers, or do you want something that will get the job done?
greenlion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 20:48   #20
Jim Watson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 6,863
Physically possible, sure.
In conventional terms, you are talking about a .44 Russian Rimless or more likely a .44 Russian Rimless Short.
Nothing to keep you from cutting .44 Russian/Special/Magnum brass to rimless and shortening to say .75". But it will only be .019" smaller outside diameter than .45 ACP/GAP. That isn't going to reduce gun size by very much. Going to a metal magazine a la S&W Plastic M&P will save as much or more in bulk.

The next step would be to reinvent the heeled bullet so that your whole round would not be but .43" O.D. That would give you a .429" nominal .44 bullet in a cartridge only .005" larger than a .40 S&W.

OK, I have given away the plan. All that is required now is engineering and money.
__________________
I have a few facts and a lot of opinions.

Last edited by Jim Watson; 05-12-2013 at 20:49..
Jim Watson is online now   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:32.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 926
272 Members
654 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31