Handgun caliber evolution - Or its seeming absence

[simonrichter]

What I wanted to epitomize with the thread title: While there was surely some progress from the first mass-produced pistols of around 1900 to todays super small, poly, double stack and-what-not-else pistols, imho the calibers did not greatly improve from there.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking bullet technology here, but strictly calibers as a whole. Most popular are still 9mm and .45 acp - both introduced over 100 yrs. ago. The same is true for the minor calibers (.32 acp, .380 etc.) that reentered the stage due to the increased popularity of pocket guns during the last decade. One of the few newly invented calibers that made it to mass market was the .40 S&W which basically builds on the same principle: A relatively heavy and slow bullet (compared to a rifle caliber) out of a straight cartridge. The .357 SIG is maybe an exception, but its performance is still close to other major calibers.

There where a lot of approaches into making the pistol kind of a "mini-rifle" instead of the common "spitting slugs" technique, consider e.g. the 5,7 x 28, 6,5 x 25 cbm, 5,45 x 18 etc. The advantages are obvious: Less recoil, more penetration, higher capacity, less ammunition weight, stretched trajectory and thus longer range.

Still, few of those new-approach-calibers made it into mass market (the 5,7 as the only example maybe), and none came even close to the popularity of 9mm, .40 s&w and .45 acp. Even in the military arsenals of the world these calibers are maybe not as uncommon as in the civil sector, but still a niche product.

Why is that?
The cost factor?
No need for something new? (which seems, given the pressure to innovate in our fast modern business world, quite unlikely to me...)
Restrictions? (all these new calibers could be built without being actually armor piercing, though...)


Looking forward to your thoughts!

 

[zombietactics]

All of the common (and most popular) handgun duty and self-defense calibers exist within a very narrow range of variables.

That's driven primarily by physics. You have to have something which fits in a hand-sized package, can be controlled by a human being, and results in some kind of meaningful terminal-ballistic effect on the intended target.

With those necessary design goals, there are limits to what can be done in terms of a weapon launching metal projectiles.

That's probably why most of the improvements have been in projectile or cartridge design ... it's the only place left to go.

 

[buck460XVR]

Truth is, in the SD/HD market, most of the bases are covered by the old calibers with new technology in bullet construction. Hunting handguns tho, have made some huge strides since the early 1900s and even since the .44 mag, with the really big boomers like .454 Casulls, .480 Rugers, .470 and 500 Linebaugh's, .460 and .500 S&Ws to name a few. I would consider them a vast improvement over the handgun calibers available for hunting back in the early 1900s.

 

[Jim Watson]

Why?
Probably because they are not as effective as the old standards, ballyhoo notwithstanding.

 

[TimSr]

The biggest factor in bringing in a new cartridge is that it really needs to do something that an existing cartridge does not do. You mentioned all auto cartridges, and mentioned the 40 which filled a semi auto niche in the area of defense which has only moved away from revolver dominance in more recent years. Buck460 mentioned the lack of powerful handgun hunting cartridges, and thus a new niche. Interestingly, most of those are beefed up versions of existing cartridges.

I guess the question is, "what do you think is a need that is currently not being met with an existing cartridge?"

The only thing I see is a possibility or more choices in big game semi-auto guns, but I really don't see a big demand for those as the focus is on one shot, humane kills.

 

[Guv]

Kind of crazy when you consider the 9mm Luger is 139 years old.

 

[44 AMP]

Kind of crazy when you consider the 9mm Luger is 139 years old.

Your math is off. The 9mm Luger was introduced in 1902. That makes it 112 this year.

Why isn't there more caliber evolution? Cost is a really big factor. Unless & until a new design does something significantly better than what we are using now, AND does it at a cost that is affordable, its not going to make it in the market.

And just to mention, the cost isn't just what new guns and ammo cost, its also all the money invested in what we currently have, that is now "obsolete".

For an example, (although its a rifle), Garand didn't design his rifle for the .30-06. The US had so much invested in the .30-06, Garand wound up redesigning his rifle for it.

consider e.g. the 5,7 x 28, 6,5 x 25 cbm, 5,45 x 18 etc. The advantages are obvious: Less recoil, more penetration, higher capacity, less ammunition weight, stretched trajectory and thus longer range.

And also bullets of fairly light mass. IF you can get small bullets up to rifle speeds (not an easy task in a handgun), then they act like small bullets at rifle speed. Good at killing things, but notoriously poor close range stoppers.

 

[waveslayer]

Check out the 22TCM then. Awesome round. They are out there

 

[Scorch]

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.

And you are correct, there has been very little evolution in firearms technology over the past 100 years.

 

[Guv]

See 44AMP, we all make mistakes.

 

[g.willikers]

Thinking about it, with the exception of advances in materials and construction techniques, firearms in general have not changed all that much for a very long time.
If civilization and technology continue to advance, will firearms become like bows and arrows, one day?

 

[osbornk]

I think we stay with the traditional calibers because we don't want to risk owning an orphan gun. I just donated a rifle to our local historical museum because the ammunition is not longer made for it. It's historical because it was the first repeating rifle issued by a Government (Switzerland on January 8, 1869). It was a 41 caliber rimfire that has not had ammuition made since 1947. My brother also has a rifle made in the late 1800s with no ammunition available.

I'll stick with 22, 9, 12 gauge, 20 gauge, etc. because the ammunition is and will be available at comparatively reasonable prices.

 

[Jo6pak]

A big part of it is marketing. Anyone own a .45GAP? I have a buddy who bought one and can't find ammo now. The risk is high when a new product is introduced.

Another part of the equation is that the "mini-rifle" cartridges (5,7 x 28, 6,5 x 25 cbm, 5,45 x 18 etc.) are built predominately for military contracts and mainly designed to defeat body armor and increase range. The civilian defensive handgunner has little real need for the added capacity and generally goes with proven cartridges in more conventional designs.

There is also the fact that gun owners in general are fairly conservative people.

 

[44 AMP]

Guv, we all make mistakes, I make my share, too. Catch me in one, and I'll be big enough to admit it, just as you were.

As to calibers and their evolution (not cartridges) consider the common pistol calibers, .22, .25, .30, .32, .35, .40, .41,.44, .45, and even .475/.480 and .500. What benefits can be gained vs. the cost, by going to a caliber inbetween something already in use?

Not much, if any, I'm thinking.

And considering that some of our .32s are actually .30s, our .38s are .36s, and our .44s are .43s finding some niche that isn't already covered by something else is tough.

At pistol power levels, there simply isn't enough difference to justify something else. You could make a .33 caliber, and give it a case to match, or even exceed the .357 mag, but outside of the curious, who's going to buy it? Who's going to make the bullets, and the ammo, totally out of whole cloth, so to speak.

A new case in an existing caliber has the built in advantage of bullets already available.

Mentioned was the .40S&W and .357 Sig. Note that both these rounds were designed to fit in existing guns. Indeed, the .40S&W is what it is, physically, entirely so it would fit into existing 9mm size guns, and still deliver the desired ballistics.

If civilization and technology continue to advance, will firearms become like bows and arrows, one day?

Sure. Bows & arrows still work today as well as they ever did (usually better due to modern materials, construction, & engineering). Same for muzzle loaders. Eventually, cartridge firearms will be in the same category. Not front line military use, but remaining in civilian use for sporting purposes (providing the laws of the future allow it).

But, until the "phased plasma rifle in 40 watt range" becomes a reality, AND that technology becomes as cheap as firearms, and as wide spread, guns are going to be our main stream weapons.

 

[Bezoar]

There is no real interest. in making a new cartridge.

The whole interest is in repacking an existing bullet design and figuring out a way to sucker us into spending an extra .25 cents per round on it.

Alot of the basic design issues of creating a new cartridge comes with existing gun teschnology. If you have an existing line of browning style semi automatics, and the equipment to build them. Do you really want to spend 3 to 5 million dollars designing a new cartridge that will itself require 2 million dollars worth of designwork and testing on a new handgun that will then require 3 or 5 million dollars worth of new equipment?

Sure these new fangled microscopic rifle rounds for pistols can be fun, but they dont have down range energy like say a 357 does.

 

[Sabrewolfe]

If civilization and technology continue to advance, will firearms become like bows and arrows, one day?

Honestly, I seriously doubt small arms will transition away from physical projectiles to directed energy anytime in the foreseeable future, barring the creation of some form of cheap, lightweight personal armor/shield that somehow makes slug throwers impotent. The reason being that, at the ranges they are used in, it will always be hugely more efficient to hurl a chunk of metal than to generate an energy beam/bolt/blast with equivalent destructive capability. And that assumes it is even possible to create a man-portable power source with a high enough energy density to feed a directed energy weapon.

Now, the method of accelerating the projectiles may change, as might the composition of the projectiles themselves, but I don't see phasers being feasible in the 24th century. Handheld mass drivers firing slivers of tungsten alloy at Mach 10? Maybe.

 

[James K]

In the old black powder days, bullet velocity was limited by the relatively low pressure that could be generated in a reasonable size case. So the way to get lethality (which is, after all, the name of the game) was to employ large calibers and heavy bullets. Around 1900, improved powders (mainly smokeless powders) made it possible to attain the same degree of lethality with smaller, lighter bullets. After some experimentation with really small or light bullets, things settled down to something between .32 and .38 caliber at the lower end and .44 to .50 at the upper. Barring the development of some new propellant(s) so superior that the whole gun world will be upset as it was c. 1900, it is not likely that there will be any startling changes in calibers, either rifle or handgun.

Of course, a practical energy rifle or handgun, like the "phasers" beloved by sci-fi writers, would really upset the whole apple cart, but AFAIK, there is nothing on the horizon of that nature.

Jim

 

[SIGSHR]

Evolution is not the correct term, development is better IMHO.
Plenty of development going on, it seems to me wildcatting revolver cartridges
is rather passé now-is there another Elmer Keith out there ? I suppose the 357 Bain & Davis still has some fans out there. Someone mentioned the 45GAP, that joins the 10MM Auto, the 9MM Winchester Magnum, the 44 Auto Mag, the 41 Action Express, others, that joined the Great Collection of Great Ideas-that didn't sell. The last really "new" cartridge that has established itself was the 40 S&W.

 

[Guv]

If the 357Sig can't make it I don't know what else could really penetrate the market.

 

[DannyB1954]

When you also add in the Eastern block cartridges, there are quite a few.
So it would be like reinventing the wheel. You heard of building a better mouse trap, they still sell more of the originals. The market is driven by sales. Trying to convince people they need a 39 Spl, or a 9.5mm would be the hard part.