Why not a larger bore?

Apple a Day · January 19, 2001, 08:04 PM

I was pondering the question of hollowpoints when a thought occurred to me: Why not just make a handgun with a larger diameter bore?
Now, I do NOT suggest a proportional increase in powder charge since that would be more than the vast majority of people could reasonably handle. How about a new cartridge developed -after study- with enough gusto to penetrate through a human body from most angles and not much more than that. I know there are a ton of variables associated with that and I am not an expert but I am sure an expert could come up with something reasonable.
For those 1911 aficionados who want a 50% expansion from their hollow points, why not just use a .75 caliber? For those with a 9mm why not a .54 caliber? The larger diameter would increase drag but would that really make that big of a difference since most self defense shootings occur at such short ranges?
On the downside the weight would increase, I suppose, but can be cut elsewhere with the use of composites. The size of the cartridges would cut down on the magazine capacity (assuming a self-loader) but at the moment we aren't allowed more than 10 anyway.
So, would a larger bore handgun make a better self defense/house gun? Help me out. What have I not thought of?

sw627pc · January 19, 2001, 08:16 PM

Well that is pretty much the design concept of the .45 ACP round. As far as going bigger, remember that anything over .50 caliber gets you into big headaches with the Federal government.

RANash · January 19, 2001, 08:28 PM

You must take the laws of physics into account. The bigger the caliber of the bullet, the slower it will go, unless you compensate for that with a greater charge. The greater the charge, the stronger and heaver the gun will need to be. Eventually, it is too big to carry well, or to shoot well.

There are a lot of "mouse guns" out there in people's pockets, but not a lot of Desert Eagle .50s for that reason. If I had to choose between being shot with a mouse gun or a .50, I'd take the mouse gun. But the chances of running into someone with a .50AE on him are a lot less.

Quantum Singularity · January 19, 2001, 08:31 PM

I would like to see a low pressured/low velocity .50 cartridge introduced (call it the .50 ACP). I mean, the the current .50 cartridges (such as the .50 AE) are hard recoiling hand cannons. But, a .50 cal cartridge loaded down to 750-800 fps should be somewhat easy to handle. The recoil would be stout, but due to the lower pressure I don't think it would be "snappy" recoil (which I don't handle well). Plus, it has the potential to be a great defensive caliber (assuming hollowpoints would work at the lower velocities--which isn't always the case). Even if it doesn't expand much, a .50 cal hole is gonna hurt worse than a non expanding .45 cal hole. It would be an interesting round!

Dr.Rob · January 19, 2001, 08:37 PM

I'd bet a 16 bore "howdah" would indeed be a fight stopper.. but its not easily concealable.

January 19, 2001, 09:16 PM

Would you want to carry a mag the size of a double stack Glock mag that only holds four rounds?

Quantum Singularity · January 19, 2001, 09:19 PM

You might be able to get 5 rounds into the magazine? I could be wrong. Either way, a .50 cal gun is NOT a carry gun. It should be chambered only in a full sized autoloader (5" or greater barrel).

Tropical Z · January 20, 2001, 12:40 AM

1968-Thats all you need to know.

ctdonath · January 20, 2001, 01:34 AM

12 guage is about equivalent to .75 caliber. For that size, you get three rounds in the Serbu Super-Shorty. A lot per shot, but not many shots and not much accuracy for a BIG gun.

It's a lot more efficient to pack smaller rounds that turn into large ones on impact.

Alaska Roy · January 20, 2001, 02:27 AM

Ya'll made me go mike my short Rossi rabbit ear. That Serbu is cute but way out of line price wise, the older Remington 870s had some of the short mag tubes so all you had to do was cut it and register it. I'm glad they don't make the .50acp because I'd have to buy one. As Col. Cooper once said in answer to why he carried the 1911 .45acp "because they don't make a .50acp"..Roy

STEVE M · January 20, 2001, 06:53 AM

Sounds like the old turn of the century British bulldog revolvers in .455, they were big and slow and close to 59cal.

sw627pc · January 20, 2001, 08:26 AM

Steve,

"close to 59 caliber"???

The .455 Bulldogs fired the .455 Webley round. Which is the true caliber (.455). Just slightly larger diameter than the .45 Colt and .45 ACP.

STEVE M · January 20, 2001, 11:45 AM

SW627pc, sorry that should have been 50 cal. I should drink more coffee before I try to type.

Apple a Day · January 20, 2001, 12:10 PM

THose of us who shoot black powder pistols and/or are up on their handgun history, what were the bore sizes of the pre-civil war pistols? Weren't they somewhere on the order of .50 and .71 calibers?

BTR · January 20, 2001, 07:33 PM

I have read that any handgun over fifty caliber is illegal for manufacuture. Check out the latest American Rifleman, with reference to the hangun that fired small rockets...they were too big a diameter, and thus were banned. Grrrr.

NicMk5 · January 20, 2001, 08:01 PM

I know that the brits used to make a .577 revolver for military use(purchased by individual officers not the army).
Hmph it was just the thing for stopping a charge of dervishes or fuzzy wuzzies don't you know? The Remington rolling block pistol was a .50cal center fire with a 300 grain bullet at about 600 fps.

STEVE M · January 21, 2001, 07:13 AM

Thanks, NicMk5. That was the other one I was trying to think of. They liked the whole concept of large bore/slow bullets back then. It's a shame they went to no bore/harsh words.

sw627pc · January 21, 2001, 10:28 AM

BTR,

Not illegal, just expensive and a pain in the sitter. Any firearm (other than a shotgun) with a bore diameter over .5 inch is classified as a restricted weapon by the BATF. You have to go through the tax stamp, approval cycle, etc. like it was an automatic weapon.

January 19, 2001, 08:16 PM	#2
sw627pc Senior Member Join Date: December 9, 2000 Posts: 453	Well that is pretty much the design concept of the .45 ACP round. As far as going bigger, remember that anything over .50 caliber gets you into big headaches with the Federal government. __________________ Bob C. NRA Patron USN (Ret)

January 19, 2001, 08:31 PM	#4
Quantum Singularity Senior Member Join Date: August 20, 2000 Posts: 925	.50 ACP??? I would like to see a low pressured/low velocity .50 cartridge introduced (call it the .50 ACP). I mean, the the current .50 cartridges (such as the .50 AE) are hard recoiling hand cannons. But, a .50 cal cartridge loaded down to 750-800 fps should be somewhat easy to handle. The recoil would be stout, but due to the lower pressure I don't think it would be "snappy" recoil (which I don't handle well). Plus, it has the potential to be a great defensive caliber (assuming hollowpoints would work at the lower velocities--which isn't always the case). Even if it doesn't expand much, a .50 cal hole is gonna hurt worse than a non expanding .45 cal hole. It would be an interesting round! __________________ "A gun is a tool, no better or worse than any other tool (an axe, a shovel, or anything). A gun is as good or bad as the man using it". Shane (1953) MOLON LABE!

January 19, 2001, 09:19 PM	#7
Quantum Singularity Senior Member Join Date: August 20, 2000 Posts: 925	.50 is not for "carrying" You might be able to get 5 rounds into the magazine? I could be wrong. Either way, a .50 cal gun is NOT a carry gun. It should be chambered only in a full sized autoloader (5" or greater barrel). __________________ "A gun is a tool, no better or worse than any other tool (an axe, a shovel, or anything). A gun is as good or bad as the man using it". Shane (1953) MOLON LABE!

January 20, 2001, 01:34 AM	#9
ctdonath Senior Member Join Date: April 11, 1999 Posts: 1,904	Bigger bullet means bigger shells 12 guage is about equivalent to .75 caliber. For that size, you get three rounds in the Serbu Super-Shorty. A lot per shot, but not many shots and not much accuracy for a BIG gun. It's a lot more efficient to pack smaller rounds that turn into large ones on impact.

January 20, 2001, 02:27 AM	#10
Alaska Roy Senior Member Join Date: May 29, 1999 Posts: 281	.72 caliber for 12 bore- Ya'll made me go mike my short Rossi rabbit ear. That Serbu is cute but way out of line price wise, the older Remington 870s had some of the short mag tubes so all you had to do was cut it and register it. I'm glad they don't make the .50acp because I'd have to buy one. As Col. Cooper once said in answer to why he carried the 1911 .45acp "because they don't make a .50acp"..Roy

January 19, 2001, 08:04 PM	#1
Apple a Day Senior Member Join Date: March 29, 2000 Location: Poquoson,Virginia Posts: 1,524	I was pondering the question of hollowpoints when a thought occurred to me: Why not just make a handgun with a larger diameter bore? Now, I do NOT suggest a proportional increase in powder charge since that would be more than the vast majority of people could reasonably handle. How about a new cartridge developed -after study- with enough gusto to penetrate through a human body from most angles and not much more than that. I know there are a ton of variables associated with that and I am not an expert but I am sure an expert could come up with something reasonable. For those 1911 aficionados who want a 50% expansion from their hollow points, why not just use a .75 caliber? For those with a 9mm why not a .54 caliber? The larger diameter would increase drag but would that really make that big of a difference since most self defense shootings occur at such short ranges? On the downside the weight would increase, I suppose, but can be cut elsewhere with the use of composites. The size of the cartridges would cut down on the magazine capacity (assuming a self-loader) but at the moment we aren't allowed more than 10 anyway. So, would a larger bore handgun make a better self defense/house gun? Help me out. What have I not thought of?

January 19, 2001, 08:28 PM	#3
RANash Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 300	You must take the laws of physics into account. The bigger the caliber of the bullet, the slower it will go, unless you compensate for that with a greater charge. The greater the charge, the stronger and heaver the gun will need to be. Eventually, it is too big to carry well, or to shoot well. There are a lot of "mouse guns" out there in people's pockets, but not a lot of Desert Eagle .50s for that reason. If I had to choose between being shot with a mouse gun or a .50, I'd take the mouse gun. But the chances of running into someone with a .50AE on him are a lot less.

January 19, 2001, 08:37 PM	#5
Dr.Rob Staff Alumnus Join Date: July 28, 1999 Location: Denver Posts: 2,454	I'd bet a 16 bore "howdah" would indeed be a fight stopper.. but its not easily concealable.

January 19, 2001, 09:16 PM	#6
PreserveFreedom Guest Posts: n/a	Would you want to carry a mag the size of a double stack Glock mag that only holds four rounds?

January 20, 2001, 12:40 AM	#8
Tropical Z Senior Member Join Date: September 6, 2000 Location: Atlantis Posts: 1,683	1968-Thats all you need to know.

January 20, 2001, 06:53 AM	#11
STEVE M Senior Member Join Date: February 7, 1999 Location: TN. USA Posts: 607	Sounds like the old turn of the century British bulldog revolvers in .455, they were big and slow and close to 59cal.

January 20, 2001, 08:26 AM	#12
sw627pc Senior Member Join Date: December 9, 2000 Posts: 453	Steve, "close to 59 caliber"??? The .455 Bulldogs fired the .455 Webley round. Which is the true caliber (.455). Just slightly larger diameter than the .45 Colt and .45 ACP. __________________ Bob C. NRA Patron USN (Ret)

January 20, 2001, 11:45 AM	#13
STEVE M Senior Member Join Date: February 7, 1999 Location: TN. USA Posts: 607	SW627pc, sorry that should have been 50 cal. I should drink more coffee before I try to type.

January 20, 2001, 12:10 PM	#14
Apple a Day Senior Member Join Date: March 29, 2000 Location: Poquoson,Virginia Posts: 1,524	blackpowder folks help me with this one... THose of us who shoot black powder pistols and/or are up on their handgun history, what were the bore sizes of the pre-civil war pistols? Weren't they somewhere on the order of .50 and .71 calibers? __________________ THose who use arms well cultivate the Way and keep the rules. Thus they can govern in such a way as to prevail over the corrupt. - Sun Tzu, The Art of War

January 20, 2001, 07:33 PM	#15
BTR Senior Member Join Date: July 13, 1999 Posts: 570	I have read that any handgun over fifty caliber is illegal for manufacuture. Check out the latest American Rifleman, with reference to the hangun that fired small rockets...they were too big a diameter, and thus were banned. Grrrr.

January 20, 2001, 08:01 PM	#16
NicMk5 Member Join Date: January 2, 2001 Posts: 47	I know that the brits used to make a .577 revolver for military use(purchased by individual officers not the army). Hmph it was just the thing for stopping a charge of dervishes or fuzzy wuzzies don't you know? The Remington rolling block pistol was a .50cal center fire with a 300 grain bullet at about 600 fps.

January 21, 2001, 07:13 AM	#17
STEVE M Senior Member Join Date: February 7, 1999 Location: TN. USA Posts: 607	Thanks, NicMk5. That was the other one I was trying to think of. They liked the whole concept of large bore/slow bullets back then. It's a shame they went to no bore/harsh words.

January 21, 2001, 10:28 AM	#18
sw627pc Senior Member Join Date: December 9, 2000 Posts: 453	BTR, Not illegal, just expensive and a pain in the sitter. Any firearm (other than a shotgun) with a bore diameter over .5 inch is classified as a restricted weapon by the BATF. You have to go through the tax stamp, approval cycle, etc. like it was an automatic weapon. __________________ Bob C. NRA Patron USN (Ret)