[Omni04]

hello everybody! I was looking for some suggestions on a 10mm CCW. I have been looking at S&W and they seem to be very high quality weapons. As much as i love glocks, i am kind of nervous carrying them (i know so many people swear that they are fine, but it is just a preference for my first ccw)

for the record i am 5"11 and 165 pounds. I also plan on IWB around 4 o'clock.

what models would be a good choice for a ccw? im looking at spending less than 800. i guess my priorities would be as follow:


small size > ammo capacity > accuracy > reliability > not ugly > price

im also assuming longevity will be longer than i live, as long as i take care of it!

this is my first ccw, and in fact i have never shot a 10mm. That is something i completley plan on doing before i commit to buying one.


im not adamant by any means on a S&W, if theres other good companies i would be interested as well.

Thanks for all the help!

[Jim Watson]

The only S&W 10mm I have any experience with is the original 1006 which is a great big gun that I would not want to carry all day. But I am not a 10mm type of personality anyhow.

[Omni04]

hmmm you think its too big to ccw? -_-;;

[jc2]

Does the term "horse pistol" mean anything to you? The 1006 is a big, heavy weapon. Maybe not too big to conceal if you are willing to do it, but there are better choices. If you really want to carry a 10mm concealed, one of the 1911 versions (Delta Elite, DW Razorback, Kimber) would probably be your best bet. The 1911 is fairly easy to conceal and you have a lage selection of holster to experiement with until you find something that works.

I don't how much thought has gone into your calibre selection. I have a couple of 10s (a 1076 and a G26--the 1076 is better CCW), but FWIW, if were looking for a CCW, I would look something besides a 10mm. Frankly, there are calibres every bit as effective for anti-personnel use without the drawbacks of a 10mm

[SouthpawShootr]

Your price ceiling is going to eliminate most, if not all, of the current production 1911 10s. What you're left with is the EAA Witness (a little big), Witness Compact, Witness Compact Polymer, Glock 20, & Glock 29. Personally for a dedicated concealment gun, I'd go Glock 29. Next would be Glock 20. It's a little big to concealment, but if you work at it, you can make it happen. Look around and see if you can find a Dan Wesson Patriot 10mm (I think I've seen them for $650-700 range).

[Omni04]

i originally was thinking about a 9mm. but then i did some research on all the ballistic reports, and 10mm seemed one of the best. even the FBI did some research and found it was the most affective. i know some glocks chambered for 10mm weren't than large, but i wasn't sure about the S&W.


the price ceiling can go up a little bit if required, price isn't too much of a factor. I still plan on experimenting with a lot of these before i purchase, so i was just looking for a couple good suggesitons.

[pauli]

i would tend to respectfully suggest that if you need to ask this question, then 10mm may not be the best caliber for you.

[Omni04]

pauli, whats wrong with learning things? i already stated i planned on trying many of these out, i also have 2 years before i can even obtain a ccw. please don't critisize for LEARNING.

[Lennyjoe]

To be honest, I would carry a G29 if I wanted a 10MM for CCW.

On that note, I have a 1006 and carry it in a Bianchi Accumold belt holster when out in the bush. The 1006 is way to big for CCW. If it had to be a Smith then the 1086 would be the one but they are hard to find.

You should have no fear of CCWing a Glock. As long as you keep your finger out of the trigger guard and carry it in a holster that has a trigger guard you'll be fine. Thousands of folks carry a Glock with no problems. I have in the past and have never worried about shooting myself.

[Omni04]

a lot of people do sya that and i am still considering one. Im just kind of etchy because its my first ccw, plus im not even sure about glock safeties. i was actually just searching for more information on the glocks' 3 internal mechanisms. Once again, this is a learning experience for me.

[VARifleman]

You'd support it with your thumb, middle, and ring fingers, as your index finger would be on the trigger. ;) Now for your second hand, you're right, but you only need your middle finger and thumb of one hand to control the pistol.

[Omni04]

you ebat me too it! i just deleted my edit after taking the amazing leap of imagination.... plus you have your other hand to support :)

[pauli]

pauli, whats wrong with learning things? i already stated i planned on trying many of these out, i also have 2 years before i can even obtain a ccw. please don't critisize for LEARNING.
it seems you missed the point of my post.

nothing is wrong with learning, obviously. however, you seem to have put the cart before the horse. 10mm is a handful of a caliber, both to shoot and to finance. it's a very niche caliber, such that anyone who might consider carrying it would usually already know the entire menu of available firearms. they would also, more likely than not, be a rather experienced shooter - experienced enough to know that it's worth it to them to own, carry, and put in the practice necessary for carry, with a gun that shoots ammo that you pretty much have to either order online, or load yourself. i have yet to see 10mm winchester whitebox.

it's sorta like saying, "which morgan for me?" if you're in a position to ask such questions, you'd generally already know which one suits you best - you'd have already driven plenty of plus eight's and three wheeled contraptions and whatnot.

[Omni04]

i understand, but i also feel that when i make the decision for a ccw, it will be the only very high-end gun i will own (at least for a couple years). Thats why i say price isn't too much of a factor. I would rather have one very top of the line CCW, and then a couple of other cheaper cz's and stuff for plinking at the shooting range.

i have already done a good amount of research on other calibers as well, and to be honest the 10mm kind of slipped by my radar, until i was reading up on the subject on wikipedia today at work. i am just trying to compile a list together so i have a good 2 years worth of decision making before i commit on a CCW.

if i did decide on a 10mm i would slowly work my way up, because the only caliber i own is .22.

[Myself]

Omni04

I love the 10mm and have a mess of them. I have fired most of the tens and good bad and ugly I still love them. That said I feel that it is not an ideal starting gun for everyone. Some people can pick them up and shoot well quickly while others need an adjustment period to the gun/cal. The heavier 10mm's are the hardest to carry but the nicest to shoot.

CCW is a game of give and take. The most effective calibers are frequently harder to conceal then typical pocket guns. Take time to try out as many gun types as you can at rental ranges, borrowed friends guns, etc. It will help with your decision as to what fits you best. Good luck with your search and stay safe.

[jc2]

i originally was thinking about a 9mm. but then i did some research on all the ballistic reports, and 10mm seemed one of the best. even the FBI did some research and found it was the most affective.
I'll bet that report didn't mention that after a brief infatuation with the 10mm, the FBI replaced it with a . . . 9x19.

That report is fifteen to twenty years old. There's been a whole of development in ammo since then. Today's ammunition is nothing like the ammo available when that report was written.

If you're just interested in playing around or maybe plan doing some hunting, there's nothing wrong with the 10mm. If you are seriously looking for a defence weapon, there are a whole lot of better choices than the 10mm.

Don't let yourself be fooled by old data or seduced by MV and ME figures--there's a whole more to good defence ammunition than its MV and ME (matter of fact, those are probably to of the least important pieces of information).

[Grayrider]

I am a 10mm fan. Have been from the beginning, when I bought a Delta in the late 80's. Three Deltas later I had one fairly customized that still sits in my collection. It is the gun I have owned the longest.

Also had some Glock 20s and Witnesses. A bevy of other 10mm 1911s. After Missouri got CCW I put some effort into finding a suitable 10mm. I can perhaps add some comments from experience on this issue.

My most reliable 10mm was a S&W 1076. A friend bought it from me. If he decides to sell it, I will buy it back. That would have worked fairly well for CCW, although pretty heavy and not too small. It would feed anything, and was pretty accurate. Used they can be had around $500. Mags are a bit steep, but are out there. Be aware the smith **76 series had a recall related to breaking decockers. Some were serviced, others not. A 1066 would also serve well. The 1006 might be a bit big. I am not a fan of DAO that much, so cannot comment on those Smiths.

Witnesses are hit and miss for quality control. I am currently awaiting the arrival of a Witness Stock in 40. That gun would be convertable to 10mm, or you can buy one in 10mm around 60-90 days from now when they are in country. I will post a detailed review soon, and have a good contact at EAA now. The basic Witness in 10mm runs well after some tweaking. My contact says they are working hard to fix the issues typically associated with them. The end result is a pretty big but carryable 15 shot 10mm. It points very well, and can be made to have a wonderful trigger (DA and SA). If you don't mind CCW with a larger gun, the Witness can do it. I would say if money is no option, wait for the Stock model (depending on my review) as it has some extras one would want. Street price should be around $725. Leather is common, and I am discussing options with Eric Larsen at HBE Leather Works. Again, all depending on my success with the semi-custom Stock model.

10mm Glocks are not really that big. If you look at the dimensions of the 20 it is around the size of a Commander, but thicker in the slide and longer in the grip. They are Glocks and run well. Honestly the G20 is the only Glock I have had malfunction, but 10mm ammo varries so much in power I think it is hard to make a gun that will run it all 100%. I am not much a fan of Glocks for various reasons. If they suit you it would carry pretty well given the light weight. Again, 15 rounds of fun if you worry about ammo capacity. Certainly for CCW that helps decrease the number of mags you may need to carry.

10mm 1911s are buggy beasts. I have not had one that ran 100% out of the box from any maker. Dan Wesson's were all problematic (I had four), ranging from minor tweaks (extractor & feed ramp) to major (I don't think the gun would ever work in the case of a Bob Tail Patriot Commander). DW clearly was not experienced at making 1911s when they started, and learning as they went. Please no flames on this. I owned four, and it is hard for anyone to argue with me that this was somehow a fluke. My smith was pretty disgusted at the mistakes given some were pretty simple fixes. One extractor appeared to have been dropped in without any tuning at all.

Now my Kimber is a bit touchy but I need to have my smith give it a feed & function job. It runs most of the time and is quite accurate. I think it will run fine with a little polishing. My Delta runs great, but it has had so many modifications it is not remotely stock. Lesson from this? 10mm 1911s may need further attention so be prepared to spend. Short ones in 10mm are hard to get working. A 10mm 1911 is a joy once finished, as they can be very accurate. The slime profile makes for easy CCW, as does the slim magazine. No unsightly bulges to hide in ones pocket. Big double-stack mags are always a bit obvious in the pocket. Speaking of double-stack, there are the Paras in 40 caliber. A barrel swap and some springs should get you into a 16 shot 10mm. I have that setup in my Para P16 LTD.

As for recoil, well shoot a bunch and you won't notice. I am not a fan of the "work up from lighter calibers" approach. I tried that when I was much younger and it seemed that I never adjusted to the heavy calibers. So one day I bought a 45 and said I won't shoot anything but this until I am used to it. That worked. After a while, 9mm seemed like a 22. I have also shot lots of 10mm, so now 45 seems mild. Pick your gun, pick your caliber, and shoot, shoot, shoot!

GR

[SouthpawShootr]

Didn't the FBI tame the 10mm a bit? My understanding was that the issue load was roughly equivalent to the .40SW. Their subgun was the MP5 in 10mm, which I doubt would work with the their 10mm "lite" load. Kind of silly to adopt a caliber, then tone it down from the standard load. You'd almost certainly be adversely affecting the efficiency of the chambering.

[Grayrider]

Exactly. I think that varience has a lot to do with reliability issues. Loads varry greatly, although most factory stuff is pretty tame. I did note that my 1076 seemed not to care at all. It would feed anything one handed it without the slightest hesitation.

GR

[SouthpawShootr]

Well, I know that the VA State Police adopted the 1076 following the FBI's lead. Went for years and didn't hear a peep. Shortly after the FBI dumped the 1076 VASP decided they needed new guns too. Transition to Sig 228s for a short while before going to 229s in .357 Sig. They actually stated in a news story that the guns have reliability issues. Of course they did. If these guns were set up for full power 10mm at the factory, they were oversprung for the 10 LITE. I can see where this could cause reliability issues. If it was the other way around (1076 sprung for 10 LITE and VASP using 10mm full power, same thing). I have no idea what load VASP was using, but most likely the same pistol load as the FBI. Second the 1076 was manufactured in response the the FBI wanting a Sig style decocker and no mag safety. S&W quickly changed to 1006 to the FBI specs (and probably skipped alot of engineering steps in the process). Something similar happend with NJSP and the SW99 some years back. Design was changed to make the agency happy and had problems. I'm getting off topic so I'll stop here.

[jc2]

Actually, the FBI didn't "tame" the 10mm, and it had nothing to do with reliability issues. The original run of 1076s had some reliability issue due to the design changes the FBI insisted be requested--NOT ammo. The problem was quickly fixed (and many of the older 1026s/76s have to "dimples" below the decocker to indicate a modified weapon).

The FBI adopted a Federal 190-grain JHP at 1090 fps from a 1076. It was adopted because it met all FBI requirements and offered a significant advantages in controllability. It was, and remains, a very effective combination (and is my favourite load in my 1076 followed by the Winchester Silvertip).

[logical]

The biggest problem with 10mm is that it has an uncertain future. As fewer and fewer guns in this caliber are available, fewer and fewer companies will bother making reasonably priced defensive ammo for it.

Go with something you can afford to shoot a lot of practice with and have a wide variety of affordable loads for.

A Sig of some sort in .40 S&W is a good choice and many can also accept a different barrel and mags to allow shooting .357 Sig. rounds. I'm sure .45 is not a bad choice but I am not a .45 guy myself so I can't steer you at all in that area.

Personally, I feel comfortable with 9mm +P Gold Dots (Speer JHP) and like the wide variety of big and small guns that will shoot it.

[dev_null]

1. There are plenty of new 10mm guns being made now, including Kimber, EAA and Glunk.

2. The EAA's are relatively smaller, lighter and less expensive, yet have a good rep.

3. I really don't get this "the 1006 is like carrying a boat anchor" thing. I carry a fullsized Kimber .45 all day and my 1006 is neither bigger nor heavier. Only reason I'm not switching off between the two is because I'm waiting for a holster.

All standard disclaimers apply.

- 0 -

[jc2]

The only 10mm handguns that have a consistent production history for the past several years have been the Glock (with two models) and the Tangfolio (with two models and a couple of different finishes). There have been fairly consistent (but unsubstantiated) rumours about Glock dropping their 10mm line. There have several special runs from other major but no serious production.

The availability of 10mm ammunition from the major manufacturers is very limited, but several small speciality shops (boutiques) offer a variety of 10mm ammunition which is largely unproven (untested and unproven in actual usage)--not exactly stuff on which you want to bet your life. At least I prefer to carry ammunition for which I have hard data--both in the form of test results from professional independent or government labs and a history of actual performance with LE--most boutique loads offer neither.

Part of the problem with the 10mm is that it is pretty well DOA when it comes LE, and the major manufacturers are just not sinking the R&D dollars into they have into their other calibres for which there is actually a market. As a result, there are very few bullets available for the 10mm (at least one of the boutiques is using bullets actually designed for the .38-40 for one of its 10mm loads). Most of the boutique loads are built on bullets designed for the .40 S&W's velocities/energy levels. Their actual performance/effectiveness may actually be reduced when they are pushed beyond those velocity/energy levels.

The 10mm one selling point is that it is roughly equal in effectiveness to the .357 Magnum (which is considered a bare minimum) as a hunting round so the 10mm provides a bare minimum hunting round for those who want to hunt with an autoloader.

[Omni04]

this is a lot of helpful information. and i have never even wore an IWB holster, so i can't provide any feedback on how large of a gun i am able to carry.

even if i don't decide that a 10mm ccw is right for me, they seem like a very interesting caliber to consider owning at least one of!

does hydro-shock(sp) make rounds in 10mm? Also whats the cheapest place online to get 10mm? I wasn't sure how much a brick would set me back, and how many rounds came in a brick.

reloading isn't an option for me yet.

[jc2]

Yes, Federal makes 180-grain Hydra-Shok in 10mm (Load Number P10HS1G).

Natchez (which usually has good prices) lists it at $17.29 per box of 20 (with no discount for bulk orders). I make that out to be about $865 for a "brick" (1000 rounds) not including shipping and handling. Shooting 10mm is not inexpensive. Their Remington (UMC) practice ammo runs right at $291 (plus shipping and handling) for a "brick" (again with no bulk discount). The 10mm is not for the faint-hearted. :)

Centerfire ammo is not normally sold in "bricks," but in case orders (normally of 500 or 1000 rounds)--for 500 round prices divide the figures above by two (but don't forget the shipping and handling--10mm ammo is heavy).

[Guns_and_Labs]

10mm is a fine selection for CCW, but nowhere near the only selection. I have a G29 that I carry, though I opt for an on-the-belt holster. It was quite accurate out of the box, at least when I concentrate. It's recoil is manageable, but takes quite a bit of getting used to with full power loads. The big-name factory loads are a bit lighter, more like the .40.

I also have a Colt Delta that I carry occasionally, usually when hunting. It's not a bad choice for CCW, I suppose, though I tend to carry a .45 1911 instead.

I carry a fullsized Kimber .45 all day and my 1006 is neither bigger nor heavier.

I do, too, and the 1006 (or the 4506) sure FEELS heavier than the Kimber, more like my Valtro with the tungsten guide rod. Also seems to soak up recoil better with that weight, of course.

Either 10mm or .45 will stop anything on two legs, with proper shot placement. Many people find .45 a little more user-friendly, though, especially for multiple shots. And, since you're cruising the FBI data, note that their HRT has been using .45 for a while now.

.45 vs. 10mm... I love them both, but for different missions. Try before you buy, and think carefully about the likely uses.

[Guns_and_Labs]

does hydro-shock(sp) make rounds in 10mm? Also whats the cheapest place online to get 10mm? I wasn't sure how much a brick would set me back, and how many rounds came in a brick.


Try Double Tap, at http://www.doubletapammo.com. You can get 500 rounds for $220. They use Speer Gold Dot, Golden Saber, or XTP, though, not Hydrashok.

[jc2]

You might think twice before you jump on the Double Tap bandwagon (or that of any of the other boutique loaders).

For the most part their ammunition is really a great unknown when it comes to defence. Much of it has never been tested by any qualified professional independent or government lab, and it has no record of actual performance/effectiveness in LE use (i.e., "street record").

Picking ammo with which to defend life and limb should be based on hard data from reputable independent sources--not "gee whiz" velocity and energy figures from a boutique. It is entirely possible to push Gold Dots (in particular) to velocity where their effectiveness actually decreases.

[Grayrider]

I have found the Cor-bon reliable in my reliable guns. The lighter bullets are quite pleasant to shoot in 10mm, even when pushed to warp speed. However, I tend to be of the more lead is better mindset with ammo choices and generally carried 180s in 10mm.

I am not currently carrying a 10mm for CCW as I have not found a gun I was 100% satisfied with. I need 100% reliability (or at least 99.999999). Perhaps this Witness Stock will change my mind, albeit the incoming one is a 40. One thought along those lines is that the 10mm Glock, Witness, and 1911s all offer varrying degrees of simple convertability to 40 S&W. You can do dual caliber and shoot the cheaper 40 for practice. Just don't do that to the point that the 10mm seems suprisingly harsh when you do shoot it.

GR

[kokapelli]

If the only gun you own is a 22cal, you better try shooting a 10mm and with fast follow up shots before you consider it for CCW.

If I remember correctly, one of the reasons the FBI dropped the 10mm is it's recoil was a little difficult for some of their agents to control.

After shooting a 22cal, shooting a 10mm would be like trying to corner with a full sized van like you did with a Miata sports car.

[dev_null]

Just run a couple of mags through a DE .50AE and the Ten will feel like a .22.

[Rock]

I shoot and carry a G29 often. It is not hard to shoot well at all. The Glocks seem to soak up some of the recoil. And I have been hearing the 10mm is dying for ever. The fact is there are quite a few companies making them now. And plenty of full power ammo to be had. Some of the major ammo manufacturers do water down their loads though. I don't buy from them. There are good loads by companies such as Texas ammo, Georgia arms, and Double Tap to name a few. I have a few boxes of ProLoad that are good too, but they are closed for now. And Silver tips are not as powerful as the others, but still not a bad load.

Don't pay attention to the naysayers if a 10mm is what you want. You will learn to shoot it unless you are afraid of a little recoil, it is a gun after all. Try some out before you buy if possible. I really enjoy shooting mine, it's one of my favorites. I load my own ammo for practice.

[Omni04]

Alright, now i have some more directions to go! And yea, 10mm isn't cheap at all! I already expect a huge difference between a .22 and, well anything OTHER than a .22 Not to mention that my 22 is a S&W model 41- quite a heavy handgun which would further reduce recoil.

theres no point in beating the horse anymore- so thanks again everybody for all the information! Maybe in a week or so i will throw out another thread of a different caliber (pending i can't find one already open on the issue).

thanks everybody!

[drf]

Omni04, I feel uncomfortable as you do carrying a Glock.. I like the guns Glock makes but I'm human and I feel the trigger is to light and a possible accidental discharge could happen....
I made that mistake when I bought a H&K with the LEM trigger (I didnt feel it was safe for me), I ended up trading the gun back in for a DA/SA H&K P2000....

You could always have a New York trigger installed on a Glock to give you more poundage on the trigger pull......drf

[Omni04]

heavy trigger pull = bah IMHO. Id rather have the manual saftey on it or consider a USP. With proper training it will be a fluent motion to take off the saftey, lightweight, affordable, and everything else everybody has heard a million times!

[AlaskaErik]

If you don't like 9mm, then I would consider .40 as a good compromise. They have excellent stopping power and the recoil isn't that bad. When I was first started looking into getting a semi, I also wanted the 10mm. But now that I have years of experience and research behind me I really like the .40. In fact, three out of four of my carry pistols are .40 and the other is a .380 mouse gun.

Erik

[caz223]

http://www.cz-usa.com/01.detail.php?id=66

Sweetest shooting 10mm I own. And I own a few....

[Grayrider]

Same gun I had. It might have been sweet to shoot if it ran more than a couple rounds without displaying virtually every malfunction a 1911 is capable of. Then there was the dead front sight they wanted me to pay to ship them back. Of course that was their customer service response to the issues with my other Dan Wesson's as well. Oh yeah, and I was "limp wristing" every gun that would not feed. Funny that does not happen with my other 10mm 1911s....

I hope CZ shakes up things at DW and gets the quality control under control. They have potential, and some buyers seem to have gotten good ones. Four out of four not working for me was enough. The 10mm addiction made me go back. Lesson? It can be a terrible addiction indeed....

:evil:

GR

[OF]

G29. It's the hostess with the mostess. :D

[Cellar Dweller]

See, very few buy guns in 10mm because very few companies make guns in 10mm because very few buy guns in 10mm...circular logic. :banghead:

"Premium self-defense" ammo from the Big 5:
Winchester makes a 175gr Silvertip
Hornady makes 155, 180 and 200gr XTP
Federal has a 180gr Hydra-Shok.
I would've sworn that Speer sold 10mm Gold Dots (website shows bullets only, no loaded ammo).
Remington only catalogs truncated-cone UMC.

[SHOOT1SAM]

Omni04,

Check out 10mmtalk.com for the largest gang of 10mm shooters.

I have, and carry, a S&W 1006. I use a Milt Sparks Versa-Max II IWB holster, in conjunction with their double-thick gunbelt (1-3/4" width). This combo really distributes the weight of the pistol and makes it very comfortable to carry.

Sam

[caz223]

Same gun I had. It might have been sweet to shoot if it ran more than a couple rounds without displaying virtually every malfunction a 1911 is capable of. Then there was the dead front sight they wanted me to pay to ship them back. Of course that was their customer service response to the issues with my other Dan Wesson's as well. Oh yeah, and I was "limp wristing" every gun that would not feed. Funny that does not happen with my other 10mm 1911s....

I hope CZ shakes up things at DW and gets the quality control under control. They have potential, and some buyers seem to have gotten good ones. Four out of four not working for me was enough. The 10mm addiction made me go back. Lesson? It can be a terrible addiction indeed....


Sounds like you got friday guns.
I got 2 of those from DW too, :banghead: but the 10mm PT-C bob was perfect from day 1!!!!

Maybe I got lucky.

[Sean Smith]

Without getting into a "10mm goodness" pissing contest, let me suggest that the correct answer for your stated purpose is probably the Glock 29.

[Guns_and_Labs]

You might think twice before you jump on the Double Tap bandwagon (or that of any of the other boutique loaders).

For the most part their ammunition is really a great unknown when it comes to defence. Much of it has never been tested by any qualified professional independent or government lab, and it has no record of actual performance/effectiveness in LE use (i.e., "street record").

Picking ammo with which to defend life and limb should be based on hard data from reputable independent sources--not "gee whiz" velocity and energy figures from a boutique. It is entirely possible to push Gold Dots (in particular) to velocity where their effectiveness actually decreases.

I've heard Glock has the same attitude... they don't consider the "specialty" ammo to be "factory" for purposes of their warranty. I'm not sure I buy that, personally. I've all too frequently come across dangerous examples of poor quality control in big name factory ammo. I've never found such with the specialty firms I've used (Buffalo Bore and Double Tap).

I'm also not sure about the lack of street record. Double Tap won't comment when asked about it, so that might be true. On the other hand, I've seen both BB and DT performance in enough hunting situations to trust it there.

It's a pity that there's no standardized ammunition certification.

[Sean Smith]

Yeah... the DT performance sure looks terrible to me. :rolleyes:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=122925

[jc2]

I don't think anybody said Double Tap was "terrible" (and I have no idea how you read that into what was said).

What was said was said is:

1. Double Tap is really a great unknown when it comes to defence.

2. Most of it has never been tested by any qualified professional independent or government lab, and it has no record of actual performance/effectiveness in LE use (i.e., "street record"). The numbers that post quoted were straight from the manufacturer and need to be taken with a very large grain of salt until verified by a professional independent or government lab. Ballistic gelatin testing is NOT a job for amateurs (no matter how well intentioned).

3. Picking ammo with which to defend life and limb should be based on hard data from reputable independent sources--not "gee whiz" velocity and energy figures. It is entirely possible to push Gold Dots (in particular) to velocity where their effectiveness actually decreases.

4. I want to see hard data before I bet life any ammo whether it is from a boutique like Double Tap or a major manufacturer like Winchester, Federal, Remington or Speer.

These remarks are limited to strictly to LE/defence ammo and do not necessarily extend to hunting ammo (which, of course, should be a given considering the topic of the thread). ;)

[Guns_and_Labs]

Ballistic gelatin testing is NOT a job for amateurs (no matter how well intentioned).
Well, let's not be hasty in our judgments... What makes an "expert" vs. an "amateur", and how do you know which category the Double Tap folks fall into? Is it not possible to hire experts or be trained by them. I've seen the specs for gelatin testing, and it seems a bit easier than, say, pharmaceutical development.

And, are these independent labs somehow audited or reviewed by competent authority?

These remarks are limited to strictly to LE/defence ammo and do not necessarily extend to hunting ammo (which, of course, should be a given considering the topic of the thread).
Well, I must say that I take some comfort in stopping power on a wild boar or bear. Not quite the same as a linebacker on PCP, but there's still some comfort in knowing that a DT load can effectively stop a 200-300 lb. wrecking machine, albeit on four legs instead of two. The gristle plate on a boar seems every bit as sturdy as two layers of denim or leather.

Also, I seem to recall that the definitive ballistics tests are as often done on animal models, cows and sheep, as on ballistic gelatin.

"Street data" is certainly nice, but I also recall that street data is highly inconsistent, subject to wide variety of variables, and can't be used predictively. It's also not necessarily discloseable.


I want to see hard data before I bet life any ammo whether it is from a boutique like Double Tap or a major manufacturer like Winchester, Federal, Remington or Speer.

Amen to that. But let's not be hasty in judging the quality of data, or the data collection techniques.

[coltrane679]

Sounds like you're dropping back and punting on 10mm, which is a shame--it's my favorite semi-auto round, although .45 and 357SIG both work for me, too. I carry all three calibers at various times--but I'm a big guy so bigger guns are a little easier for me to carry.

However, if you reconsider, there's a local pawn shop around here that has a 1076 for $429. Seems like a nice carry gun (the G29 is too small for me in the grip, and the other 10s are quite a bit bigger and/or heavier than a 1076).

[jc2]

Well, let's not be hasty in our judgments... What makes an "expert" vs. an "amateur", and how do you know which category the Double Tap folks fall into? Is it not possible to hire experts or be trained by them. I've seen the specs for gelatin testing, and it seems a bit easier than, say, pharmaceutical development.

Actually, I said "professional" not "expert." There is a bit of a difference--and yes Double Tap definitely falls into the non-professional category (at least when it comes to ballistic gelatin testing). There's more to ballistic testing than mixing the gelatin, taking its temperature, slapping some clothes on it and shooting away. The real problem comes with controlling and/or accounting for the variables during testing (this is where experience, training and the right facilities come in). At least one recognized professional ballistic tester has openly questioned Double Tap's published results (not implying dishonesty or deception on Double Tap's part but rather errors in testing). Anyway, there is certainly plenty of room for doubt when it comes to DT's posted penetration and expansion figures. Before you bet life and limb on them, they need to be verified by an independent professional or government lab/tester.

As to the hunting issue (which is totally irrelevant to the thread and kind of red herring), the penetration/expansion figures (and bullet weights) for hunting ammunition are not necessarily what I would I select for defence. (Besides, if we are serious about hunting, there a whole let better calibres available than 10mm.) BTW, we are not talking about testing on animals here, but rather testing in ballistic geletin--the two are not directly related. I can't recall any "definitive testing" done on animals since Thompson/LaGarde testing at the beginning of the previous century.

As to "street data," I'm not talking about that tripe S&M push as a "definitive study" or specific data in individual shootings, but rather a general history of good performance in LE use. There are some loads out there (e.g., the Speer 124-grain +P Gold Dot and the Winchester 147-grain Ranger T) that have a history of effective performance in LE use. To be blunt, Double Tap's offering have absolutely NO history of effective use in LE or defence.

But let's not be hasty in judging the quality of data, or the data collection techniques.
I'm not being hasty. In fact, I am counseling caution when it comes to selecting these loads for carry (and against being hasty to jump on the Double Tap bandwagon because of some "gee whiz" numbers put forth by the manufacturer). I want to see the manufacturer's test results vefified by an independent professional or government lab, and I want to see a history of effective use in LE. There is not enough hard data available to support carrying Double Tap for defence. There are other, better, proven alternatives available.

[coltrane679]

As to "street data," I'm not talking about that tripe S&M push as a "definitive study" or specific data in individual shootings, but rather a general history of good performance in LE use. There are some loads out there (e.g., the Speer 124-grain +P Gold Dot and the Winchester 147-grain Ranger T) that have a history of effective performance in LE use. To be blunt, Double Tap's offering have absolutely NO history of effective use in LE or defence.

Of course this means that nothing but mass-marketed (to LE) rounds from major manufacturers will ever meet your standard. And rounds that LE just doesn't use (modern 10mm, .45 Super) could never meet your standard.

You shoot that candyass 9mm "effective" round, and I'll shoot the 10mm DT Gold-Dot, and we'll both sleep fine.

[jc2]

Yes, it does seem like the 10mm is DOA when it comes to LE, doesn't it? BTW, my standard for selecting a carry load is hard data--something evidently even you admit and understand is not available for Double Tap.

As for those 9x19 loads, they are just a couple of rounds with a history of very good performance in LE use (something Double Tap lacks BTW). I could have easily picked the Speer 180-grain Gold Dot or Winchester 180-grain Ranger T (.40 S&W). I could have just as easily selected the Speer and Winchester 125-grain offering in 357 SIG. There's always Remington's 230-grain Golden Sabre, Winchesters 230-grain and 230-grain +P Ranger T loads or Speer's 230-grain Gold Dot in .45 ACP.

There is plenty of ammunition with well-documented professional and/or government test results that also have an excellent history of performance in actual use by LE. It seems rather foolish to rely on a product for which there has been no reliable, professional or government testing and which has absolutely no historical performance record--particularly when there so many proven (both in the lab and in actual use) other choices available. But then, if somebody really wants to be seduced by some "gee whiz" velocity and energy figures posted by the manufacturer, far be it from me to try to confuse them with the facts. :cool:

[atblis]

10mm is an utter blast to shoot. If you don't have one, you need to get one. The only reason I bother with 9mm is because CZ doesn't make a 10mm.

The Witnesses can be good guns, and are really cheap (Witnesses do seem to have a higher lemon rate). I bought two NIB recently from CDNN for $269 each. $319 or so would be a good dealer price around me. At a price like that you should buy one just to try, and than perhaps get the Glock for carry. I would not want to CC a full size Witness.

Be warned though. EAA is utterly worthless, so if you have a problem with a Witness, you're basically on your own (Despite the "lifetime warranty").

10mm is not dead.

Georgia Arms sells excellent ammo for plinking.

[coltrane679]

No, jc2, what you don't understand (or want to acknowledge) is that your "facts" are actually an argument, and one that is not falsifiable at that--which means you have crossed over into belief, not fact. Your "logic" (if that is not too string a word) would dictate that a .44 magnum could not be considered effective for self-defense, which is plainly idiotic (if anything, of course, the round is TOO powerful for common self-defense usage, Dirty Harry notwithstanding). But the plainly idiotic is no deterent to you, obviously.

All you are doing is bathering the same basic lines over and over--i.e., the only reliable self-defense rounds are those commonly used by LE. If this "standard" personally makes you all comfy all over, go with it--nobody really cares what you shoot or carry. But your insistance that this is the ONLY basis to choose a defense round is ideology, not "a fact". So, excuse some of us if we don't give a damn about your beliefs.

[Omni04]

hey, a bullet is a bullet!


but i may be SLIGHTLY shying away from 10mm for the time being. I still have a long way and a lot more looking around to do. But i think i will lean towards a 9mm USP for a starter because of the cheap ammo and the manual saftey. After that who knows? I have a whole lifetime to own huge caliber handguns :)

ill have to look into the georgia arms for the cheap 10mm plinking ammo. Thats another reason i kind of shied away from it, i didn't think id be spending a dollar a bullet! (this from the guy that goes through a brick and a half of .22 LR everytime he goes to the range)

[jc2]

I think you're more than a little confused coltrane679.

I never said the 10mm is "too powerful" for self-defence. In fact, I carry a 1076 for that purpose occassionally (and have even used a .44 Magnum in that role). There is good 10mm (and .44 Magnum) defence ammunition available. I do, however, think the service calibres (9x19/357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP) are better suited for dedicated defence purposes.

The suitabilility of the 10mm for defence is not the issue. The issue is that when it comes to Double Tap ammo there is no hard data to determine its suitability, or lack of suitability, as defensive ammo. "Gee whiz" velocity and energy figures (and even questionable ballistic testing results posted by the manufacturer) do not necessarily equate to Double Tap being suitable defence ammo.

There is a large selection of ammunition available for which there IS hard data in the form of test results from reputable professional and/or government labs AND historical performance in LE/defence use. Double Tap has neither. It may work fine, or it may not work as well as the factory offerings from Speer, Winchester, Federal, etc. The problem is that we have no hard data concerning how well it will work. Given the absence of good, hard data about Double Tap's performance (or lack thereof--an equally plausible result), there are certainly better choices available for defence of life and limb. Choices for which there is hard data available that will give us some idea (and assurance) of how that ammo actually performs--that data is totally lacking in Double Tap's case.

Again, if you feel comfortable in your selection of Double Tap ammunition more power to you. Others who might considering a 10mm for a first time (or maybe considering the use of a 10mm in a defensive role) should be aware that hard performance data on Double Tap is almost totally lacking. Double Tap is bascially a great unknown when it comes defence. Depending on the experience/knowledge level of a person (and how susceptible they are to the hype--good and bad--that the 10mm engenders), others need to be advised that is a wide selection of good ammunition available for defence (and calibres more suitable for defence) for which exists a great deal of hard data both in the terms of professional independent or government test data and historical performance in LE.

[Guns_and_Labs]

The issue is that when it comes to Double Tap ammo there is no hard data to determine its suitability, or lack of suitability, as defensive ammo.

Well, let's parse this a bit.

BULLETS: The bullets are the same as those used in the "big names". So long as the velocity is within the bullet's specs, who is loading them should not be an issue (again, for bullet performance). There certainly is plenty of evidence as to the suitability of Gold Dots, and Golden Saber, though less on XTP. Based on the bullet manufacturer's data (I'm assuming they are considered a competent authority), the Double Tap loads are within spec -- though I only checked the 180 gr GD's and GS's.

LOAD: I'm not sure why you keep referring to "gee whiz" for the velocity and energy figures. Certainly velocity is the easiest to check. I know I have, and my results match the published figures pretty well. I don't have a test chamber, but I am able to factor in variability in temperature, humidity and wind through repeated measures. I've found the Double Tap and Buffalo Bore loads to be as controlled or more so than the "big names".

Other Components: Again, the brass is coming from tested, commercial sources... and largely the same suppliers and specs as some of the "big name" ammunition providers.

So, on all of the above, there does seem to be some "hard evidence" for the components used by Double Tap. We get to manufacturer specifics.

QUALITY CONTROL: This is probably the most important component in the ammunition process -- I'm biased by my pharmaceutical development background -- and yet it's the one that NONE of the ammunition suppliers have had tested by your favored "reputable professional and/or government labs." I've never seen published data on ballistics that controlled back to batch records or even lot records.

that data is totally lacking in Double Tap's case.

I agree with you, jc2, on the need for caution and care in the selection of defensive ammunition. I disagree with your overly focused attention on one particular source of data. By examining other sources of data, I end up with different conclusions.

Given a choice between 180 gr. Gold Dots loaded to 1300 fps and 180 gr. Gold Dots loaded to 1025 fps -- and given that Speer shows both to be within performance spec (it takes a bit more to make GD's frangible, according to Speer) and the 180 gr. Gold Dot has a stellar record on the street -- I'll be biased towards 1300 fps. The higher velocity will give me more potential penetration and energy transfer. Then I'll buy a bunch of them and examine them for quality control. When satisfied, I'll put them in my duty weapon. They happen to be Double Taps.

[MCNETT]

JC2, Jimco, or juliet charley:
Almost every post that I see by jc2 is an attempt to smear a great company's name and advance his agenda. He really likes to repeat what he says. He has not tried DoubleTap's ammo, but he posts about it more than anyone other than me.
Jimco, if you want to become an expert on what DoubleTap can and cannot do, please purchase some and evaluate it yourself. I will even throw in free shipping if you post the results right here in the THR. If not, please refrain from bashing DoubleTap in the future.
-Mike

[coltrane679]

I never said the 10mm is "too powerful" for self-defence.

Well, that's good--because I never said you said that. Are you having discussions with the voices in your head or what? I only mentioned the concept in relation to .44 magnum--an extremely effective SD round, but with too much power (too much recoil for most, and overpenetration) for many situations. But by your standard there is no way we could even claim that it is effective for SD--it doesn't have your sacred widespread use by LE to qualify. That's an obviously idiotic conclusion, which reveals a fundamental flaw with your argument.

The suitabilility of the 10mm for defence is not the issue. The issue is that when it comes to Double Tap ammo there is no hard data to determine its suitability, or lack of suitability, as defensive ammo.

No, the issue here is your insistence that ONLY regular LE usage can provide the ONLY standard of "hard data" you personally find acceptable. By that standard, there will NEVER be such "hard data" on DT rounds--or on .45 Super, or .44 magnum, or a whole crapload of other rounds which plainly would be extremely effective at self-defense.

You have created this bogus standard--it exists solely between your ears. It is not "a fact".

PS: Learn to spell "defense" like an American already.

[jc2]

Guns_and_Labs -
Given a choice between 180 gr. Gold Dots loaded to 1300 fps and 180 gr. Gold Dots loaded to 1025 fps -- and given that Speer shows both to be within performance spec (it takes a bit more to make GD's frangible, according to Speer) and the 180 gr. Gold Dot has a stellar record on the street -- I'll be biased towards 1300 fps. The higher velocity will give me more potential penetration and energy transfer.
You are correct in that Gold Dots do not become frangible but when driven too fast they DO fold back on themselves resulting in smaller permanent and temporary cavities. In other words, the 180-grain Gold Dot at ~1300 fps may be LESS effective than the 180-grain Gold Dot at ~1025 fps. We do not have sufficient hard data (i.e. test data from professional independent sources) to confirm it (or deny it). FTR, here is a an interesting exchange from over on WT concerning that very load (180-grain Gold Dot at ~1300 fps):

QUESTION (TO AMMO LAB): Hey David/Ammo Lab, I've been meaning to ask you about some of these Gold Dot loads I've seen advertised/talked about for the 10mm. Aren't those 180-grain Gold Dots advertised at a nominal MV of 1300 fps (or 165-grain Gold Dots at 1400 fps) from a G20 moving just a little fast for optimum performance for Gold Dot bullet. I'm thinking if they knocked at 100 (or preferably 200) fps off those you'd probably get better performance from the bullets (not to mention better control). Any thoughts?

ANSWER (FROM AMMO LAB):that is correct, although the Gold Dot does a very good job of holding together and avoiding structural failure through many materials it is not designed to function properly at significantly increased or decreased velocities and that will reduce overall effectiveness and performance.

That answer alone should be enough to make anyone pause and think. Ammo Lab has tested a lot of ammunition/bullets and probably knows more than you and me combined about bullet performance. There is not enough hard data available to make an informed judgement on the performance of Double Tap ammunition in a defence role.

Nobody is denying Double Tap uses quality components, but there is more to effectiveness than merely quality components. Hard test data, and actual history of performance of performance in LE use gives a good idea of how well the components work together, how well the manufacturer did at matching the components and how well manufacturers did maximizing their performance. As it stands now, all we know is Double Tap uses quality components. We have no idea of how well those components as loaded by Double Tap work, period. FWIW, testing by the professional and government labs is documented by lot number.

MCNETT -

You should preface you remarks by stating you have a direct economic interest in Double Tap, and your remarks should not necessarily be considered those of an unbiased observer/participant.

While the discussion has centered on Double Tap (and BTW, I was not the one that introduce Double Tap into the thread), there is no reason feel that people are picking on Double Tap. The remarks hold equally true for any of the other boutique ammunition.

I wonder if it's your direct economic interest in Double Tap that makes you see "smearing" or "bashing" and even an "agenda" (even though the observations are valid for all the boutiques). There has been nothing said that could be considered "bashing" or even negative concerning Double Tap ammo (or any of the other boutique companies).

All that has been stated is:

1. There is no professional independent or government agency testing data on Double Tap's Gold Dot loads. That is a simple fact.

2. Double Tap's Gold Dot loads have no historical performance record with any major law enforcement agency. That is a simple fact.

3. I want to see hard data in the form professional independent or government lab test results (and preferably actual historical law enforcement performance data) before I select a load with which to defend my life of limb (regardless of manufacturer). That is a simple fact.

4. That it is not good practice to select a carry load (regardless of the manufacturer) without hard data from professional independent or government lab and preferably a historical LE performance record. That is good advice.

None of which constitutes "smearing" or "bashing" (nice little buzz words though, Mike).

[Stephen A. Camp]

Please do not use derogatory terms in discussions. It is fine to disagree. It is not fine to use descriptors that are rude.

Thank you in advance.

[MCNETT]

You have a great talent for repeating yourself!
You also laid out "fact" 1-4. How do you know this? Where is your source of data? How about some "hard facts" from the mysterious jc2, or jimco, or juliet charley? To each his own. We have heard what you have to say time and time and time and time........again until we are all ready to faint. You have stated and restated your position on YOUR choice of ammunition. WE GOT IT! Now that everyone in the cyber world knows how you feel, please let the discussion move on without your bias getting into every thread concerning the company of which I am affiliated with. I am here to ANSWER questions about DoubleTap's products. You are here only to start an argument.
-Mike

[jc2]

coltrane679 -
No, the issue here is your insistence that ONLY regular LE usage can provide the ONLY standard of "hard data" you personally find acceptable.
You have totally missed point. You are hearing only on the part about a historic performance record with LE (or ignoring all the remarks concerning ballistic test data from a reputable, professional independent source) and worrying way too much about esoteric calibres like the .45 Super. In terms of "hard data" I am talking about BOTH test data from reputable, independent professional ballistic labs AND a history of performance in actual LE use (and there is 10mm ammunition that qualifies). I would observe that the paucity of historic performance data in LE of calibres like the .45 Super (and the 10mm's actual record with LE) is probably a very loud comment on their overall suitability for defence/LE use.

[Lennyjoe]

Ok jc2, time to move on. The thread has been severely hijacked from its intended purpose.

[jc2]

Again, McNett, President and CEO of Double Tap Ammunition, you come in here throwing about charges of "bias" (and totally blowing off the moderators on this board caution against "derogatory terms" in discussions).

Since you are here to answer questions, I will ask a few.

1. Has any reputable, professional independent labs or testers (e.g., Gary Roberts, David DiFabio/Ammo Lab, Buford Boone/FTU) tested your Gold Dots loads? If they have, how about some hard data, their evaluation, and links to an independent source for that data.

2. Do you have a statement(s) from one of those reputable, professional independent sources listed above stating that Double Tap's Gold Dot loads have worked effectively for the LE Officers who depended upon them?

For some reason, you want to make this all about Double Tap. It isn't. It holds true for all the boutiques (small speciality shops) including others like RCBD.

[Johnny Guest]

Omni04 opened the thread with some rather specific questions.

We'll leave it open for a bit, to see if the thread can get back on course.
Next bit of sniping concerning ammo brands or other OT stuff, and posts will begin disappearing. Not just the new ones, but ALL the previous OT posts in this thread.

Come on, now - - Don't make life difficult for your friendly neighborhood moderators. :rolleyes:

Johnny Guest
THR Mod

[Omni04]

Thank you very much Johnny Quest! :)

ok, so lemme try to recap. It seems that the glock is a better choice for CCW due to its lower costs, and smaller gun frame.

I glanced around at USP's and i don't see any chambered for 10mm. Are there any other compact handguns that are durable and a little smaller than the S&W's?

i think i have gotten almost all i am going to out of the thread though. I had a lot of questions answered already.

small question about ammo though: would you all consider double tap to be the cheapest for just plinking? I have only glanced around a little bit at ammo prices and that is one of the things that makes me worried to use a 10mm as a primary CCW. I would be shooting it often at the range and i hope to get some cheap practice ammo.

that being said, i probably will have 2 types of ammo, one for CCW, and a cheaper one for going to the range. What ammo won't blow me up, and will still hit targets cheaply? :)

[jc2]

The cheapest for plinking day in, day out is Georgia Arms. You might also watch ammoman.com for liquidations, and Natchez for specials (for example, Natchez has Blazers for $12.16/50).

Be advised, Georgia Arms practice ammo is reloaded, and therefore verboten in a Glock. Their two practice loads are a 180-grain FMJ at $10.00/50 and a 180-grain LFP at $8.50/50 (lead is generally considered a big no-no in Glocks).

For carry, my favourite is http://www.ammoman.com/IMAGES/Fed-10mm-90-1.jpg (but unfortunately out of stock) with Winchester Silvertips a close (and more available) second (and currently on sale at Natchez for $10.15/20). FWIW, probably the least expensive carry ammo available is Georgia Arms' 180-grain Gold Dot load $13.75/50--it's loaded in new brass and is cheaper than most practice ammo (and there's lot to be said for being able to practice with actual load/bullet you carry.

As the weapons, you've pretty much nailed it with the G29 and S&W 1066/76/86. The G29 is definitely lighter and shorter. The S&Ws are slimmer (which to me is the most important element in concealed carry). I have both a G29 and 1076, and the 1076 carries much better/more comfortably--the extra barrel length helps it balance better on the belt. If you are interested (and hurry), there is a 1086 on gunbroker.com (from a seller I'd trust)--the current price is $510 with about seven hours to go:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?item=33492679

[Guns_and_Labs]

It seems that the glock is a better choice for CCW due to its lower costs, and smaller gun frame.

Not really, in terms of frame. A smaller S&W single stack may well be better for size and ergonomics (like the 1076). It certainly fits me better than the double stack Glock. The Glock has the edge on weight, though. On cost, maybe a toss-up when comparing new Glocks to the lamentably-now-discontinued S&W's.

Of course, some will tell you that the 1911 format is perfect for CCW, and that you ought to pop for a Colt Delta Elite if you're set on 10mm. Or Dan Wesson's Commander-sized 10mm.



jc2: Please check PM's... I don't want to upset the mod's with an OT question.

[Iron bottom]

I have 9 and 10mm handguns. There is no comparison between them. 9mm feels like a bb gun after shooting a 10mm. There is nothing at all amiss with Double Tap ammo. I always feel better carrying a 10mm and Double Tap. I know anything, man or beast, getting hit with 10mm Double tap is going to have a bad day. Btw, a Delta Elite was the second pistol I bought and I never looked back. You won't go wrong with 10mm.

[jeepmor]

1. 10mm - a cult round gaining popularity, reloading key to liberal economical long term plinking. So is a good spotter for brass location for that matter, boy do they fly.

2. uber round - 357 equivalent...in an auto format,

3. silvertips best performing bullet for 10mm velocity per
10mmtalk.com "feral dog" empirical reports.

This round is increasing in popularity as I am a new owner myself within the last year. For a new gun in this format, I would like see one, besides glock, specifically focused on the CCW market in a single stack.

Bring back the S&W 10mm line on a weight loss program is my vote.

jeepmor

[roscoe]

You should preface you remarks by stating you have a direct economic interest in Double Tap, and your remarks should not necessarily be considered those of an unbiased observer/participant.
I think he pretty much said that when he offered free shipping.

[IndianaBoy]

I would rather have one very top of the line CCW, and then a couple of other cheaper cz's and stuff for plinking at the shooting range.

I don't know anything about the 10mm round, other than that it posts some very impressive numbers.

But don't make the mistake of thinking that price = quality. CZ makes some very fine handguns that work well from the range, to competitions, to carry. I have a CZ 75B that I like just as well as my much more pricey Sig P225. But I carry the Sig because of easier concealment and lighter weight, even though I am giving up capacity.

HK's are very highly regarded but they feel terrible to me, and as such aren't worth the price tag. I also don't shoot them worth a darn. Sig's, CZ's and Browning High Powers feel great to me, and I shoot well with them.

If I were you, I would rent/shoot as many guns as you could in the next two years, and then make a CCW choice based on a platform/caliber that fits you in terms of shootability and concealment. I would prefer to carry a 454 Casull if I were looking at only the ballistics numbers, but that is not realistic.

There are 10mm carry options, others here have given you great advice about them. But you are putting the cart before the horse IMHO.

Don't be too concerned with 'image' for a CCW gun. An 800 dollar handgun that you don't shoot well is not going to be any better for a CCW than a 350 dollar gun which points naturally for you and is also inherently accurate.

Personally I would not carry a Jennings, Lorcin, Raven, et al. But I hesitate to deride them because I am aware that perhaps that is all that some people can afford.

Buy all the quality that you can afford, as long is it fits you personally.

[EdLaver]

The Glock 29 is your best choice. I carry one for my CCW and it IS THE ONLY glock that I actually like. Buy one with a few pearce grip extensions and you'll be a happy well protected man!:)

[pocketgun]

Ancient thread - I am sure the decision was made long ago, and advice is no longer needed.

[Marshall]

I'm curious as to what, if any, decision made was made. :)

[tincat2]

Man, 10mm just heats things right up! I gotta get one!

[jeepmor]

He is a manufacturer. I do strongly believe he as adequate data as to his real world performance of his offerings. Police do get back to manufacturers regarding ballistic performance in actual shootings and Mike has briefly mentioned this on 10mmtalk.com. However, the subject of shooting people is not one that an organization brags about in this arena, it's just bad karma dude, think about it. Mike makes his living doing this stuff, there are certain lines he can and will not cross simply out of professional courtesy and ethics.

I would gladly carry a full power 10mm round from McNett or other boutique manufacturers as opposed to the 40S&W equivalent offered by most well known large manufacturers such as Winchester and Federal. If prosecution accused me of selecting a "killer" load, I would reiterate that it operates at the originally intended operating range of the firearm, nothing more.

And if needed, I'm sure Mr. McNett's organization could provide plenty of ballistic data to support or dispute any legal claims as to performance. He is using bullets in his cartridges that have well known performance characteristics, so I don't see what all the quibbling is about.

He is filling a niche quite nicely and making a decent living at it considering he has moved to a larger facility within a year or so IIRC. I'd state he is becoming a large manufacturer and 10 years from now this will be a moot point regarding data. The amount of ballistic gelatin testing he has conducted cannot simply be thrown out because it did not come from an independent lab, that's just asenine IMO. Data is data, maybe DT generated it, but that doesn't make it invalid. I should have skipped this one, my apologies if I've irked anyone in my statements. Respect to all, happy plinking.

jeepmor

PS - on topic, I'd probably pick a G29 for CCW. I know you don't like the trigger or feel safe, but it's the smallest model available. Other than that, a Witness compact, but they are notably heavy at 30oz unloaded.