Phaetos
December 4, 2005, 01:48 PM
Title says it all? Why do you need a 10mm? More velocity out of the barrel? Slightly higher energy? And who makes a 10mm?
10mm? What purpose and why?
If you enjoyed reading about "10mm? What purpose and why?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MCgunner
December 4, 2005, 01:53 PM
Title says it all? Why do you need a 10mm? More velocity out of the barrel? Slightly higher energy? And who makes a 10mm?
The ten makes for a decent outdoor round. Watched Sweaty Teddy take some exotic off the YO with it on the outdoor channel once, used his Glock. It's only chambered in service size autos. Would make a neat moon clip revolver round! That's about it far as I can think of. I never bought one. I have a friend with an AMT in 10mm. I've shot it a few times. I'll keep my .45, thanks. If I wanna kill something with a handgun, I have an ultra accurate Ruger blackhawk in .45 colt with some hot handloads using 300 grain bullets or I'll use my TC in .30-30.
The ten makes for a decent outdoor round. Watched Sweaty Teddy take some exotic off the YO with it on the outdoor channel once, used his Glock. It's only chambered in service size autos. Would make a neat moon clip revolver round! That's about it far as I can think of. I never bought one. I have a friend with an AMT in 10mm. I've shot it a few times. I'll keep my .45, thanks. If I wanna kill something with a handgun, I have an ultra accurate Ruger blackhawk in .45 colt with some hot handloads using 300 grain bullets or I'll use my TC in .30-30.
Phaetos
December 4, 2005, 02:13 PM
Hmmm.. interesting. My dad was reading "Outdoor Life" I think it was and they said to carry a 10mm with you when out hunting to fend off other wildlife :) Like what, killer squirrels ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4489792.stm?
Cosmoline
December 4, 2005, 02:44 PM
The 10mm, esp. with heavy hardcast loads, is equal to hot .357 hardcast as a backwoods cartridge. No .40, 9x19, .45 ACP or any standard semi cartridge can make this claim. Neither can the .357 Sig.
mindpilot
December 4, 2005, 03:02 PM
I am an avid hunter in MN and I have a disability that allows me to hunt big game with a hand gun. 10mm, .40 , and .45 are the only guns allowed to be used. A 9mm is not enough, it is a proven fact to bring down a large animal let alone a human on Crystal Meth.:what:
MCgunner
December 4, 2005, 03:52 PM
I am an avid hunter in MN and I have a disability that allows me to hunt big game with a hand gun. 10mm, .40 , and .45 are the only guns allowed to be used. A 9mm is not enough, it is a proven fact to bring down a large animal let alone a human on Crystal Meth.:what:
Wow, you have to be handicapped in Mn to handgun hunt? Guess I'll stay in Texas. I prefer my contender, but it's kinda a two handed gun. You only mention autoloading rounds. They restrict handgun cartridges to THAT? No .44 mag, .50AE, or the new .50S&W? My favorite is the .45 colt, but I'd like to try a .454 Casull.
The ten is more of a .357 in power. When it first came out, I remember reading articles about "a .41 mag auto" which is pretty much BS. The .41 mag is a neat caliber to handload even if the factory loads may be a little weak.
Wow, you have to be handicapped in Mn to handgun hunt? Guess I'll stay in Texas. I prefer my contender, but it's kinda a two handed gun. You only mention autoloading rounds. They restrict handgun cartridges to THAT? No .44 mag, .50AE, or the new .50S&W? My favorite is the .45 colt, but I'd like to try a .454 Casull.
The ten is more of a .357 in power. When it first came out, I remember reading articles about "a .41 mag auto" which is pretty much BS. The .41 mag is a neat caliber to handload even if the factory loads may be a little weak.
mindpilot
December 4, 2005, 04:03 PM
Wow, you have to be handicapped in Mn to handgun hunt? Guess I'll stay in Texas. I prefer my contender, but it's kinda a two handed gun. You only mention autoloading rounds. They restrict handgun cartridges to THAT? No .44 mag, .50AE, or the new .50S&W? My favorite is the .45 colt, but I'd like to try a .454 Casull.
The ten is more of a .357 in power. When it first came out, I remember reading articles about "a .41 mag auto" which is pretty much BS. The .41 mag is a neat caliber to handload even if the factory loads may be a little weak.
Well I am sure you can use those calibers too...not sure. I am not even sure about the handicap law anymore, I am refering to whitetail deer mainly. Only thing I hunt with a 10mm.
The ten is more of a .357 in power. When it first came out, I remember reading articles about "a .41 mag auto" which is pretty much BS. The .41 mag is a neat caliber to handload even if the factory loads may be a little weak.
Well I am sure you can use those calibers too...not sure. I am not even sure about the handicap law anymore, I am refering to whitetail deer mainly. Only thing I hunt with a 10mm.
jc2
December 4, 2005, 04:35 PM
As previously stated, the 10mm claim to fame is that it is the bottom feeder equivalent to the .357 Magnum.
Its strength is that it is a good general purpose round that is adequate for hunting (at least up to whitetail-size game), and it is a decent defence round (though it is pretty DOA as a LE round).
Its weakness is that there are better hunting rounds, and there are better defence rounds.
Weapon selection is rather limited, and ammunition is relatively expensive and hard to find--particularly if you are not into bulk mail (or internet) ordering.
Its strength is that it is a good general purpose round that is adequate for hunting (at least up to whitetail-size game), and it is a decent defence round (though it is pretty DOA as a LE round).
Its weakness is that there are better hunting rounds, and there are better defence rounds.
Weapon selection is rather limited, and ammunition is relatively expensive and hard to find--particularly if you are not into bulk mail (or internet) ordering.
migoi
December 4, 2005, 04:54 PM
Look for a S&W 610. Unfluted cylinder, shoots 10MM and 40S&W. Moon clips come in 6 round and 2 round variety. The two rounders are a bit harder to demoon though.
migoi
migoi
MTMilitiaman
December 4, 2005, 05:07 PM
Its weakness is that there are better hunting rounds, and there are better defence rounds.
Yes perhaps better hunting rounds--if you want to go from a 28 oz auto to a 43 oz hunting revolver. One could argue as a trail pistol, the added weight of the revolver isn't worth the power increase. As for better defensive rounds, maybe some that come close. The .45 might expand marginally larger but the 10mm has more capacity, which is an issue in a defensive firearm. The 10mm gives you the capacity of the .40 with more energy and bullet expansion. It offers similar energy to the .357 but with more diameter and slightly more mass in most defensive loads. Also most .357s hold 6 to 8 rounds while my Glock 20 holds 15+1 with the possibility of increasing capacity to 17+1. Basically the 10mm offers expanded bullet diameters very close to that of the .45 but with more energy and magazine capacity.
Yes perhaps better hunting rounds--if you want to go from a 28 oz auto to a 43 oz hunting revolver. One could argue as a trail pistol, the added weight of the revolver isn't worth the power increase. As for better defensive rounds, maybe some that come close. The .45 might expand marginally larger but the 10mm has more capacity, which is an issue in a defensive firearm. The 10mm gives you the capacity of the .40 with more energy and bullet expansion. It offers similar energy to the .357 but with more diameter and slightly more mass in most defensive loads. Also most .357s hold 6 to 8 rounds while my Glock 20 holds 15+1 with the possibility of increasing capacity to 17+1. Basically the 10mm offers expanded bullet diameters very close to that of the .45 but with more energy and magazine capacity.
WT
December 4, 2005, 05:45 PM
I believe the 10mm was designed by S&W at the request of the FBI after the infamous Miami shootout in the 1980's.
Michael Zeleny
December 4, 2005, 05:56 PM
I believe the 10mm was designed by S&W at the request of the FBI after the infamous Miami shootout in the 1980's.The 10mm round was designed by Norma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10mm) in 1983 for chambering in the Dornaus & Dixon Bren Ten (http://www.bren-ten.com/). S&W made its model 1076 for the FBI in the late Eighties, for adoption inspired by the Miami shootout. After the FBI requested that the 10mm round be downloaded, S&W developed its shortened .40 round.
MCgunner
December 4, 2005, 05:59 PM
Yes perhaps better hunting rounds--if you want to go from a 28 oz auto to a 43 oz hunting revolver. One could argue as a trail pistol, the added weight of the revolver isn't worth the power increase. As for better defensive rounds, maybe some that come close. The .45 might expand marginally larger but the 10mm has more capacity, which is an issue in a defensive firearm. The 10mm gives you the capacity of the .40 with more energy and bullet expansion. It offers similar energy to the .357 but with more diameter and slightly more mass in most defensive loads. Also most .357s hold 6 to 8 rounds while my Glock 20 holds 15+1 with the possibility of increasing capacity to 17+1. Basically the 10mm offers expanded bullet diameters very close to that of the .45 but with more energy and magazine capacity.
28 ounce auto? That glock I fired was HUGE, felt heavier, maybe not. 1911s like the AMT Javelina are 40 ounce guns in the short slide version. For outdoor carry, I prefer a revolver anyway. Had a really nifty Rossi a while back, very light and durable in .357 mag. Traded it away. I have a L frame sized Taurus now. As for autos, if you prefer autos as an outdoor gun, the 10 is a good choice. There is the Coonan in .357. .357 is a lot more common on shelves at walmart than the 10. Part of my affection with the .357, though, is the use of .38 in the same gun. Revolvers can do that, not the Coonan. Of course, if you handload and install a light spring, you can make your ten a .40 or lighter. But, with the revolver, life is easier if you want your magnum to do small game duty.
I think if I wanted a 10 for outdoor duty and I didn't go for that S&W 610 (knew they'd made one, but couldn't remember the model), the Glock is the gun I'd get. I wasn't too impressed with that AMT my friend has. It's mediocre in accuracy and he had to have a smith work it over to get it to feed reliably. Does Colt still offer the 10? I'm really not up on what's available in the caliber. But, the M610 revolver would have the advantage of the .357 in that it could use .40s for light loads. You could have fun with this gun handloading for outdoor uses. This would be a very neat outdoor gun I think. The moon clips are much easier to use than speed loaders and as a defense revolver it'd be hard to beat, very versatile. It also might do pretty well with heavy bullets on pins, though I'd think a 625 in .45 would be better for that.
28 ounce auto? That glock I fired was HUGE, felt heavier, maybe not. 1911s like the AMT Javelina are 40 ounce guns in the short slide version. For outdoor carry, I prefer a revolver anyway. Had a really nifty Rossi a while back, very light and durable in .357 mag. Traded it away. I have a L frame sized Taurus now. As for autos, if you prefer autos as an outdoor gun, the 10 is a good choice. There is the Coonan in .357. .357 is a lot more common on shelves at walmart than the 10. Part of my affection with the .357, though, is the use of .38 in the same gun. Revolvers can do that, not the Coonan. Of course, if you handload and install a light spring, you can make your ten a .40 or lighter. But, with the revolver, life is easier if you want your magnum to do small game duty.
I think if I wanted a 10 for outdoor duty and I didn't go for that S&W 610 (knew they'd made one, but couldn't remember the model), the Glock is the gun I'd get. I wasn't too impressed with that AMT my friend has. It's mediocre in accuracy and he had to have a smith work it over to get it to feed reliably. Does Colt still offer the 10? I'm really not up on what's available in the caliber. But, the M610 revolver would have the advantage of the .357 in that it could use .40s for light loads. You could have fun with this gun handloading for outdoor uses. This would be a very neat outdoor gun I think. The moon clips are much easier to use than speed loaders and as a defense revolver it'd be hard to beat, very versatile. It also might do pretty well with heavy bullets on pins, though I'd think a 625 in .45 would be better for that.
1911Tuner
December 4, 2005, 06:05 PM
I've always had the idea that, although just a bit over the top in a pistol, the 10mm would have made a dandy subgun round in an Uzi-based platform. A 10-inch barrel would put it on par with the .41 Magnum.
Think about it...a 600 rpm .41 Magnum.:cool:
Think about it...a 600 rpm .41 Magnum.:cool:
Ranb
December 4, 2005, 06:05 PM
The 10mm was designed in 1983 for the Bren Ten pistol.
After the 1986 FBI shootout in Florida, the FBI went looking for a better pistol than the 9mm, 38 special and 357 mag they used at the gun fight. The two bad guys were armed with a shotgun, pistols and a Ruger mini-14 in 223. The rifle alone accounted for three agents wounded and two agents killed. In my opinion if was not the caliber of the pistols that handicapped the FBI, it was the fact they went to a gunfight armed with pistols instead of rifles. It is bad to blame the caliber instead of the tactics used.
The FBI decided to go with a 10mm pistol, but it proved to be too much recoil for some agents to control, so they kept the 10mm S&W with a lower powered round. COTW reference says the FBI load is a 180 JHP at 950 fps. Rather light if you ask me. Shortly after the 10mm FBI load was developed, the 40 S&W came out.
Ranb
After the 1986 FBI shootout in Florida, the FBI went looking for a better pistol than the 9mm, 38 special and 357 mag they used at the gun fight. The two bad guys were armed with a shotgun, pistols and a Ruger mini-14 in 223. The rifle alone accounted for three agents wounded and two agents killed. In my opinion if was not the caliber of the pistols that handicapped the FBI, it was the fact they went to a gunfight armed with pistols instead of rifles. It is bad to blame the caliber instead of the tactics used.
The FBI decided to go with a 10mm pistol, but it proved to be too much recoil for some agents to control, so they kept the 10mm S&W with a lower powered round. COTW reference says the FBI load is a 180 JHP at 950 fps. Rather light if you ask me. Shortly after the 10mm FBI load was developed, the 40 S&W came out.
Ranb
Phaetos
December 4, 2005, 06:32 PM
A little arguement over when and who it was created for? hehe... So, S&W makes one, in revolver form? And Glock makes one in semi-auto. Who else makes one?
jc2
December 4, 2005, 06:37 PM
As for better defensive rounds, maybe some that come close. The .45 might expand marginally larger but the 10mm has more capacity, which is an issue in a defensive firearm. The 10mm gives you the capacity of the .40 with more energy and bullet expansion. It offers similar energy to the .357 but with more diameter and slightly more mass in most defensive loads. Also most .357s hold 6 to 8 rounds while my Glock 20 holds 15+1 with the possibility of increasing capacity to 17+1. Basically the 10mm offers expanded bullet diameters very close to that of the .45 but with more energy and magazine capacity.
The 10mm has several shortcomings as defensive round you chose to gloss over. While it may offer the capacity of the .40 S&W, it does so in a considerably larger weapon--the G20 has all the ergonomics of a cinder block (it's too big to be a brick). The short S&Ws (1066/76/86) are better defence weapons based on ergonomics/pointability, but they are still large and heavy. While the 10mm may appear to offer better paper ballistics than the .40 S&W, it has not shown any advantage in actual defence use. We also need to remember that, with the exception of the 175-grain Silvertip, there are absolutely NO current generation (modern technology) bullets designed for the 10mm. The only "full-power" defence/LE ammo available for 10mm besides the 175-grain Silvertips relies on bullets designed for the .40 S&W pushed the the far upper end (or beyond) the optimum performance window for those bullets (and they are all totally unproven in actual defence/LE use). Another important point to consider with the 10mm is that when you move into the full-power range, you pay a penalty in terms of controllability. When you argued for the 10mm as a hunting round, you cited concerns with the platform (bottom feeder versus revolver). When it comes to defence, platform (size, weight, ergonomics) argues against the 10mm--especially the G20 which you use in your argument. Couple that with a dearth of suitable projectiles designed for the 10mm (at least at the upper-end) and the sacrifice on controllability with upper-end loads, and it is plain to see there are better choices for defence.
Tuner has it right. The 10mm would make a dandy sub or magazine fed carbine.
The 10mm has several shortcomings as defensive round you chose to gloss over. While it may offer the capacity of the .40 S&W, it does so in a considerably larger weapon--the G20 has all the ergonomics of a cinder block (it's too big to be a brick). The short S&Ws (1066/76/86) are better defence weapons based on ergonomics/pointability, but they are still large and heavy. While the 10mm may appear to offer better paper ballistics than the .40 S&W, it has not shown any advantage in actual defence use. We also need to remember that, with the exception of the 175-grain Silvertip, there are absolutely NO current generation (modern technology) bullets designed for the 10mm. The only "full-power" defence/LE ammo available for 10mm besides the 175-grain Silvertips relies on bullets designed for the .40 S&W pushed the the far upper end (or beyond) the optimum performance window for those bullets (and they are all totally unproven in actual defence/LE use). Another important point to consider with the 10mm is that when you move into the full-power range, you pay a penalty in terms of controllability. When you argued for the 10mm as a hunting round, you cited concerns with the platform (bottom feeder versus revolver). When it comes to defence, platform (size, weight, ergonomics) argues against the 10mm--especially the G20 which you use in your argument. Couple that with a dearth of suitable projectiles designed for the 10mm (at least at the upper-end) and the sacrifice on controllability with upper-end loads, and it is plain to see there are better choices for defence.
Tuner has it right. The 10mm would make a dandy sub or magazine fed carbine.
jc2
December 4, 2005, 06:43 PM
A little arguement over when and who it was created for? hehe... So, S&W makes one, in revolver form? And Glock makes one in semi-auto. Who else makes one?
There really is no argument. It was created by Norma for the Bren Ten. WT was wrong.
Glock makes the G20 and the G29 (a chopped G20) in 10mm. EAA sells an Italian import in 10mm. I believe the S&W revolver (M610) is currently out of production so it's strictly an old stock/used proposition. There have been a couple of limited runs of 10mm in 1911 format recently, but I don't believe they are regular production items. Probably the best 10s are the discontinued S&W mid-size models (1066/76/86) followed by the discontinued S&W full-size models (1006/26/46).
There really is no argument. It was created by Norma for the Bren Ten. WT was wrong.
Glock makes the G20 and the G29 (a chopped G20) in 10mm. EAA sells an Italian import in 10mm. I believe the S&W revolver (M610) is currently out of production so it's strictly an old stock/used proposition. There have been a couple of limited runs of 10mm in 1911 format recently, but I don't believe they are regular production items. Probably the best 10s are the discontinued S&W mid-size models (1066/76/86) followed by the discontinued S&W full-size models (1006/26/46).
priv8ter
December 4, 2005, 07:48 PM
Yeah, if a 1911 is more your style, Dan Wesson still makes them.
www.cz-usa.com
They look much prettier than the glocks, but will run you a bit more than the Glock or EAA option.
greg
www.cz-usa.com
They look much prettier than the glocks, but will run you a bit more than the Glock or EAA option.
greg
NordicG3K
December 4, 2005, 11:12 PM
The 10mm Auto is not a "perfect" cartridge. There is no single job that it does better than any other cartridge. What makes the 10mm so special is that it can do so many different jobs exceedingly well. In town I would feel well armed with a .40 S&W, .357 Mag or .45 ACP. Out in the woods a .41 Mag, .44 Mag, or heavily loaded .45 Colt are hard to beat. But with a 10mm I can do both with one gun and load. I think the .357 is close, but it's best defensive loads are the fast 125gn loadings and I prefer something heavier when out in the country. Right now my main carry piece is a Dan Wesson bobtail Commander stoked with either Winchester 175gn Silvertips or Double Tap 180gn Gold Dots (I can't decide which I prefer yet).
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2002-12/73942/dw-patriot-btc-10mm_1.jpg
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2002-12/73942/dw-patriot-btc-10mm_1.jpg
Skofnung
December 4, 2005, 11:26 PM
Did'nt Col. Cooper have something to do with the development of the 10mm? I seem to remember him saying that the 10mm is best suited for making long shots with an auto-pistol and that under 50 yards it gives nothing up to the .45acp.
I'm a fan of the Glock 21. The big boy fits my hand well. The Glock 20 has always intruiged me. 15+1 of such a round does have an appeal.
I'm a fan of the Glock 21. The big boy fits my hand well. The Glock 20 has always intruiged me. 15+1 of such a round does have an appeal.
aguyindallas
December 4, 2005, 11:31 PM
Where is HighVelocity when we need him.....
jem375
December 4, 2005, 11:43 PM
I am an avid hunter in MN and I have a disability that allows me to hunt big game with a hand gun. 10mm, .40 , and .45 are the only guns allowed to be used. A 9mm is not enough, it is a proven fact to bring down a large animal let alone a human on Crystal Meth.:what:not true on the calibers to hunt deer in Mn. the case length has to be at least 1.285" with a couple of exceptions and this includes the 10MM... the .40 and 45ACP are not legal, the 45LC is. there is a long list of calibers legal, and my hunting handguns are a T/C 44 mag, T/C 375JDJ, Ruger Super blackhawk in 44 mag, and a Savage Striker in 308 win.......
MTMilitiaman
December 5, 2005, 12:37 AM
The 10mm has several shortcomings as defensive round you chose to gloss over. While it may offer the capacity of the .40 S&W, it does so in a considerably larger weapon--the G20 has all the ergonomics of a cinder block (it's too big to be a brick). The short S&Ws (1066/76/86) are better defence weapons based on ergonomics/pointability, but they are still large and heavy.
This is personal preference, entirely. First off, the Glock 20 is only .04" taller, .27" longer, .09" wider, and about 4.8 oz heavier than the Glock 22. It is smaller than my USP Tactical and dimensionally, it is shorter in both length and heigth than my brother's Springfield Mil-Spec and while it is a fullsize pistol, I have carried it concealed inside my waste band in its Uncle Mikes with a spare mag. So it is not entirely unfeasible. The main additions over the Glock 22 and other pistol models is in girth and grip circumference. It is a fullsize frame. More on that in a second. The good news is that it fits me very well. I have big hands with long fingers that fit very well in the Gen III finger grooves and it points more instinctively for me than the 1911. The controls are easy for me to reach, even as a lefty, and the pistol's operation couldn't be more simple. So from my perspective, it suffers nothing in terms of ergonomics or pointability.
While the 10mm may appear to offer better paper ballistics than the .40 S&W, it has not shown any advantage in actual defence use. We also need to remember that, with the exception of the 175-grain Silvertip, there are absolutely NO current generation (modern technology) bullets designed for the 10mm. The only "full-power" defence/LE ammo available for 10mm besides the 175-grain Silvertips relies on bullets designed for the .40 S&W pushed the the far upper end (or beyond) the optimum performance window for those bullets (and they are all totally unproven in actual defence/LE use).
I was just waiting for someone to blurt this off. Cause I have heard it too many times and am sick of it so I have armed myself with the knowledge to counter it. I recently brought these concerns to Speer in the form of an email and recieved the following reply:
"Robert: our 180 gr. GDHP load data for the 10mm has a max velocity of
1295 fps. I don't see why the bullet would cause a problem in that
velocity spectrum.
Shoot Straight!
Coy Getman
CCI/Speer Technical Service Coordinator
(800) 627-3640 # 5351 (pound key must be used)
Fax: (208) 799-3589"
So when Mike McNett pushes the 180 gr Gold Dot to 1300 fps, it's not being unrealistic. Mike sounds like a smart enough guy to have thought of that beforehand. And indeed his published geletin tests seem to support this. Using 10% ballistic geletin calibrated to FBI specs the .40 Smith and Wesson load using a 180 gr Gold Dot HP @ 1100 fps expands to .68" and penetrates to a depth of 14.75". Not bad. But add 200 fps and push the same bullet out of the 4.6 inch barrel of the Glock 20 and you get an expansion of .96" and a penetration of 15.25". So you can say you are pushing bullets beyond their velocity threshold and you can blather on about how the 10mm's energy doesn't accomplish much, but from my end it is looking pretty good.
Now the Speer Gold Dot has established a pretty good reputation in a variety of calibers and most consider it among the best designs currently available. And the reasons most street statistics don't show the 10mm Auto being much more effective than the .40 I suspect is because a) there haven't been nearly as many shootings with the 10mm Auto so the sample size is lacking and b) if I can recall correctly from statistics, when operating on a standard bell curve, it is exponentially more difficult to increase. So if a test concludes that 97% of chest shots with the .40 are fatal, then getting to 98% is going to be 10x more difficult for the 10mm than it was to get from 96% to 97%. Someone correct me if I am wrong here. Couple that with the difficulty of achieving reliable (falsifiable, testable) street data, and you can see why I am pessemestic about what so-and-so says about the 10mm Auto, esp when everything I see that can be tested suggests otherwise.
Another important point to consider with the 10mm is that when you move into the full-power range, you pay a penalty in terms of controllability. When you argued for the 10mm as a hunting round, you cited concerns with the platform (bottom feeder versus revolver). When it comes to defence, platform (size, weight, ergonomics) argues against the 10mm--especially the G20 which you use in your argument. Couple that with a dearth of suitable projectiles designed for the 10mm (at least at the upper-end) and the sacrifice on controllability with upper-end loads, and it is plain to see there are better choices for defence.
Something you fail to consider is that the .40 attempts to put bigger bullets out at the same velocity as the 9mm in a 9mm sized gun with the affect of increasing the recoil. Recoil is snappier and harder to control. Then you put the 10mm Auto in a full-sized handgun designed from the ground up to handle the capabilities of the cartridge and I don't really see how you can complain about the recoil of the Glock 20. Between the recoil characteristics of the frame material, the beefy slide, recoil spring, low bore axis of the Glock, and the way the wider grip of the Glock 20 distributes recoil in a larger portion of the hand, and the Glock is very comfortable to shoot. Personally I find my Glock to be more comfortable and easy to control than my brother's Springfield Mil-Spec even though the Mil-Spec is heavier and gets 200 fpe less at the muzzle. I've seen a 17-year old girl do very well with the Glock 20 loaded with Double Taps so I refuse to believe all but the most anemic couldn't become profiecent with the pistol with practice. And while I acknowledge I am far from where I want to be in my pistol craft, I've never been as comfortable or confident in my abilities and my equipment as I am with the Glock. I shoot it better than any other pistol I have ever fired, including a fullsize Beretta 9mm.
Tuner has it right. The 10mm would make a dandy sub or magazine fed carbine.
Finally something we agree on. Where is this long rumored Glock carbine? If they introduced a carbine with the basic feeling and ergonomics of their pistols, to compete with the Beretta Storm, it would be awesome. Esp if they made mags interchangeable with their pistols then introduced a 10mm version and a 29 round magazine for it so we didn't have to rely on aftermarket magazines of questionable quality and durability. I am seeing Picatanny rails, a red dot scope, a 9 or 10 inch barrel or so...o boy...it might actually be a pistol caliber carbine I would consider.
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=31441&d=1132361046
Not expertly done I admit but practicing is the fun part. The chest is two 15 round mags and a mag loaded with 12 rounds cause 3 slipped between the truck seats or otherwise went MIA, all drew from hip and shot till slide lock at about 25 feet in about 10 seconds or so. The head shots was 10 rounds fired slow fire from 30 feet or so. All rounds were 180 gr Double Tap FMJs.
This is personal preference, entirely. First off, the Glock 20 is only .04" taller, .27" longer, .09" wider, and about 4.8 oz heavier than the Glock 22. It is smaller than my USP Tactical and dimensionally, it is shorter in both length and heigth than my brother's Springfield Mil-Spec and while it is a fullsize pistol, I have carried it concealed inside my waste band in its Uncle Mikes with a spare mag. So it is not entirely unfeasible. The main additions over the Glock 22 and other pistol models is in girth and grip circumference. It is a fullsize frame. More on that in a second. The good news is that it fits me very well. I have big hands with long fingers that fit very well in the Gen III finger grooves and it points more instinctively for me than the 1911. The controls are easy for me to reach, even as a lefty, and the pistol's operation couldn't be more simple. So from my perspective, it suffers nothing in terms of ergonomics or pointability.
While the 10mm may appear to offer better paper ballistics than the .40 S&W, it has not shown any advantage in actual defence use. We also need to remember that, with the exception of the 175-grain Silvertip, there are absolutely NO current generation (modern technology) bullets designed for the 10mm. The only "full-power" defence/LE ammo available for 10mm besides the 175-grain Silvertips relies on bullets designed for the .40 S&W pushed the the far upper end (or beyond) the optimum performance window for those bullets (and they are all totally unproven in actual defence/LE use).
I was just waiting for someone to blurt this off. Cause I have heard it too many times and am sick of it so I have armed myself with the knowledge to counter it. I recently brought these concerns to Speer in the form of an email and recieved the following reply:
"Robert: our 180 gr. GDHP load data for the 10mm has a max velocity of
1295 fps. I don't see why the bullet would cause a problem in that
velocity spectrum.
Shoot Straight!
Coy Getman
CCI/Speer Technical Service Coordinator
(800) 627-3640 # 5351 (pound key must be used)
Fax: (208) 799-3589"
So when Mike McNett pushes the 180 gr Gold Dot to 1300 fps, it's not being unrealistic. Mike sounds like a smart enough guy to have thought of that beforehand. And indeed his published geletin tests seem to support this. Using 10% ballistic geletin calibrated to FBI specs the .40 Smith and Wesson load using a 180 gr Gold Dot HP @ 1100 fps expands to .68" and penetrates to a depth of 14.75". Not bad. But add 200 fps and push the same bullet out of the 4.6 inch barrel of the Glock 20 and you get an expansion of .96" and a penetration of 15.25". So you can say you are pushing bullets beyond their velocity threshold and you can blather on about how the 10mm's energy doesn't accomplish much, but from my end it is looking pretty good.
Now the Speer Gold Dot has established a pretty good reputation in a variety of calibers and most consider it among the best designs currently available. And the reasons most street statistics don't show the 10mm Auto being much more effective than the .40 I suspect is because a) there haven't been nearly as many shootings with the 10mm Auto so the sample size is lacking and b) if I can recall correctly from statistics, when operating on a standard bell curve, it is exponentially more difficult to increase. So if a test concludes that 97% of chest shots with the .40 are fatal, then getting to 98% is going to be 10x more difficult for the 10mm than it was to get from 96% to 97%. Someone correct me if I am wrong here. Couple that with the difficulty of achieving reliable (falsifiable, testable) street data, and you can see why I am pessemestic about what so-and-so says about the 10mm Auto, esp when everything I see that can be tested suggests otherwise.
Another important point to consider with the 10mm is that when you move into the full-power range, you pay a penalty in terms of controllability. When you argued for the 10mm as a hunting round, you cited concerns with the platform (bottom feeder versus revolver). When it comes to defence, platform (size, weight, ergonomics) argues against the 10mm--especially the G20 which you use in your argument. Couple that with a dearth of suitable projectiles designed for the 10mm (at least at the upper-end) and the sacrifice on controllability with upper-end loads, and it is plain to see there are better choices for defence.
Something you fail to consider is that the .40 attempts to put bigger bullets out at the same velocity as the 9mm in a 9mm sized gun with the affect of increasing the recoil. Recoil is snappier and harder to control. Then you put the 10mm Auto in a full-sized handgun designed from the ground up to handle the capabilities of the cartridge and I don't really see how you can complain about the recoil of the Glock 20. Between the recoil characteristics of the frame material, the beefy slide, recoil spring, low bore axis of the Glock, and the way the wider grip of the Glock 20 distributes recoil in a larger portion of the hand, and the Glock is very comfortable to shoot. Personally I find my Glock to be more comfortable and easy to control than my brother's Springfield Mil-Spec even though the Mil-Spec is heavier and gets 200 fpe less at the muzzle. I've seen a 17-year old girl do very well with the Glock 20 loaded with Double Taps so I refuse to believe all but the most anemic couldn't become profiecent with the pistol with practice. And while I acknowledge I am far from where I want to be in my pistol craft, I've never been as comfortable or confident in my abilities and my equipment as I am with the Glock. I shoot it better than any other pistol I have ever fired, including a fullsize Beretta 9mm.
Tuner has it right. The 10mm would make a dandy sub or magazine fed carbine.
Finally something we agree on. Where is this long rumored Glock carbine? If they introduced a carbine with the basic feeling and ergonomics of their pistols, to compete with the Beretta Storm, it would be awesome. Esp if they made mags interchangeable with their pistols then introduced a 10mm version and a 29 round magazine for it so we didn't have to rely on aftermarket magazines of questionable quality and durability. I am seeing Picatanny rails, a red dot scope, a 9 or 10 inch barrel or so...o boy...it might actually be a pistol caliber carbine I would consider.
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=31441&d=1132361046
Not expertly done I admit but practicing is the fun part. The chest is two 15 round mags and a mag loaded with 12 rounds cause 3 slipped between the truck seats or otherwise went MIA, all drew from hip and shot till slide lock at about 25 feet in about 10 seconds or so. The head shots was 10 rounds fired slow fire from 30 feet or so. All rounds were 180 gr Double Tap FMJs.
Bob R
December 5, 2005, 02:06 AM
http://www.hkpro.com/image/mp5-10.jpg
8.85" barrel
30 rounds of 10mm
HK also makes a MP5/40 to go with the MP5/10
http://www.hkpro.com/MP5-10.htm
Every one should have a 10mm.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0603/Bob8251/frontsmall.jpg
bob
8.85" barrel
30 rounds of 10mm
HK also makes a MP5/40 to go with the MP5/10
http://www.hkpro.com/MP5-10.htm
Every one should have a 10mm.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0603/Bob8251/frontsmall.jpg
bob
Gordy Wesen
December 5, 2005, 02:29 AM
If you live where you'll encounter Cougers, black bear and people in several layers of winter clothing the 10mm is an unbelieveably nice niche gun, especially in the Glock 29. It's compact and easy to carry. If you hunt outside your backyard, pick another caliber. If you live in the city, go get a .45 or whatever suits your particular need. Guns are tools. The people who continually bash the 10 think the world filled with nails and carry only a hammer.
Michael Courtney
December 5, 2005, 08:45 AM
We also need to remember that, with the exception of the 175-grain Silvertip, there are absolutely NO current generation (modern technology) bullets designed for the 10mm.
This is simply wrong. Double tap offers a wide variety of loads including several weights using the Gold Dot, the XTP in 180 and 200 grains, and the Golden Saber in 165 grains, as well as the 135 grain Nosler. The whole range of penetration possibilities is covered with full power loads. Corbon also offers their Pow'R Ball loading in 135 grains, and Glaser offers a 115 grain load.
Michael Courtney
This is simply wrong. Double tap offers a wide variety of loads including several weights using the Gold Dot, the XTP in 180 and 200 grains, and the Golden Saber in 165 grains, as well as the 135 grain Nosler. The whole range of penetration possibilities is covered with full power loads. Corbon also offers their Pow'R Ball loading in 135 grains, and Glaser offers a 115 grain load.
Michael Courtney
MCgunner
December 5, 2005, 09:05 AM
This is simply wrong. Double tap offers a wide variety of loads including several weights using the Gold Dot, the XTP in 180 and 200 grains, and the Golden Saber in 165 grains, as well as the 135 grain Nosler. The whole range of penetration possibilities is covered with full power loads. Corbon also offers their Pow'R Ball loading in 135 grains, and Glaser offers a 115 grain load.
Michael Courtney
Well, if I had a 10, I'd handload for it, but one thing I like about common calibers is you can walk into any walmart in America where every you may be and pick up a box. 10s are getting obscure. I don't care much for .44 special for the same reason, yet there's more .44 special loads out there I'm sure than there are 10s.
I'd still like one of those S&W 610s. Now, this friggin' thread has me wanting anothe expensive gun again. :banghead: There was a gun show near me this weekend. Thankfully I missed it. :rolleyes:
Michael Courtney
Well, if I had a 10, I'd handload for it, but one thing I like about common calibers is you can walk into any walmart in America where every you may be and pick up a box. 10s are getting obscure. I don't care much for .44 special for the same reason, yet there's more .44 special loads out there I'm sure than there are 10s.
I'd still like one of those S&W 610s. Now, this friggin' thread has me wanting anothe expensive gun again. :banghead: There was a gun show near me this weekend. Thankfully I missed it. :rolleyes:
dairycreek
December 5, 2005, 03:40 PM
I believe the 10mm was designed by S&W at the request of the FBI after the infamous Miami shootout in the 1980's.
Right on! Ater the abysmal performance of the 9mm round in that shootout which resulted in the loss of life for undergunned FBI agents, there was a hue and cry among law enforcement for a stronger handgun round to be developed. Hence the 10mm. But, the political "heads" of that time got all PC and opined that the round was just too strong and that they would be publicly criticized. So, they opted for someting less strong and "vicious" than the infamous 10mm and that ended up being the .40 S&W.
I sat in a courtroom and listened to a female judge absolutely ream a federal marshal for carrying a 10mm which he had sucessfuly used in a gunfight against drug dealers. Go figure:cuss:
Right on! Ater the abysmal performance of the 9mm round in that shootout which resulted in the loss of life for undergunned FBI agents, there was a hue and cry among law enforcement for a stronger handgun round to be developed. Hence the 10mm. But, the political "heads" of that time got all PC and opined that the round was just too strong and that they would be publicly criticized. So, they opted for someting less strong and "vicious" than the infamous 10mm and that ended up being the .40 S&W.
I sat in a courtroom and listened to a female judge absolutely ream a federal marshal for carrying a 10mm which he had sucessfuly used in a gunfight against drug dealers. Go figure:cuss:
1911Tuner
December 5, 2005, 04:32 PM
Bob R...Neat! I'd heard that H&K was workin' on one, but stopped keepin' up with the story. Just shows where I've had MY head buried for awhile.:rolleyes:
10mm Thompson Sub clone w/drum magazine anyone?:evil:
10mm Thompson Sub clone w/drum magazine anyone?:evil:
Guns_and_Labs
December 5, 2005, 04:57 PM
If you live where you'll encounter Cougers, black bear and people in several layers of winter clothing the 10mm is an unbelieveably nice niche gun, especially in the Glock 29. It's compact and easy to carry. If you hunt outside your backyard, pick another caliber. If you live in the city, go get a .45 or whatever suits your particular need.
+1
I also find the 10mm has a definite edge (over the .45 acp or .40 S&W) on penetration through light cover, knock down of opponents with body armor, and longer range shots (e.g. over 50 yards).
It should be said that the .308 does an even better job, but it's tougher to carry concealed.
+1
I also find the 10mm has a definite edge (over the .45 acp or .40 S&W) on penetration through light cover, knock down of opponents with body armor, and longer range shots (e.g. over 50 yards).
It should be said that the .308 does an even better job, but it's tougher to carry concealed.
jc2
December 5, 2005, 06:39 PM
This is simply wrong. Double tap offers a wide variety of loads including several weights using the Gold Dot, the XTP in 180 and 200 grains, and the Golden Saber in 165 grains, as well as the 135 grain Nosler. The whole range of penetration possibilities is covered with full power loads. Corbon also offers their Pow'R Ball loading in 135 grains, and Glaser offers a 115 grain load.
Michael Courtney
Nope, Mikey, you are dead wrong. The Gold Dot, Golden Sabre and Nosler bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) Double Tap uses are designed for the .40 S&W (and .40 S&W velocities/energy levels)--not for the 10mm. Mike McNett doesn't design or manufacture bullets (and he doesn't know how to conduct accurate ballistic gelatin testing either).
None of the major manufacturers have spent a dime on defence/LE bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) for the 10mm in many, many years (if ever). The 10mm was long dead as a LE/defence round long before the development of current generation, modern technology bullets.
Michael Courtney
Nope, Mikey, you are dead wrong. The Gold Dot, Golden Sabre and Nosler bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) Double Tap uses are designed for the .40 S&W (and .40 S&W velocities/energy levels)--not for the 10mm. Mike McNett doesn't design or manufacture bullets (and he doesn't know how to conduct accurate ballistic gelatin testing either).
None of the major manufacturers have spent a dime on defence/LE bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) for the 10mm in many, many years (if ever). The 10mm was long dead as a LE/defence round long before the development of current generation, modern technology bullets.
redneck2
December 5, 2005, 07:03 PM
let me preface this by saying, I handload for my G20 and Delta Elite, so
Let's see. I want to get this straight.....
I've got 15 rounds of a rifle weight bullet (180 grain Gold Dots), at nearly rifle velocities (1,320 fps)...
and you're asking "why??"
guess my question is "why not ??". If there were ever a perfect SD round it seems to be the 10.
Now, I'm really not a Glock fan. They're blocky, ugly, and there's just nothing to like about them, other than the fact they they need virtually no maintenance, are simple to use, always go "bang", and really reduce the felt recoil to a manageable level.
My house gun is the G20 with a M6. Got a safe full of guns including the Delta, a M29, a couple of 1911's, a Ruger .45LC. Which one is going to be better???
If I just want something to go out and shoot, the Glock is probably the last on the list. It's just not "fun". But for something at 2:30 am, it's the weapon of choice. YMMV.
Let's see. I want to get this straight.....
I've got 15 rounds of a rifle weight bullet (180 grain Gold Dots), at nearly rifle velocities (1,320 fps)...
and you're asking "why??"
guess my question is "why not ??". If there were ever a perfect SD round it seems to be the 10.
Now, I'm really not a Glock fan. They're blocky, ugly, and there's just nothing to like about them, other than the fact they they need virtually no maintenance, are simple to use, always go "bang", and really reduce the felt recoil to a manageable level.
My house gun is the G20 with a M6. Got a safe full of guns including the Delta, a M29, a couple of 1911's, a Ruger .45LC. Which one is going to be better???
If I just want something to go out and shoot, the Glock is probably the last on the list. It's just not "fun". But for something at 2:30 am, it's the weapon of choice. YMMV.
NordicG3K
December 5, 2005, 09:19 PM
Nope, Mikey, you are dead wrong. The Gold Dot, Golden Sabre and Nosler bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) Double Tap uses are designed for the .40 S&W (and .40 S&W velocities/energy levels)--not for the 10mm. Mike McNett doesn't design or manufacture bullets (and he doesn't know how to conduct accurate ballistic gelatin testing either).
None of the major manufacturers have spent a dime on defence/LE bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) for the 10mm in many, many years (if ever). The 10mm was long dead as a LE/defence round long before the development of current generation, modern technology bullets.
I don't feel this is a completely fair assessment. The Hornady XTPs and the Winchester 175gn Silvertip were indeed designed for the 10mm, but all bullets have a "performance window" they are designed for. While ammo manufacturers try to establish a specified muzzle velocity (for a given barrel length), they have absolutely no control over impact velocities as this is largely determined by the distance between the shooter and target. Because of this manufacturers try to ensure that their bullets will perform adequately over as wide a range of velocities as possible. Most of this effort is on the downward end of the spectrum (positive expansion at slower than normal velocities), but there is also a "cushion" at the high end as well. It must also be remembered that part of the reason for the 10mm is to extend the range of the handgun. In other words, you have the ability to hit your target with the same (or greater) energy as a .40 S&W or .45 ACP, but further away. I have not as of yet seen any tests showing any .40 S&W bullet coming apart inside the target when fired at 10mm velocities. Overpenetration is more likely, but personally I don't think this is as big of an issue as it's portrayed. If you consider other possibilities such as the use of FMJ ammunition, hits in relatively shallow target areas such as arms or legs, or just plain misses for that matter, then you're going to also have bullets continuing on beyond the intended target.
None of the major manufacturers have spent a dime on defence/LE bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) for the 10mm in many, many years (if ever). The 10mm was long dead as a LE/defence round long before the development of current generation, modern technology bullets.
I don't feel this is a completely fair assessment. The Hornady XTPs and the Winchester 175gn Silvertip were indeed designed for the 10mm, but all bullets have a "performance window" they are designed for. While ammo manufacturers try to establish a specified muzzle velocity (for a given barrel length), they have absolutely no control over impact velocities as this is largely determined by the distance between the shooter and target. Because of this manufacturers try to ensure that their bullets will perform adequately over as wide a range of velocities as possible. Most of this effort is on the downward end of the spectrum (positive expansion at slower than normal velocities), but there is also a "cushion" at the high end as well. It must also be remembered that part of the reason for the 10mm is to extend the range of the handgun. In other words, you have the ability to hit your target with the same (or greater) energy as a .40 S&W or .45 ACP, but further away. I have not as of yet seen any tests showing any .40 S&W bullet coming apart inside the target when fired at 10mm velocities. Overpenetration is more likely, but personally I don't think this is as big of an issue as it's portrayed. If you consider other possibilities such as the use of FMJ ammunition, hits in relatively shallow target areas such as arms or legs, or just plain misses for that matter, then you're going to also have bullets continuing on beyond the intended target.
JohnKSa
December 5, 2005, 09:29 PM
I don't feel this is a completely fair assessment.Clearly you haven't seen many discussions on this forum about 10mm if you were expecting fair assessments. :D These discussions are often more about what people feel they can say without being challenged than they are about fair assessments.
I too, would be interested to hear of bullet failures resulting from driving ".40 S&W bullets" at 10mm velocities. Like you, I have seen/heard no evidence of this being a problem.
I too, would be interested to hear of bullet failures resulting from driving ".40 S&W bullets" at 10mm velocities. Like you, I have seen/heard no evidence of this being a problem.
Lone_Gunman
December 5, 2005, 09:34 PM
This thread is the ballistic equivalent of masturbation.
MachIVshooter
December 5, 2005, 10:10 PM
Well, if I had a 10, I'd handload for it, but one thing I like about common calibers is you can walk into any walmart in America where every you may be and pick up a box. 10s are getting obscure. I don't care much for .44 special for the same reason, yet there's more .44 special loads out there I'm sure than there are 10s.
Actually, the 10mm has been making a significant comeback the last 4 or 5 years. After S&W discontinued the 10xx series, Glock or a custom 1911 were about your only choices. Now, EAA has a dozen variations of the Witness in 10mm, dan wesson has 3, Kimber has 2, STI makes some, Parker arms, the S&W 610, Vector MP5/10, Oly Arms 10mm carbine, and a few others. Ammo is Remington UMC 180, CCI blazer 200, Federal American Eagle 180 and 200, Federal Hydra-shok 180, Winchester silvertip 175, Norma 170, PMC 180 and 200,and of course a variety from Buffalo Bore and Double tap. I'm sure I've missed a few, but what I am trying to say that finding either a gun or ammunition in 10mm is not difficult unless you ONLY shop at Wal-Mart. And if that is the case, you're not going to find much 44 spl. either. (and countless other cartridges).
We also need to remember that, with the exception of the 175-grain Silvertip, there are absolutely NO current generation (modern technology) bullets designed for the 10mm.
Find me a 200 grain .40 S&W load. Fact is, most 180 and all 200 grain pills were designed for the 10mm's higher velocities. The .40 S&W has fairly dismal velocity with 180's and too short a case to load 200's. Yes, some manufacturers load the .40 with 180 grain pills. And you can get .410 loaded with 00 buck:rolleyes: . Speer says their 180 gr. GD is designed to operate up to 1295 FPS. The .40 will barely hit 1100 with top loads. So why would a bullet be designed for a cartridge that can only achieve 80% of the velocity for which the bullet was designed to operate up to?
To the original post:
The 10mm does not push to slightly higher velocities than .40. In the world of autoloading handguns, 200-300 FPS is a BIG difference. You are talking a 70% energy gain in maximum loads for each cartridge. That's .30-30 vs. .30-06. Or, if you prefer cars, a Pontiac Grand Prix GTP vs. a Corvette Z06.
But the 10mm isn't for everyone. Some folks are OK with mediocrity:neener:
Actually, the 10mm has been making a significant comeback the last 4 or 5 years. After S&W discontinued the 10xx series, Glock or a custom 1911 were about your only choices. Now, EAA has a dozen variations of the Witness in 10mm, dan wesson has 3, Kimber has 2, STI makes some, Parker arms, the S&W 610, Vector MP5/10, Oly Arms 10mm carbine, and a few others. Ammo is Remington UMC 180, CCI blazer 200, Federal American Eagle 180 and 200, Federal Hydra-shok 180, Winchester silvertip 175, Norma 170, PMC 180 and 200,and of course a variety from Buffalo Bore and Double tap. I'm sure I've missed a few, but what I am trying to say that finding either a gun or ammunition in 10mm is not difficult unless you ONLY shop at Wal-Mart. And if that is the case, you're not going to find much 44 spl. either. (and countless other cartridges).
We also need to remember that, with the exception of the 175-grain Silvertip, there are absolutely NO current generation (modern technology) bullets designed for the 10mm.
Find me a 200 grain .40 S&W load. Fact is, most 180 and all 200 grain pills were designed for the 10mm's higher velocities. The .40 S&W has fairly dismal velocity with 180's and too short a case to load 200's. Yes, some manufacturers load the .40 with 180 grain pills. And you can get .410 loaded with 00 buck:rolleyes: . Speer says their 180 gr. GD is designed to operate up to 1295 FPS. The .40 will barely hit 1100 with top loads. So why would a bullet be designed for a cartridge that can only achieve 80% of the velocity for which the bullet was designed to operate up to?
To the original post:
The 10mm does not push to slightly higher velocities than .40. In the world of autoloading handguns, 200-300 FPS is a BIG difference. You are talking a 70% energy gain in maximum loads for each cartridge. That's .30-30 vs. .30-06. Or, if you prefer cars, a Pontiac Grand Prix GTP vs. a Corvette Z06.
But the 10mm isn't for everyone. Some folks are OK with mediocrity:neener:
jc2
December 5, 2005, 10:13 PM
I don't feel this is a completely fair assessment.
Actually, it is. The specific bullets cited (Gold Dots, Golden Sabres) were definitely designed for a .40 S&W application. There may be some "cushion" at the upper end, but there's no doubt the 10mm boutique loads are at the upper end or beyond their optimum performance window. Actually, it is pretty well documented that Gold Dots, in particular, performance deteriorates when pushed too fast (not fragmenting but delivering smaller temporary and permanent cavities). It is very likely that if the boutiques would knock 150-250 fps they would be more effective. BUT you are very right in one point: None of these boutique loads are test (and have absolutely NO LE/defence performance history). There are lots of proven loads available. It's rather silly to bet your life on what are essentially unproven/untested loads just because they're a little faster when there are a number tested and well-proven loads available.
Actually, it is. The specific bullets cited (Gold Dots, Golden Sabres) were definitely designed for a .40 S&W application. There may be some "cushion" at the upper end, but there's no doubt the 10mm boutique loads are at the upper end or beyond their optimum performance window. Actually, it is pretty well documented that Gold Dots, in particular, performance deteriorates when pushed too fast (not fragmenting but delivering smaller temporary and permanent cavities). It is very likely that if the boutiques would knock 150-250 fps they would be more effective. BUT you are very right in one point: None of these boutique loads are test (and have absolutely NO LE/defence performance history). There are lots of proven loads available. It's rather silly to bet your life on what are essentially unproven/untested loads just because they're a little faster when there are a number tested and well-proven loads available.
cz75bdneos22
December 5, 2005, 10:22 PM
Do you n-e-e-d it? No..Do you w-a-n-t it? Y-E-S !!!!:eek:
i settled on Glock G20...:neener: YMMV:D
i settled on Glock G20...:neener: YMMV:D
MTMilitiaman
December 5, 2005, 10:26 PM
jc2, I provided an email from Speer documenting their approval with the velocity McNett loads the 180 gr Gold Dot at. That's info straight out of the horse's mouth saying you're wrong and still you deny it. Fact is, if those bullets weren't designed to perform and perform well at those velocities, Speer wouldn't load them to that velocity and provide data for it in their own manuals.
As for McNett's testing procedures, I dare say, unless you can provide info that says specifically what he did wrong, it is best to keep such allegations to yourself. Or let me guess, you can do better? I don't see your company name on a box of ammunition widely regarded to be some of the best available anywhere.
As for McNett's testing procedures, I dare say, unless you can provide info that says specifically what he did wrong, it is best to keep such allegations to yourself. Or let me guess, you can do better? I don't see your company name on a box of ammunition widely regarded to be some of the best available anywhere.
warriorsociologist
December 5, 2005, 10:40 PM
Actually, it is. The specific bullets cited (Gold Dots, Golden Sabres) were definitely designed for a .40 S&W application. There may be some "cushion" at the upper end, but there's no doubt the 10mm boutique loads are at the upper end or beyond their optimum performance window. .
:confused:
Why are you so certain this is a fact? Where is your evidence? I can’t understand how or why you are trying to make such sweeping and blanket statements. Just because some of these these bullets were in fact designed to perform well at “.40 velocities” (e.g., well lower than can be achieved in a 10mm) in no way necessitates/requires that they will automatically perform poorly/worse/(or better for that matter) if pushed faster. Certainly there are some bullet designs that suffer from being pushed “too fast,” but JHPs like Hornady's 200 XTP bullets certainly perform better at "10mm velocities" than at ".40 velocities" and most .40 load "recipes" hardly ever contain any truly viable loads >180gr bullets. Also, for example, Beartooth's 200gr WFN hard cast (my favorite 10mm hunting round) was designed specifically for the 10mm. I generally don’t take such a confrontational stance on these ‘boards, but it does appear that you are overly sure about a few things said here that (so far) you have backed up with little (make that no?) substance. Your “faster is always bad for bullets” logic is flawed…but like many such universal claims, there is always a good number or readily available examples of such things to “prove such a case” to less-informed bystanders who don’t know/care enough to dig deep enough to find the “real” truth/trend/facts. I know this sounds harsh, but if you do have anything that does contribute in the way of actual data or substantiated facts, please share them with us. If not, please remember that your opinion is just that – an opinion – and shouldn’t be trumped up to appear as anything more than precisely that.
:confused:
Why are you so certain this is a fact? Where is your evidence? I can’t understand how or why you are trying to make such sweeping and blanket statements. Just because some of these these bullets were in fact designed to perform well at “.40 velocities” (e.g., well lower than can be achieved in a 10mm) in no way necessitates/requires that they will automatically perform poorly/worse/(or better for that matter) if pushed faster. Certainly there are some bullet designs that suffer from being pushed “too fast,” but JHPs like Hornady's 200 XTP bullets certainly perform better at "10mm velocities" than at ".40 velocities" and most .40 load "recipes" hardly ever contain any truly viable loads >180gr bullets. Also, for example, Beartooth's 200gr WFN hard cast (my favorite 10mm hunting round) was designed specifically for the 10mm. I generally don’t take such a confrontational stance on these ‘boards, but it does appear that you are overly sure about a few things said here that (so far) you have backed up with little (make that no?) substance. Your “faster is always bad for bullets” logic is flawed…but like many such universal claims, there is always a good number or readily available examples of such things to “prove such a case” to less-informed bystanders who don’t know/care enough to dig deep enough to find the “real” truth/trend/facts. I know this sounds harsh, but if you do have anything that does contribute in the way of actual data or substantiated facts, please share them with us. If not, please remember that your opinion is just that – an opinion – and shouldn’t be trumped up to appear as anything more than precisely that.
mr.trooper
December 5, 2005, 10:48 PM
I need a 10mm Glock 20 to go with this:
Civilian Legal MP5-10 (http://www.vectorarms.com/indexframe.html)
Civilian Legal MP5-10 (http://www.vectorarms.com/indexframe.html)
VirgilCaine
December 5, 2005, 10:52 PM
+1
I also find the 10mm has a definite edge (over the .45 acp or .40 S&W) on penetration through light cover, knock down of opponents with body armor, and longer range shots (e.g. over 50 yards).
Wow, I didn't know it was so different from the 9mm. The guys who made Deus Ex knew their stuff more than I thought. [It's a future-SF video game where you carry 10mm handgun and a .308 bullpup assault rifle, rather than the current 9mm/.223 standard--cops/military wanted more power vs. terrorists.
I also find the 10mm has a definite edge (over the .45 acp or .40 S&W) on penetration through light cover, knock down of opponents with body armor, and longer range shots (e.g. over 50 yards).
Wow, I didn't know it was so different from the 9mm. The guys who made Deus Ex knew their stuff more than I thought. [It's a future-SF video game where you carry 10mm handgun and a .308 bullpup assault rifle, rather than the current 9mm/.223 standard--cops/military wanted more power vs. terrorists.
warriorsociologist
December 5, 2005, 10:54 PM
I need a 10mm Glock 20 to go with this:
Civilian Legal MP5-10 (http://www.vectorarms.com/indexframe.html)
Before buying that Vector, check some of the 10mm forums (the 10-ring at GT for starters). Those who have picked these up have found them to be hit & miss (maybe even more "miss"). I gave up my spot on the waiting list after seeing some of these stories & talking to Vector Arms a few times (not to mention that doing so allowed me to buy 3 hanguns I would have otherwise passed up). :)
Civilian Legal MP5-10 (http://www.vectorarms.com/indexframe.html)
Before buying that Vector, check some of the 10mm forums (the 10-ring at GT for starters). Those who have picked these up have found them to be hit & miss (maybe even more "miss"). I gave up my spot on the waiting list after seeing some of these stories & talking to Vector Arms a few times (not to mention that doing so allowed me to buy 3 hanguns I would have otherwise passed up). :)
NordicG3K
December 5, 2005, 11:03 PM
Actually, it is. The specific bullets cited (Gold Dots, Golden Sabres) were definitely designed for a .40 S&W application. There may be some "cushion" at the upper end, but there's no doubt the 10mm boutique loads are at the upper end or beyond their optimum performance window. Actually, it is pretty well documented that Gold Dots, in particular, performance deteriorates when pushed too fast (not fragmenting but delivering smaller temporary and permanent cavities). It is very likely that if the boutiques would knock 150-250 fps they would be more effective. BUT you are very right in one point: None of these boutique loads are test (and have absolutely NO LE/defence performance history). There are lots of proven loads available. It's rather silly to bet your life on what are essentially unproven/untested loads just because they're a little faster when there are a number tested and well-proven loads available.
I do not disagree with your point concerning the original design requirements of the Gold Dots and Golden Sabers in .40 caliber. My point is that one of the original goals of the 10mm Auto was to extend the effective range of the handgun. So, what is the difference in terminal performance of a .40 S&W 180gn Gold Dot hitting it's target at 900fps at a distance of 25 yards and a 10mm using the identical bullet hitting it's target at 900fps at 50 to 75 yards? As far as temporary and permanent cavities, these are fine if you're attacked by a blob of jello in some dark, deserted alley, but personally I don't put a lot of weight into such "science." There are far too many variables such as clothing, bone, fat, bullet path, bullet placement, barriers, etc. that have, in my opinion, far greater impact on terminal performance. These are the reasons why I feel your statements are not a fair appraisal of the situation.
I do not disagree with your point concerning the original design requirements of the Gold Dots and Golden Sabers in .40 caliber. My point is that one of the original goals of the 10mm Auto was to extend the effective range of the handgun. So, what is the difference in terminal performance of a .40 S&W 180gn Gold Dot hitting it's target at 900fps at a distance of 25 yards and a 10mm using the identical bullet hitting it's target at 900fps at 50 to 75 yards? As far as temporary and permanent cavities, these are fine if you're attacked by a blob of jello in some dark, deserted alley, but personally I don't put a lot of weight into such "science." There are far too many variables such as clothing, bone, fat, bullet path, bullet placement, barriers, etc. that have, in my opinion, far greater impact on terminal performance. These are the reasons why I feel your statements are not a fair appraisal of the situation.
jc2
December 5, 2005, 11:19 PM
Why are you so certain this is a fact?
Speer developed the Gold Dot bullet for use in its own line of ammunition (even though they do sell components to the boutiques like DT as well individual loaders). They developed the Gold Dot bullets DT uses for their own .40 S&W ammuniton. Because they share a common diameter, the .40 S&W Gold Dots will work in a 10mm, but they were designed for the .40 S&W.
in no way necessitates/requires that they will automatically perform poorly/worse/(or better for that matter) if pushed faster.
That is part of the problem. Nobody really KNOWS how they will perform at the velocities some the boutiques push them. We do know for a fact that Gold Dot performance deteriorates (smaller temporary permanent cavities) when pushed too fast. These boutique loads have not been tested by any independent, professional labs or testers and remained TOTALLY UNPROVEN in actual LE/defence use. We know .40 S&W Gold Dot bullets perform very well at ~1000 fps based on test results from independent, professional labs and testers and actual results based on their use in LE. We have no real idea (though lots of speculation) on how they will perform at the velocities some these boutiques push them. Again, why bet your life on unknown when we know the same bullet at ~1000 fps HAS PROVEN to be very effective in LE/defence applications. Some become so enamoured of MV that they loose any modicum of common sense they might have.
Also, for example, Beartooth's 200gr WFN hard cast (my favorite 10mm hunting round) was designed specifically for the 10mm.
Actually, we have sort of ventured off track here. The discussion of the Gold Dot, Golden Sabre loads was strictly in reference to LE/defence loads/applications. We've already acknowledged that while the 10mm (like its ballistic twin the .357 Magnum) is adequate (at closer ranges with good placement) for medium game (up to whitetails anyway), there are far better calibres for hunting. This discussion has actually morphed into a discussion of the boutique loads from small shops like Double Tap based on a poster taking umbrage at my remark that there are better calibres for LE/defence (and LE has certainly "voted with its feet" when it comes to the 10mm).
BTW, had you bothered to read before you chose to take a confrontational chance, you would have seen that I never said "faster is always bad for bullets" (that's your strawman)--I have said faster is not always better which is very different.
Speer developed the Gold Dot bullet for use in its own line of ammunition (even though they do sell components to the boutiques like DT as well individual loaders). They developed the Gold Dot bullets DT uses for their own .40 S&W ammuniton. Because they share a common diameter, the .40 S&W Gold Dots will work in a 10mm, but they were designed for the .40 S&W.
in no way necessitates/requires that they will automatically perform poorly/worse/(or better for that matter) if pushed faster.
That is part of the problem. Nobody really KNOWS how they will perform at the velocities some the boutiques push them. We do know for a fact that Gold Dot performance deteriorates (smaller temporary permanent cavities) when pushed too fast. These boutique loads have not been tested by any independent, professional labs or testers and remained TOTALLY UNPROVEN in actual LE/defence use. We know .40 S&W Gold Dot bullets perform very well at ~1000 fps based on test results from independent, professional labs and testers and actual results based on their use in LE. We have no real idea (though lots of speculation) on how they will perform at the velocities some these boutiques push them. Again, why bet your life on unknown when we know the same bullet at ~1000 fps HAS PROVEN to be very effective in LE/defence applications. Some become so enamoured of MV that they loose any modicum of common sense they might have.
Also, for example, Beartooth's 200gr WFN hard cast (my favorite 10mm hunting round) was designed specifically for the 10mm.
Actually, we have sort of ventured off track here. The discussion of the Gold Dot, Golden Sabre loads was strictly in reference to LE/defence loads/applications. We've already acknowledged that while the 10mm (like its ballistic twin the .357 Magnum) is adequate (at closer ranges with good placement) for medium game (up to whitetails anyway), there are far better calibres for hunting. This discussion has actually morphed into a discussion of the boutique loads from small shops like Double Tap based on a poster taking umbrage at my remark that there are better calibres for LE/defence (and LE has certainly "voted with its feet" when it comes to the 10mm).
BTW, had you bothered to read before you chose to take a confrontational chance, you would have seen that I never said "faster is always bad for bullets" (that's your strawman)--I have said faster is not always better which is very different.
jc2
December 5, 2005, 11:29 PM
I do not disagree with your point concerning the original design requirements of the Gold Dots and Golden Sabers in .40 caliber. My point is that one of the original goals of the 10mm Auto was to extend the effective range of the handgun. So, what is the difference in terminal performance of a .40 S&W 180gn Gold Dot hitting it's target at 900fps at a distance of 25 yards and a 10mm using the identical bullet hitting it's target at 900fps at 50 to 75 yards? As far as temporary and permanent cavities, these are fine if you're attacked by a blob of jello in some dark, deserted alley, but personally I don't put a lot of weight into such "science." There are far too many variables such as clothing, bone, fat, bullet path, bullet placement, barriers, etc. that have, in my opinion, far greater impact on terminal performance. These are the reasons why I feel your statements are not a fair appraisal of the situation.
Again, we were originally talking about LE/defence which involves ranges considerably less than 25 yards in the large majority of the cases. I certainly don't want to give up effectiveness under 25 yards in LE/defence usage in order to gain effectiveness in the 50 to 75 yard range. As far ballistic testing goes, we know, whether you like it or not, that Gold Dots in particular loose effectiveness when pushed too fast. As far as "variables such as clothing, bone, fat, bullet path, bullet placement, barriers, etc.," NONE of the boutique 10mm loads have ANY LE/defence performance record against "variables such as clothing, bone, fat, bullet path, bullet placement, barriers, etc." while we KNOW these bullets have proven effective in LE/defence use at common .40 S&W velocities for which they were designed.
Frankly, I like the 10mm. I have a couple of them, and one was my regular carry piece for years. If I ever go back to a bottom feeder for regular carry, it will be again. Even now, I carry a .357 Magnum which the ballistic twin (if you will, the revolver equivalent of the 10mm). I like the calibre 10mm (and .357 Magnum), but as stated before, which started this whole mess, there are better calibres for hunting and better calibres for LE/defence (but I can't think of any better calibre for doing both adequately)--and my reservations about the various boutique shops/loads for LE/defence stand
Again, we were originally talking about LE/defence which involves ranges considerably less than 25 yards in the large majority of the cases. I certainly don't want to give up effectiveness under 25 yards in LE/defence usage in order to gain effectiveness in the 50 to 75 yard range. As far ballistic testing goes, we know, whether you like it or not, that Gold Dots in particular loose effectiveness when pushed too fast. As far as "variables such as clothing, bone, fat, bullet path, bullet placement, barriers, etc.," NONE of the boutique 10mm loads have ANY LE/defence performance record against "variables such as clothing, bone, fat, bullet path, bullet placement, barriers, etc." while we KNOW these bullets have proven effective in LE/defence use at common .40 S&W velocities for which they were designed.
Frankly, I like the 10mm. I have a couple of them, and one was my regular carry piece for years. If I ever go back to a bottom feeder for regular carry, it will be again. Even now, I carry a .357 Magnum which the ballistic twin (if you will, the revolver equivalent of the 10mm). I like the calibre 10mm (and .357 Magnum), but as stated before, which started this whole mess, there are better calibres for hunting and better calibres for LE/defence (but I can't think of any better calibre for doing both adequately)--and my reservations about the various boutique shops/loads for LE/defence stand
warriorsociologist
December 5, 2005, 11:55 PM
:rolleyes:
I guess that's one way to respond. Since when was this a GDHP/GSHP only thread? This is a 10mm thread.
10mm? What purpose and why?
Title says it all? Why do you need a 10mm? More velocity out of the barrel? Slightly higher energy? And who makes a 10mm?
Also, there are in fact plenty of folks who seem to be more "in the know" about how many of these perform than you seem to be. Most of my experience with these has been on whitetail (XTP & WFN). We are all still waiting for the reasons that you think the testing McNett has done with his loads is not adequate...or how/why experiences such as mine do not translate into support for the position that these bullets can and do perform well at these higher velocities.
So, what tests would you recommend? How might we/McNett/others satisfy your unfounded skepticism? I say "unfounded" because you haven't given us anything but conjecture.
Don't forget that many of the original .40/10mm bullets were in fact designed with the 10mm in mind. Even some of the less spectacular (in terms of design) of these such as the Fed 190gr JHP performed quite well and earned their (albeit short-lived) place in the FBI inventory. Many of these "older-tech" bullets performed quite well at the "warm" velocities of these Fed loads, the early Norms loads, the subsequent (rather) anemic "FBI-lite" loads, and later the .40S&W. Many of today's newer bullets represent a variety of improved designs with respect to maintaining their integrity upon impact and such. If anything, it would seem that until proven otherwise, we should expect better performance out of these more recent bullets. Most of the tests I have seen (by McNett and others) have been compelling to me and many others...and my experience with XTPs and WFN have been very impressive on deer. I also have a friend in MN who used a 180gr GSHP (S&W 610) to take a nice 8-pointer last year with a through-and-through ribs/shoulder wound about 2 years ago. As I said before, if you have anything more than your hunches to go on with respect to your assessment that these rounds shouldn't be expected to perform up to snuff at "10mm velocities"...by all means, let's have it.
Also, the .357 mag is not the balistic twin of the 10mm. A more adequate comparison would be a "warm"/moderate (not max) .41 mag. I also am a .357 mag fan. As 'proof,' .38+p/.357 loads are in fact a much better represented caliber in my CCW guns (3) vs. my 10mm CCW pieces (1).
...my reservations about the various boutique shops/loads for LE/defence stand
fair enough....but all I/we want to know is on what do they stand??? So far, it seem to only be on your gut feeling.
I guess that's one way to respond. Since when was this a GDHP/GSHP only thread? This is a 10mm thread.
10mm? What purpose and why?
Title says it all? Why do you need a 10mm? More velocity out of the barrel? Slightly higher energy? And who makes a 10mm?
Also, there are in fact plenty of folks who seem to be more "in the know" about how many of these perform than you seem to be. Most of my experience with these has been on whitetail (XTP & WFN). We are all still waiting for the reasons that you think the testing McNett has done with his loads is not adequate...or how/why experiences such as mine do not translate into support for the position that these bullets can and do perform well at these higher velocities.
So, what tests would you recommend? How might we/McNett/others satisfy your unfounded skepticism? I say "unfounded" because you haven't given us anything but conjecture.
Don't forget that many of the original .40/10mm bullets were in fact designed with the 10mm in mind. Even some of the less spectacular (in terms of design) of these such as the Fed 190gr JHP performed quite well and earned their (albeit short-lived) place in the FBI inventory. Many of these "older-tech" bullets performed quite well at the "warm" velocities of these Fed loads, the early Norms loads, the subsequent (rather) anemic "FBI-lite" loads, and later the .40S&W. Many of today's newer bullets represent a variety of improved designs with respect to maintaining their integrity upon impact and such. If anything, it would seem that until proven otherwise, we should expect better performance out of these more recent bullets. Most of the tests I have seen (by McNett and others) have been compelling to me and many others...and my experience with XTPs and WFN have been very impressive on deer. I also have a friend in MN who used a 180gr GSHP (S&W 610) to take a nice 8-pointer last year with a through-and-through ribs/shoulder wound about 2 years ago. As I said before, if you have anything more than your hunches to go on with respect to your assessment that these rounds shouldn't be expected to perform up to snuff at "10mm velocities"...by all means, let's have it.
Also, the .357 mag is not the balistic twin of the 10mm. A more adequate comparison would be a "warm"/moderate (not max) .41 mag. I also am a .357 mag fan. As 'proof,' .38+p/.357 loads are in fact a much better represented caliber in my CCW guns (3) vs. my 10mm CCW pieces (1).
...my reservations about the various boutique shops/loads for LE/defence stand
fair enough....but all I/we want to know is on what do they stand??? So far, it seem to only be on your gut feeling.
MTMilitiaman
December 5, 2005, 11:56 PM
...based on a poster taking umbrage at my remark that there are better calibres...
And yet you have chosen to completely sideskirt my remarks and basically the whole issue.
As far ballistic testing goes, we know, whether you like it or not, that Gold Dots in particular loose effectiveness when pushed too fast.
And yet again, you have yet to provide any evidence that states the 10mm pushes these bullets "too fast" to counter that by the Speer representative, who says they're not. So while you seem to be able to state the same thing over and over again, it is as of now unsupported and completely unfounded...no matter how many times you say it.
And yet you have chosen to completely sideskirt my remarks and basically the whole issue.
As far ballistic testing goes, we know, whether you like it or not, that Gold Dots in particular loose effectiveness when pushed too fast.
And yet again, you have yet to provide any evidence that states the 10mm pushes these bullets "too fast" to counter that by the Speer representative, who says they're not. So while you seem to be able to state the same thing over and over again, it is as of now unsupported and completely unfounded...no matter how many times you say it.
NordicG3K
December 6, 2005, 01:07 AM
Again, we were originally talking about LE/defence which involves ranges considerably less than 25 yards in the large majority of the cases. I certainly don't want to give up effectiveness under 25 yards in LE/defence usage in order to gain effectiveness in the 50 to 75 yard range. As far ballistic testing goes, we know, whether you like it or not, that Gold Dots in particular loose effectiveness when pushed too fast. As far as "variables such as clothing, bone, fat, bullet path, bullet placement, barriers, etc.," NONE of the boutique 10mm loads have ANY LE/defence performance record against "variables such as clothing, bone, fat, bullet path, bullet placement, barriers, etc." while we KNOW these bullets have proven effective in LE/defence use at common .40 S&W velocities for which they were designed.
Frankly, I like the 10mm. I have a couple of them, and one was my regular carry piece for years. If I ever go back to a bottom feeder for regular carry, it will be again. Even now, I carry a .357 Magnum which the ballistic twin (if you will, the revolver equivalent of the 10mm). I like the calibre 10mm (and .357 Magnum), but as stated before, which started this whole mess, there are better calibres for hunting and better calibres for LE/defence (but I can't think of any better calibre for doing both adequately)--and my reservations about the various boutique shops/loads for LE/defence stand
This topic has wandered a bit, so you'll have to forgive me if I focused on issues beyond LE/defence issues. I certainly agree with you on two points however. First off, there are not enough bullets designed specifically for full-power 10mm loads. Secondly, there is simply not enough data (if any) to establish the 10mm's performance using ammunition from such makers as Double Tap, TAC, Cor-Bon, Pro-Load, etc.
Personally I find the real-world value of ballistic gelatin testing rather suspect due to the issues I already discussed. Objective, scientific data requires consistent and repeatable testing though and it is impossible to do this using actual "real-world" shootings.
Frankly, I like the 10mm. I have a couple of them, and one was my regular carry piece for years. If I ever go back to a bottom feeder for regular carry, it will be again. Even now, I carry a .357 Magnum which the ballistic twin (if you will, the revolver equivalent of the 10mm). I like the calibre 10mm (and .357 Magnum), but as stated before, which started this whole mess, there are better calibres for hunting and better calibres for LE/defence (but I can't think of any better calibre for doing both adequately)--and my reservations about the various boutique shops/loads for LE/defence stand
This topic has wandered a bit, so you'll have to forgive me if I focused on issues beyond LE/defence issues. I certainly agree with you on two points however. First off, there are not enough bullets designed specifically for full-power 10mm loads. Secondly, there is simply not enough data (if any) to establish the 10mm's performance using ammunition from such makers as Double Tap, TAC, Cor-Bon, Pro-Load, etc.
Personally I find the real-world value of ballistic gelatin testing rather suspect due to the issues I already discussed. Objective, scientific data requires consistent and repeatable testing though and it is impossible to do this using actual "real-world" shootings.
Myself
December 6, 2005, 01:19 AM
Getting back on track. The 10mm gives a user a great deal of choices in power for a large number of applications. It is a single cartrige that can perform as a hunting, self-defense and critter protection round. I believe that is its greatest asset.
Platforms are currently being produced by Kimber, Witness. STI, Dan Wesson (CZ) and Vector. The various Colt & Smith offerings that have been produced in the past are fairly avialable. There have been numerous other smaller manufactures some good some not that have produced 10's.
Additional specific information is avialable at Nordic's site or at 10mmtalk.
Platforms are currently being produced by Kimber, Witness. STI, Dan Wesson (CZ) and Vector. The various Colt & Smith offerings that have been produced in the past are fairly avialable. There have been numerous other smaller manufactures some good some not that have produced 10's.
Additional specific information is avialable at Nordic's site or at 10mmtalk.
jc2
December 6, 2005, 06:56 AM
Most of my experience with these has been on whitetail (XTP & WFN). We are all still waiting for the reasons that you think the testing McNett has done with his loads is not adequate...or how/why experiences such as mine do not translate into support for the position that these bullets can and do perform well at these higher velocities.
Again (still), you are focusing on one issue--hunting--while my remarks have been directed in another direction--LE/defence. The 10mm is an adequate low-end hunting round for medium game (up to whitetail-size). It is in the same class as the .357 Magnum (actually it is the ballistic twin of the .357 Magnum--the 10mm is really the bottom feeder equivalent of the .357 Magnum).
So, what tests would you recommend? How might we/McNett/others satisfy your unfounded skepticism? I say "unfounded" because you haven't given us anything but conjecture.
Again, I would suggest you read BEFORE you post. Double Tap's Gold Dot (LE/defence loads) have NOT been test by any independent, professional labs/testers (and Mike's PR results have been openly questioned by independent labs/testers). Double Tap's Gold Dot loads are totally UNPROVEN and have NO RECORD in actual LE/defence use. That is by no means "unfounded skepticism" but merely a stating of the facts.
Don't forget that many of the original .40/10mm bullets were in fact designed with the 10mm in mind. Even some of the less spectacular (in terms of design) of these such as the Fed 190gr JHP performed quite well and earned their (albeit short-lived) place in the FBI inventory.
Again, these bullets have not been the focus of the discussion (please try reading before posting). We have been discussing the loads offered by the various boutiques. The 190-grain Federal JHP was my favourite 10mm carry load for years. Unfortunately, it is no longer manufacutured and is no longer available. (BTW, despite you correct in stating it was a "warm" load. It's velocity fell considerably short of that of most of the boutique loads we've been discussing.) You might also note that I acknowledged the 175-grain Silvertip as good current production LE/defence load (and is what I carry when I carry a 10mm nowadays).
Also, the .357 mag is not the balistic twin of the 10mm. A more adequate comparison would be a "warm"/moderate (not max) .41 mag.
Unfortunately, with this statement, you are revealing how little you know about the subject. When you compare the upper-end (velocity/energy wise) .357 Magnum loads from manufacturers such as Buffalo Bore with the upper-end (again, velocity/energy wise) from manufacturers such as Double Tap, you will find that they are virtually identical (with the .357 Magnum a very, very slight, insignificant advantage in velocity/energy in most cases). On the other hand, when you look at upper-end .41 Magnum loads by Buffalo Bore, you will see that the .41 Magnum exceeds the energy levels of the hottest 10mm by roughly 50%. There truly is no comparison of the .41 Magnum to the 10mm when you compare max load to max load to max load. If you would like to continue your silliness, I could compare Federal 180-grain 10mm Hydra-Shok at ~1030 fps with the Speer 180-grain .40 S&W Gold Dot at ~1025 fps and point out that the 10mm competes favourably with .40 S&W.
Again (still), you are focusing on one issue--hunting--while my remarks have been directed in another direction--LE/defence. The 10mm is an adequate low-end hunting round for medium game (up to whitetail-size). It is in the same class as the .357 Magnum (actually it is the ballistic twin of the .357 Magnum--the 10mm is really the bottom feeder equivalent of the .357 Magnum).
So, what tests would you recommend? How might we/McNett/others satisfy your unfounded skepticism? I say "unfounded" because you haven't given us anything but conjecture.
Again, I would suggest you read BEFORE you post. Double Tap's Gold Dot (LE/defence loads) have NOT been test by any independent, professional labs/testers (and Mike's PR results have been openly questioned by independent labs/testers). Double Tap's Gold Dot loads are totally UNPROVEN and have NO RECORD in actual LE/defence use. That is by no means "unfounded skepticism" but merely a stating of the facts.
Don't forget that many of the original .40/10mm bullets were in fact designed with the 10mm in mind. Even some of the less spectacular (in terms of design) of these such as the Fed 190gr JHP performed quite well and earned their (albeit short-lived) place in the FBI inventory.
Again, these bullets have not been the focus of the discussion (please try reading before posting). We have been discussing the loads offered by the various boutiques. The 190-grain Federal JHP was my favourite 10mm carry load for years. Unfortunately, it is no longer manufacutured and is no longer available. (BTW, despite you correct in stating it was a "warm" load. It's velocity fell considerably short of that of most of the boutique loads we've been discussing.) You might also note that I acknowledged the 175-grain Silvertip as good current production LE/defence load (and is what I carry when I carry a 10mm nowadays).
Also, the .357 mag is not the balistic twin of the 10mm. A more adequate comparison would be a "warm"/moderate (not max) .41 mag.
Unfortunately, with this statement, you are revealing how little you know about the subject. When you compare the upper-end (velocity/energy wise) .357 Magnum loads from manufacturers such as Buffalo Bore with the upper-end (again, velocity/energy wise) from manufacturers such as Double Tap, you will find that they are virtually identical (with the .357 Magnum a very, very slight, insignificant advantage in velocity/energy in most cases). On the other hand, when you look at upper-end .41 Magnum loads by Buffalo Bore, you will see that the .41 Magnum exceeds the energy levels of the hottest 10mm by roughly 50%. There truly is no comparison of the .41 Magnum to the 10mm when you compare max load to max load to max load. If you would like to continue your silliness, I could compare Federal 180-grain 10mm Hydra-Shok at ~1030 fps with the Speer 180-grain .40 S&W Gold Dot at ~1025 fps and point out that the 10mm competes favourably with .40 S&W.
jc2
December 6, 2005, 07:19 AM
This topic has wandered a bit, so you'll have to forgive me if I focused on issues beyond LE/defence issues. I certainly agree with you on two points however. First off, there are not enough bullets designed specifically for full-power 10mm loads. Secondly, there is simply not enough data (if any) to establish the 10mm's performance using ammunition from such makers as Double Tap, TAC, Cor-Bon, Pro-Load, etc.
That's really all I have been trying to say all along (except I have added that it seems kind of silly to depend on what is unessentially totally unproven loads for defence of life and limb when there are any number of loads that have been very well tested and have proven themselves themselves effective repeatedly in actual use).
That's really all I have been trying to say all along (except I have added that it seems kind of silly to depend on what is unessentially totally unproven loads for defence of life and limb when there are any number of loads that have been very well tested and have proven themselves themselves effective repeatedly in actual use).
jc2
December 6, 2005, 07:57 AM
And yet again, you have yet to provide any evidence that states the 10mm pushes these bullets "too fast" to counter that by the Speer representative, who says they're not. So while you seem to be able to state the same thing over and over again, it is as of now unsupported and completely unfounded...no matter how many times you say it.
Actually, you are mixing three separate points.
The first point was that Double Tap is pushing their Gold Dot loads to or beyond the the upper-end of their optimum performance window. DT loads their 180-grain GD to 1300 fps, and you cite a max velocity 1295 for the 180-grain GD. You are supporting exactly what I said.
The second point is that Gold Dots loose efficiency (i.e., yield smaller temporary and permanent cavities) when pushed at or beyond their optimum performance window. That is well-known characteristic of Gold Dots and can be verified David DiFabio, Gary Roberts and others.
The third point is simply stating the fact that the load simply has NOT been test by a professional, independent lab, and it has NO performance history ("street record").
As for DT's test results (which, BTW, are published to sell his product), they have been openly questioned by professional testers with a whole lot more experience with ballistic gelatin testing and Gold Dot bullets than DT. Serious ballistic testing is not a job for amateurs, and DT is a rank amateur when it comes to ballistic testing. So, yes, Double Tap's results are open to question for a couple of very good reasons.
Actually, you are mixing three separate points.
The first point was that Double Tap is pushing their Gold Dot loads to or beyond the the upper-end of their optimum performance window. DT loads their 180-grain GD to 1300 fps, and you cite a max velocity 1295 for the 180-grain GD. You are supporting exactly what I said.
The second point is that Gold Dots loose efficiency (i.e., yield smaller temporary and permanent cavities) when pushed at or beyond their optimum performance window. That is well-known characteristic of Gold Dots and can be verified David DiFabio, Gary Roberts and others.
The third point is simply stating the fact that the load simply has NOT been test by a professional, independent lab, and it has NO performance history ("street record").
As for DT's test results (which, BTW, are published to sell his product), they have been openly questioned by professional testers with a whole lot more experience with ballistic gelatin testing and Gold Dot bullets than DT. Serious ballistic testing is not a job for amateurs, and DT is a rank amateur when it comes to ballistic testing. So, yes, Double Tap's results are open to question for a couple of very good reasons.
warriorsociologist
December 6, 2005, 09:01 AM
Again (still), you are focusing on one issue--hunting--while my remarks have been directed in another direction--LE/defense. The 10mm is an adequate low-end hunting round for medium game (up to whitetail-size). It is in the same class as the .357 Magnum (actually it is the ballistic twin of the .357 Magnum--the 10mm is really the bottom feeder equivalent of the .357 Magnum).
Please explain to me how this is irrelevant to other areas (like LE/defense)?
Again, I would suggest you read BEFORE you post.
Wow…you first.
Double Tap's Gold Dot (LE/defense loads) have NOT been test by any independent, professional labs/testers (and Mike's PR results have been openly questioned by independent labs/testers). Double Tap's Gold Dot loads are totally UNPROVEN and have NO RECORD in actual LE/defense use. That is by no means "unfounded skepticism" but merely a stating of the facts.
This is practically my point. Perhaps you need to re-read what has been posted as well. PLEASE TELL US WHAT TESTS should these pros/independents do that Mike hasn't done (or how he fails to comply with their standards)? How does a lack of evidence = proof of poor results? Basing you opinion if "NO RECORDS in actual LE/defense use" is in fact (virtually by definition) "unfounded skepticism.” If this is still not clear, I am afraid I’re run out of patience to try to help you understand this point.
Again, these bullets have not been the focus of the discussion (please try reading before posting). Pot calling the kettle black I see. Get over yourself and jump down from your high horse (it’s not needed to travel “the high road”). As I said, you need to read some more as well (specifically threads other than your own). The couple types of bullets you and a few others have been focusing on do not encompass the entire topic the original poster started this thread with. We have been discussing the loads offered by the various boutiques. The 190-grain Federal JHP was my favourite 10mm carry load for years. Unfortunately, it is no longer manufacutured and is no longer available. (BTW, despite you correct in stating it was a "warm" load. It's velocity fell considerably short of that of most of the boutique loads we've been discussing.) You might also note that I acknowledged the 175-grain Silvertip as good current production LE/defense load (and is what I carry when I carry a 10mm nowadays).
The 190gr Fed load (XM1003A) was available recently from ammoman. I picked up 1000rds of it a little while ago before it ran out (I don’t think he has anymore). It was/is an accurate and respectable load. Personally (like you) I also liked it better than the 175gr STHP, and I too used to use & carry both based on how easily I could get my hands on them. I think I saved a 100-150 rds of the 190gr Fed stuff, so if you are looking for some "for old times sake" or to carry again, send me an IM and we can talk about me sending you some.
Unfortunately, with this statement, you are revealing how little you know about the subject.
Wow. In what way? :banghead: This is like talking to a child (and reading one’s writing I might add). Please explain to me exactly how I am "showing how I don't know what I am talking about" since you by contrast I assume have apparently been (magically?) impressing us (somehow) with your vast knowledge. All I have been doing is asking you to show us some support for your position. I have no problem with you being skeptical, but from my perspective (and from the perspective of at least one other poster here) you have been overstating the strength of your convictions and presenting them as hard facts when you have yet to explain what basis you have for settling on them. Worse yet, you are cutting down others’ attempts to provide evidence to support their positions and then not following up with offers explaining how they might better test things in the future. This is unproductive, immature, and not fit for "The High Road."
When you compare the upper-end (velocity/energy wise) .357 Magnum loads from manufacturers such as Buffalo Bore with the upper-end (again, velocity/energy wise) from manufacturers such as Double Tap, you will find that they are virtually identical (with the .357 Magnum a very, very slight, insignificant advantage in velocity/energy in most cases). Have you done this matching up test barrel length?
On the other hand, when you look at upper-end .41 Magnum loads by Buffalo Bore, you will see that the .41 Magnum exceeds the energy levels of the hottest 10mm by roughly 50%. There truly is no comparison of the .41 Magnum to the 10mm when you compare max load to max load to max load.
No kidding. For someone who chants "Read before you post", you seemingly failed to notice that I said that 10mm was better compared to (only) warm/moderate .41 mag loads (like hunting loads commonly available by Rem for example), NOT "max loads." Wow...please take some of your own advice.
If you would like to continue your silliness, I could compare Federal 180-grain 10mm Hydra-Shok at ~1030 fps with the Speer 180-grain .40 S&W Gold Dot at ~1025 fps and point out that the 10mm competes favourably with .40 S&W.
Ok, please do. You have shown your true and transparent colors. (No you can't have my lunch money - or anyone else’s here either.) While you’re at the above, note that many currently available 10mm defense loads have been loaded to duplicate .40 loads & not loaded to their potential. :uhoh: Also, instead of lashing out at me and others, it would be nice if you actually addressed the questions that we have been asking of you (hint: you have to read the posts to find them). To save you the trouble, all I/we are asking is for you to show us (a) what’s your evidence and (b) how can we (or McNett for example) conduct better tests that might satisfy you. Continuing to holler and beat your chest just simply doesn’t enlighten anyone as to how you have come to your conclusions. Few if any of your current explanations directly answer these basic questions – they only repeat your conclusions. Again I will mention that I would also be interested in knowing exactly what tests you would like independent labs to conduct that would satisfy your skepticism. Clearly, the lack of "real world" LE/defense shootings with current 10mm offerings like DT is a real issue...but just because there is a relative lack of evidence both for AND against these rounds does not offer anything upon which to suggest that these rounds would not perform well. There is of course a healthy amount of LE/defense .40 data, and yes, most current & common 10mm defense loads have been produced to duplicate .40 ballistics. Perhaps this level of performance is "good enough" since most of the 'real world' .40 results are quite good. However, until you can show some compelling evidence to the contrary, I see no reason to not expect that when someone takes these same types/weights of bullets (or ones 20-40 grains heavier) and pushes them a little faster, that similar and/or perhaps (likely?) better results will follow. Further, while there is an overall lack of LE/defense use data for these new 10mm loads, many of them have been used successfully on game animals (150-200lb. deer and some black bear and other larger game) with very good results. From my perspective, it seems that if these bullets hold up this well on these larger and arguably tougher-skinned/boned animals (and yes, many of these animals were in fact shot with gold dots/golden sabers and the like as well...not just XTPs for example) I see this as fairly reasonable evidence in favor of the 10mm's potential on humans in lieu of having actual results on humans.
Also, I will note that I agree that some of DT’s loading are a little too “velocity driven”. Also, I am aware of Speer's performance windows with respect to the GDHPs. Perhaps this is why I favor 190-200gr rounds in the 10mm. Perhaps this also one reason we have been talking past one another. Of course, DT’s 200gr loads are not at the hyper-velocity of the lighter rounds he loads. That said, the .223 has a very good “1-shot-stop record” and it relies on velocity….so who knows how these would perform on humans. To me though, I can see the parallels between the hyper velocity 135-165gr. 10mm loads and the venerable 124gr Fed “B” .357 mag load (both rely on velocity and the fed JHP is not known for it's ability to remain intact upon impact).
Anyway, as we both now have said in one form or another, this bickering is getting us or this topic nowhere. I'll leave my posts stand as they are and let the jury of public opinion rule on what I have said and how it was delivered. I encourage you to do the same. If you want any of the 190gr ammo I mentioned and/or you want to continue this (civilly and like adults, I might add) via IM, please let me know.
Please explain to me how this is irrelevant to other areas (like LE/defense)?
Again, I would suggest you read BEFORE you post.
Wow…you first.
Double Tap's Gold Dot (LE/defense loads) have NOT been test by any independent, professional labs/testers (and Mike's PR results have been openly questioned by independent labs/testers). Double Tap's Gold Dot loads are totally UNPROVEN and have NO RECORD in actual LE/defense use. That is by no means "unfounded skepticism" but merely a stating of the facts.
This is practically my point. Perhaps you need to re-read what has been posted as well. PLEASE TELL US WHAT TESTS should these pros/independents do that Mike hasn't done (or how he fails to comply with their standards)? How does a lack of evidence = proof of poor results? Basing you opinion if "NO RECORDS in actual LE/defense use" is in fact (virtually by definition) "unfounded skepticism.” If this is still not clear, I am afraid I’re run out of patience to try to help you understand this point.
Again, these bullets have not been the focus of the discussion (please try reading before posting). Pot calling the kettle black I see. Get over yourself and jump down from your high horse (it’s not needed to travel “the high road”). As I said, you need to read some more as well (specifically threads other than your own). The couple types of bullets you and a few others have been focusing on do not encompass the entire topic the original poster started this thread with. We have been discussing the loads offered by the various boutiques. The 190-grain Federal JHP was my favourite 10mm carry load for years. Unfortunately, it is no longer manufacutured and is no longer available. (BTW, despite you correct in stating it was a "warm" load. It's velocity fell considerably short of that of most of the boutique loads we've been discussing.) You might also note that I acknowledged the 175-grain Silvertip as good current production LE/defense load (and is what I carry when I carry a 10mm nowadays).
The 190gr Fed load (XM1003A) was available recently from ammoman. I picked up 1000rds of it a little while ago before it ran out (I don’t think he has anymore). It was/is an accurate and respectable load. Personally (like you) I also liked it better than the 175gr STHP, and I too used to use & carry both based on how easily I could get my hands on them. I think I saved a 100-150 rds of the 190gr Fed stuff, so if you are looking for some "for old times sake" or to carry again, send me an IM and we can talk about me sending you some.
Unfortunately, with this statement, you are revealing how little you know about the subject.
Wow. In what way? :banghead: This is like talking to a child (and reading one’s writing I might add). Please explain to me exactly how I am "showing how I don't know what I am talking about" since you by contrast I assume have apparently been (magically?) impressing us (somehow) with your vast knowledge. All I have been doing is asking you to show us some support for your position. I have no problem with you being skeptical, but from my perspective (and from the perspective of at least one other poster here) you have been overstating the strength of your convictions and presenting them as hard facts when you have yet to explain what basis you have for settling on them. Worse yet, you are cutting down others’ attempts to provide evidence to support their positions and then not following up with offers explaining how they might better test things in the future. This is unproductive, immature, and not fit for "The High Road."
When you compare the upper-end (velocity/energy wise) .357 Magnum loads from manufacturers such as Buffalo Bore with the upper-end (again, velocity/energy wise) from manufacturers such as Double Tap, you will find that they are virtually identical (with the .357 Magnum a very, very slight, insignificant advantage in velocity/energy in most cases). Have you done this matching up test barrel length?
On the other hand, when you look at upper-end .41 Magnum loads by Buffalo Bore, you will see that the .41 Magnum exceeds the energy levels of the hottest 10mm by roughly 50%. There truly is no comparison of the .41 Magnum to the 10mm when you compare max load to max load to max load.
No kidding. For someone who chants "Read before you post", you seemingly failed to notice that I said that 10mm was better compared to (only) warm/moderate .41 mag loads (like hunting loads commonly available by Rem for example), NOT "max loads." Wow...please take some of your own advice.
If you would like to continue your silliness, I could compare Federal 180-grain 10mm Hydra-Shok at ~1030 fps with the Speer 180-grain .40 S&W Gold Dot at ~1025 fps and point out that the 10mm competes favourably with .40 S&W.
Ok, please do. You have shown your true and transparent colors. (No you can't have my lunch money - or anyone else’s here either.) While you’re at the above, note that many currently available 10mm defense loads have been loaded to duplicate .40 loads & not loaded to their potential. :uhoh: Also, instead of lashing out at me and others, it would be nice if you actually addressed the questions that we have been asking of you (hint: you have to read the posts to find them). To save you the trouble, all I/we are asking is for you to show us (a) what’s your evidence and (b) how can we (or McNett for example) conduct better tests that might satisfy you. Continuing to holler and beat your chest just simply doesn’t enlighten anyone as to how you have come to your conclusions. Few if any of your current explanations directly answer these basic questions – they only repeat your conclusions. Again I will mention that I would also be interested in knowing exactly what tests you would like independent labs to conduct that would satisfy your skepticism. Clearly, the lack of "real world" LE/defense shootings with current 10mm offerings like DT is a real issue...but just because there is a relative lack of evidence both for AND against these rounds does not offer anything upon which to suggest that these rounds would not perform well. There is of course a healthy amount of LE/defense .40 data, and yes, most current & common 10mm defense loads have been produced to duplicate .40 ballistics. Perhaps this level of performance is "good enough" since most of the 'real world' .40 results are quite good. However, until you can show some compelling evidence to the contrary, I see no reason to not expect that when someone takes these same types/weights of bullets (or ones 20-40 grains heavier) and pushes them a little faster, that similar and/or perhaps (likely?) better results will follow. Further, while there is an overall lack of LE/defense use data for these new 10mm loads, many of them have been used successfully on game animals (150-200lb. deer and some black bear and other larger game) with very good results. From my perspective, it seems that if these bullets hold up this well on these larger and arguably tougher-skinned/boned animals (and yes, many of these animals were in fact shot with gold dots/golden sabers and the like as well...not just XTPs for example) I see this as fairly reasonable evidence in favor of the 10mm's potential on humans in lieu of having actual results on humans.
Also, I will note that I agree that some of DT’s loading are a little too “velocity driven”. Also, I am aware of Speer's performance windows with respect to the GDHPs. Perhaps this is why I favor 190-200gr rounds in the 10mm. Perhaps this also one reason we have been talking past one another. Of course, DT’s 200gr loads are not at the hyper-velocity of the lighter rounds he loads. That said, the .223 has a very good “1-shot-stop record” and it relies on velocity….so who knows how these would perform on humans. To me though, I can see the parallels between the hyper velocity 135-165gr. 10mm loads and the venerable 124gr Fed “B” .357 mag load (both rely on velocity and the fed JHP is not known for it's ability to remain intact upon impact).
Anyway, as we both now have said in one form or another, this bickering is getting us or this topic nowhere. I'll leave my posts stand as they are and let the jury of public opinion rule on what I have said and how it was delivered. I encourage you to do the same. If you want any of the 190gr ammo I mentioned and/or you want to continue this (civilly and like adults, I might add) via IM, please let me know.
MCgunner
December 6, 2005, 09:41 AM
Well, I see the ten as a great all arounder like the .38/.357 revolvers. If I had a reasonably light, small revolver, even a five shooter K frame maybe, it'd be a SUPER defense round gun even with hot .40s in moon clips, great outdoor gun, easy packin', ammo even at Walmart for the .40. I could see this thing as a baby mountain gun, maybe, with a little heavier bullet than possible with the .357, but the big attraction to me is moon clips.
However, the only revolver I'm aware of that was chambered for it is the N frame Smith. Too big to be carrying IMHO for self defense IWB and heavy on the belt. I'd as soon carry a .44 mountain gun and have more power. I had a nifty little Rossi revolver once, light, a little over 30 oz unloaded. It was such a handy little thing to haul around, had a full lug under the barrel, easy to shoot, quite accurate. Shoulda kept that thing, I guess. Took a Javelina with it, once, and some camp meat rabbits using .38 loads. Used to carry that thing out in west Texas on a HUGE ranch our hunting club had leased. Never slowed me down out there walking and spotting from the ridge lines. If that gun were a five shot 10mm, it'd been an AWESOME and unique revolver. Heck, I liked it in .357! I don't even remember what I traded it on. LOL
I like revolvers that use auto calibers and moon clips. I don't see the point in some of 'em, though. This hypothetical 10 would be a really neat gun. There is the 625 in .45acp. Could see that for pins maybe, not much else. My Ruger P90 is lighter and easier to carry. There are the little 9mm J frames. They're cool, but my Kel Tec is lighter, easier to conceal, accurate, and holds 11 rounds so what's the point? The 10 in a light K frame size gun would have a purpose, be unique and versatile.
However, the only revolver I'm aware of that was chambered for it is the N frame Smith. Too big to be carrying IMHO for self defense IWB and heavy on the belt. I'd as soon carry a .44 mountain gun and have more power. I had a nifty little Rossi revolver once, light, a little over 30 oz unloaded. It was such a handy little thing to haul around, had a full lug under the barrel, easy to shoot, quite accurate. Shoulda kept that thing, I guess. Took a Javelina with it, once, and some camp meat rabbits using .38 loads. Used to carry that thing out in west Texas on a HUGE ranch our hunting club had leased. Never slowed me down out there walking and spotting from the ridge lines. If that gun were a five shot 10mm, it'd been an AWESOME and unique revolver. Heck, I liked it in .357! I don't even remember what I traded it on. LOL
I like revolvers that use auto calibers and moon clips. I don't see the point in some of 'em, though. This hypothetical 10 would be a really neat gun. There is the 625 in .45acp. Could see that for pins maybe, not much else. My Ruger P90 is lighter and easier to carry. There are the little 9mm J frames. They're cool, but my Kel Tec is lighter, easier to conceal, accurate, and holds 11 rounds so what's the point? The 10 in a light K frame size gun would have a purpose, be unique and versatile.
Greybeard
December 6, 2005, 10:04 AM
Quote: "What makes the 10mm so special is that it can do so many different jobs exceedingly well." This quote, from a couple of pages back, pretty well summed up my decision some time ago to get a Glock 29.
Also having a .40 S&W barrel and several 15-round mags, I've found the Model 29 to be a quite versatile "tool" for various purposes - whether in the woods or in the concrete jungle.
Similar comparison to me can be made with my .454 Casull - another "tool", which at one time I believed I'd never have "need" for. The SBH can be loaded with "cowboy loads" from 250 grainers at 700 fps up to 240-grain XTPs at 2,000 fps. For the 10mm Glock 29, I've got OPTIONS rangeing from 220 grainers at just under 1000 fps to 135-grainers at over 1,500.
Whether the .40 or 10mm barrel is in the gun, it's most commonly carried with 165-grain Gold Dots. And I've yet to loose a wink of sleep over which one might be going too fast or too slow if needed in the middle of the night.
Also having a .40 S&W barrel and several 15-round mags, I've found the Model 29 to be a quite versatile "tool" for various purposes - whether in the woods or in the concrete jungle.
Similar comparison to me can be made with my .454 Casull - another "tool", which at one time I believed I'd never have "need" for. The SBH can be loaded with "cowboy loads" from 250 grainers at 700 fps up to 240-grain XTPs at 2,000 fps. For the 10mm Glock 29, I've got OPTIONS rangeing from 220 grainers at just under 1000 fps to 135-grainers at over 1,500.
Whether the .40 or 10mm barrel is in the gun, it's most commonly carried with 165-grain Gold Dots. And I've yet to loose a wink of sleep over which one might be going too fast or too slow if needed in the middle of the night.
MTMilitiaman
December 6, 2005, 11:31 AM
jc2, if you expect me to believe that the Gold Dot is going to suffer a complete break down in five feet per second over its design parameters, you're really fishing. Five feet per second is probably within the standard deviation for both Mike's and Speer's load. And again, anybody can say "boo hiss" but unless you can point out exactly what Mike did wrong, your allegations aren't supported and thus, aren't important. Ballistic testing is tedious but it isn't rocket science. Provided you follow the mixing instructions for the geletin, freeze it and use it at the right temperature, and callibrate it correctly--well Mike's test shouldn't be the ballistic equivelent of programming the lander in meters.
So what we do know is that:
1. Gold Dots were designed to perform at the velocities the 10mm is capable of pushing them, or at least at the velocities some of these "boutique" manufactures load them too.
2. The Gold Dot is a well-respected premium defensive handgun bullet widely regarded for its balance of expansion and penetration.
3. Putting 1 and 2 together, I see no reason not to expect more of the same with McNett's loads.
and finally,
4. You still haven't provided any evidence to the contrary. In fact the only thing I have seen that might support your side of the story is some results from Ammolab. Then all we have is a "my jello is better than your jello" war. And me digging up a why I am skeptical of Ammolab, which I would prefer not to do.
So what we do know is that:
1. Gold Dots were designed to perform at the velocities the 10mm is capable of pushing them, or at least at the velocities some of these "boutique" manufactures load them too.
2. The Gold Dot is a well-respected premium defensive handgun bullet widely regarded for its balance of expansion and penetration.
3. Putting 1 and 2 together, I see no reason not to expect more of the same with McNett's loads.
and finally,
4. You still haven't provided any evidence to the contrary. In fact the only thing I have seen that might support your side of the story is some results from Ammolab. Then all we have is a "my jello is better than your jello" war. And me digging up a why I am skeptical of Ammolab, which I would prefer not to do.
Michael Courtney
December 6, 2005, 12:32 PM
This is simply wrong. Double tap offers a wide variety of loads including several weights using the Gold Dot, the XTP in 180 and 200 grains, and the Golden Saber in 165 grains, as well as the 135 grain Nosler. The whole range of penetration possibilities is covered with full power loads. Corbon also offers their Pow'R Ball loading in 135 grains, and Glaser offers a 115 grain load.
Nope, Mikey, you are dead wrong. The Gold Dot, Golden Sabre and Nosler bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) Double Tap uses are designed for the .40 S&W (and .40 S&W velocities/energy levels)--not for the 10mm. Mike McNett doesn't design or manufacture bullets (and he doesn't know how to conduct accurate ballistic gelatin testing either).
None of the major manufacturers have spent a dime on defence/LE bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) for the 10mm in many, many years (if ever). The 10mm was long dead as a LE/defence round long before the development of current generation, modern technology bullets.
Who cares what cartridge the bullets were designed for? Actual performance matters more than design, and gelatin results confirm my assertion that "the whole range of penetration possibilities is covered with full power loads."
Why does Speer have to design a bullet specifically for the 10mm when both in-house and independent testing shows that their .40 caliber Gold Dots penetrate very well at 10 mm velocities?
Further, I challenge your assertion that you can push a bullet to a higher velocity and have a decrease in permanent and temporary cavities if the weight retention is basically the same. Please provide references to back up your claim.
Michael Courtney
Nope, Mikey, you are dead wrong. The Gold Dot, Golden Sabre and Nosler bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) Double Tap uses are designed for the .40 S&W (and .40 S&W velocities/energy levels)--not for the 10mm. Mike McNett doesn't design or manufacture bullets (and he doesn't know how to conduct accurate ballistic gelatin testing either).
None of the major manufacturers have spent a dime on defence/LE bullets (bullets, Mikey, bullets) for the 10mm in many, many years (if ever). The 10mm was long dead as a LE/defence round long before the development of current generation, modern technology bullets.
Who cares what cartridge the bullets were designed for? Actual performance matters more than design, and gelatin results confirm my assertion that "the whole range of penetration possibilities is covered with full power loads."
Why does Speer have to design a bullet specifically for the 10mm when both in-house and independent testing shows that their .40 caliber Gold Dots penetrate very well at 10 mm velocities?
Further, I challenge your assertion that you can push a bullet to a higher velocity and have a decrease in permanent and temporary cavities if the weight retention is basically the same. Please provide references to back up your claim.
Michael Courtney
JShirley
December 6, 2005, 12:38 PM
The .357 Magnum was originally loaded much hotter than typically seen today. Compare the Buffalo Bore 180 grain from 6" barrel (1500+ fps) to original Norma ballistics: 200 grain @ 1200 fps or 165 grain @ 1360 fps from 5" barrel.
The .357 Magnum, loaded to potential, is still considerably more powerful than the 10mm.
I like the 10mm, but it is not a .357 (or even, its twin, unless you compare a weakly loaded .357 with a stoutly loaded 10mm), and it certainly does not equal the .41 Magnum in the real world.
I personally would prefer to see the 9x23mm Winchester in a carbine. Yummy! :)
John
The .357 Magnum, loaded to potential, is still considerably more powerful than the 10mm.
I like the 10mm, but it is not a .357 (or even, its twin, unless you compare a weakly loaded .357 with a stoutly loaded 10mm), and it certainly does not equal the .41 Magnum in the real world.
I personally would prefer to see the 9x23mm Winchester in a carbine. Yummy! :)
John
MCgunner
December 6, 2005, 12:44 PM
If they fed well and were accurate without leading, I'd shoot hard cast, perhaps gas checked SWCs in the ten anyway for outdoor use. If you had to shoot a bear, that'd be the bullet I'd think for penetration. It's already a .40, expansion less important in a bear. I've examined enough SWC wound channels from my .357 carbine in deer to be a believer in them for outdoor use. I see the 10 as an outdoor caliber, but if you don't mind the muzzle flip and flash, too much expansion is not a problem in human targets. I mean, how deep are the vitals on a human? You think the 10 won't reach 'em? :rolleyes:
With a matching .40 barrel, I'd likely carry the thing with .40s anyway for self defense. That sounds like a really good system. I don't want an over-penetrating bullet in a PDW. I mean, in Texas, the shooter is responsible for what that bullet does when it exits the target. If it goes through three grandmas and a baby, well, you're in some DEEP stuff! Frangibles are a good thing if you can make 'em feed and they'll shoot accurate. I don't like frangibles in autos, though, because I don't have Bill Gates' expense account and I won't shoot an auto that hasn't proven reliable for several hundred rounds.
That's another plus for the revolver in personal defense.
With a matching .40 barrel, I'd likely carry the thing with .40s anyway for self defense. That sounds like a really good system. I don't want an over-penetrating bullet in a PDW. I mean, in Texas, the shooter is responsible for what that bullet does when it exits the target. If it goes through three grandmas and a baby, well, you're in some DEEP stuff! Frangibles are a good thing if you can make 'em feed and they'll shoot accurate. I don't like frangibles in autos, though, because I don't have Bill Gates' expense account and I won't shoot an auto that hasn't proven reliable for several hundred rounds.
That's another plus for the revolver in personal defense.
MTMilitiaman
December 6, 2005, 01:27 PM
The .357 Magnum, loaded to potential, is still considerably more powerful than the 10mm.
Using what ammo?
Actually I suppose that depends on what you consider "considerably more powerful." But with similar barrel lengths and bullet weights, the 10mm Auto and the .357 Magnum produce similar velocities--enough so that any energy advantage held by the .357 could arguably be made up for with the 10mm's greater diameter.
From Buffalo Bore's website:
.357 Magnum, 5" barrel
180 gr Hardcast @ 1398 fps
158 gr Speer Unicore @ 1457 fps
125 gr Speer Unicore @ 1543 fps
10mm Auto, 5" barrel
180 gr Speer Unicore @ 1350 fps
200 gr FMJ FN @ 1200 fps
From Double Tap's website:
.357 Magnum, 4" barrel
158 gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1400 fps
125 gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1600 fps
10mm Auto, 4.6" barrel
180 gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1300 fps
165 gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1400 fps
135 gr JHP @ 1600 fps
So unless you have a source that loads the .357 Magnum much hotter or are trying to compare a carbine length rifle to an automatic handgun, then the round is comparible with the 10mm Auto. Actually, with how I understand barrel lengths are measured, the Double Tap loads are actually closer to equal barrel lengths but we'll ignore that for the purpose of this argument because hey, I am willing to let 50 fps or so go to get 2 to 3 times the magazine capacity and a little bit more diameter.
I may come across as an unrealistically zealous 10mm Auto fan. But that is only partially true. I am willing to admit that the 10mm Auto may not be perfect, at least not for everyone. I just don't want it to be short changed or presented unfairly. I feel this is how it got to where it is today--which I feel is grossly under-appreciated. That is why I am trying to make people support allegations against the 10mm. I really don't care what you people carry. I just feel like if someone is going to say something negative about my choice, it should be grounded in something solid.
Using what ammo?
Actually I suppose that depends on what you consider "considerably more powerful." But with similar barrel lengths and bullet weights, the 10mm Auto and the .357 Magnum produce similar velocities--enough so that any energy advantage held by the .357 could arguably be made up for with the 10mm's greater diameter.
From Buffalo Bore's website:
.357 Magnum, 5" barrel
180 gr Hardcast @ 1398 fps
158 gr Speer Unicore @ 1457 fps
125 gr Speer Unicore @ 1543 fps
10mm Auto, 5" barrel
180 gr Speer Unicore @ 1350 fps
200 gr FMJ FN @ 1200 fps
From Double Tap's website:
.357 Magnum, 4" barrel
158 gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1400 fps
125 gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1600 fps
10mm Auto, 4.6" barrel
180 gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1300 fps
165 gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1400 fps
135 gr JHP @ 1600 fps
So unless you have a source that loads the .357 Magnum much hotter or are trying to compare a carbine length rifle to an automatic handgun, then the round is comparible with the 10mm Auto. Actually, with how I understand barrel lengths are measured, the Double Tap loads are actually closer to equal barrel lengths but we'll ignore that for the purpose of this argument because hey, I am willing to let 50 fps or so go to get 2 to 3 times the magazine capacity and a little bit more diameter.
I may come across as an unrealistically zealous 10mm Auto fan. But that is only partially true. I am willing to admit that the 10mm Auto may not be perfect, at least not for everyone. I just don't want it to be short changed or presented unfairly. I feel this is how it got to where it is today--which I feel is grossly under-appreciated. That is why I am trying to make people support allegations against the 10mm. I really don't care what you people carry. I just feel like if someone is going to say something negative about my choice, it should be grounded in something solid.
warriorsociologist
December 6, 2005, 01:41 PM
The .357 Magnum was originally loaded much hotter than typically seen today. Compare the Buffalo Bore 180 grain from 6" barrel (1500+ fps) to original Norma ballistics: 200 grain @ 1200 fps or 165 grain @ 1360 fps from 5" barrel.
The .357 Magnum, loaded to potential, is still considerably more powerful than the 10mm.
I like the 10mm, but it is not a .357 (or even, its twin, unless you compare a weakly loaded .357 with a stoutly loaded 10mm), and it certainly does not equal the .41 Magnum in the real world.
I personally would prefer to see the 9x23mm Winchester in a carbine. Yummy! :)
John
How about a 9x25 carbine? :cool:
Also, I still think the 10mm can "hang" and then some with the .357 when you even out the barrel lengths. Here are a few of DT's loads from a 6" KKM G20 barrel:
200gr XTP - 1344fps
200gr FMJ-FP - 1369fps
200gr WFN Beartooth - 1412fps (that's 886 ft/lbs by may calculations)
*Also, the BT loads are BHN 21 (22 initial hardness, ages to BHN 21 after 18 months & stays there) so they are VERY clean/no leading.
Also, you can carry 15+1 of them vs. 6 or 7 (That said, I love wheelguun and I still carry my 6" 686-4 as a whitetail gun on occasion too (with the very 180gr BB loads you mention).
Now, I also know that most common .41 loads are way under their potential. Perhaps we could think of the 10mm as a rimless ".41 special"? Consider that a .41 magnum (with admittedly mild factory Remington 210gr. loads) generates “only” 788ft/lbs. per shot (this is from a 4" revolver I think).
The .357 Magnum, loaded to potential, is still considerably more powerful than the 10mm.
I like the 10mm, but it is not a .357 (or even, its twin, unless you compare a weakly loaded .357 with a stoutly loaded 10mm), and it certainly does not equal the .41 Magnum in the real world.
I personally would prefer to see the 9x23mm Winchester in a carbine. Yummy! :)
John
How about a 9x25 carbine? :cool:
Also, I still think the 10mm can "hang" and then some with the .357 when you even out the barrel lengths. Here are a few of DT's loads from a 6" KKM G20 barrel:
200gr XTP - 1344fps
200gr FMJ-FP - 1369fps
200gr WFN Beartooth - 1412fps (that's 886 ft/lbs by may calculations)
*Also, the BT loads are BHN 21 (22 initial hardness, ages to BHN 21 after 18 months & stays there) so they are VERY clean/no leading.
Also, you can carry 15+1 of them vs. 6 or 7 (That said, I love wheelguun and I still carry my 6" 686-4 as a whitetail gun on occasion too (with the very 180gr BB loads you mention).
Now, I also know that most common .41 loads are way under their potential. Perhaps we could think of the 10mm as a rimless ".41 special"? Consider that a .41 magnum (with admittedly mild factory Remington 210gr. loads) generates “only” 788ft/lbs. per shot (this is from a 4" revolver I think).
Nail Shooter
December 6, 2005, 08:01 PM
by warriorsociologist:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jc2
"Again (still), you are focusing on one issue--hunting--while my remarks have been directed in another direction--LE/defense. The 10mm is an adequate low-end hunting round for medium game (up to whitetail-size). It is in the same class as the .357 Magnum (actually it is the ballistic twin of the .357 Magnum--the 10mm is really the bottom feeder equivalent of the .357 Magnum)."
Please explain to me how this is irrelevant to other areas (like LE/defense)?
************************************************
Pretty good rationalization by warriorsociologist I'd say. I personally own numerous handguns in 357, 9, 10, 44, and 45. The G20, 10mm would be my "go to" gun in a bad situation--especially if I had time to pick any gun that I owned. Nothing seems to match it as a good all around performer, and it is esp advantageous in the capacity dept. There's plenty of good ammo out there, only one person in this thread seems to be obsessed about the origins of the 40 cal pills loaded by Double Tap. :rolleyes:
It's kind of like that saying "If it positively has to be destroyed in the shortest possible time, send in the Marines"--just substitute 10mm for Marines.
:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jc2
"Again (still), you are focusing on one issue--hunting--while my remarks have been directed in another direction--LE/defense. The 10mm is an adequate low-end hunting round for medium game (up to whitetail-size). It is in the same class as the .357 Magnum (actually it is the ballistic twin of the .357 Magnum--the 10mm is really the bottom feeder equivalent of the .357 Magnum)."
Please explain to me how this is irrelevant to other areas (like LE/defense)?
************************************************
Pretty good rationalization by warriorsociologist I'd say. I personally own numerous handguns in 357, 9, 10, 44, and 45. The G20, 10mm would be my "go to" gun in a bad situation--especially if I had time to pick any gun that I owned. Nothing seems to match it as a good all around performer, and it is esp advantageous in the capacity dept. There's plenty of good ammo out there, only one person in this thread seems to be obsessed about the origins of the 40 cal pills loaded by Double Tap. :rolleyes:
It's kind of like that saying "If it positively has to be destroyed in the shortest possible time, send in the Marines"--just substitute 10mm for Marines.
:)
warriorsociologist
December 6, 2005, 09:09 PM
:
Quote:
It's kind of like that saying "If it positively has to be destroyed in the shortest possible time, send in the Marines"--just substitute 10mm for Marines.
:)
LOL. Semper Fi!
:evil:
Quote:
It's kind of like that saying "If it positively has to be destroyed in the shortest possible time, send in the Marines"--just substitute 10mm for Marines.
:)
LOL. Semper Fi!
:evil:
VirgilCaine
December 6, 2005, 09:58 PM
Also having a .40 S&W barrel and several 15-round mags, I've found the Model 29 to be a quite versatile "tool" for various purposes - whether in the woods or in the concrete jungle.
Let me see if I understand this--the [Glock] 29 can take the .40 with a barrel-switch, and there are 15-round mags for the 29...nifty.
Let me see if I understand this--the [Glock] 29 can take the .40 with a barrel-switch, and there are 15-round mags for the 29...nifty.
MTMilitiaman
December 6, 2005, 10:44 PM
Let me see if I understand this--the [Glock] 29 can take the .40 with a barrel-switch, and there are 15-round mags for the 29...nifty.
Actually that is an unexplored realm of the Glock 10mms that hasn't been brought up here. While the 10mm Auto can be loaded to a wide variety of tasks in these pistols as they come, the ability to take aftermarket barrels and components adds even more. Simply by changing barrels, and in some cases spring weights, you can fire the 10mm Auto, 9x25, .40 Smith and Wesson, and .357 SIG out of your Glock 20 or 29. Since they are all based on roughly the same case, I don't believe you even need to change magazines. If you want to shop around Lonewolf Distributors, you can find a 6 inch slide and barrel for your Glock 20 to give you a little bit more velocity and you can choose barrel lengths from standard 4.6", in the case of the Glock 20, to 5.5" from the standard slide--allowing you a lot of leeway in how you want your pistol set up for a specific task. You can have a 6 inch slide and 10mm Auto barrel loaded with 200 gr hardcast projectiles and equipped with a red dot sight for hogs and deer, then slap on the standard slide and barrel and a Surefire, load the pistol up with 135 gr JHPs and be set for home defense. If you decide you want to turn money into noise but don't want to go through as much money as noise, you can slap a standard length .40 S&W barrel in it and pick up a couple boxes of WWB from the local Wally-World on the way to the range. And you can explore other cartridge options on a whim. If you decide even the 135 grainers in the 10mm don't offer enough velocity for you, slap in a 6 inch BarSto chambered for the 9x25 and shoot some 115 gr Gold Dots out at 1800 fps. That load is, admittedly, probably well beyond the threshold the bullet was designed to perform at, but if all you want to some varmint or small game disposal or a change to blow up some water bottles--it'd do the trick. Point is, that is a lot of options and we haven't even discussed buying the Glock 21 slide and barrel from Lonewolf, which allows us to further explore the .400 Corbon and .45 Super with varying barrel lengths and a couple 13 round Glock 21 mags. And none of this requires more effort than field stripping your pistol and swapping barrels, recoil assemblies, and/or slides. Admitting that at $150 bucks a pop for the barrels, $20 a pop for the magazines, and $10 a pop for the springs, as well as several hundred for the individual slides, this system could get expensive in a hurry, you still have to admit that regardless of your impression of the Glock or the 10mm Auto, to those of us that fit the pistol and cartridge well, that is a lot of versitility.
Actually that is an unexplored realm of the Glock 10mms that hasn't been brought up here. While the 10mm Auto can be loaded to a wide variety of tasks in these pistols as they come, the ability to take aftermarket barrels and components adds even more. Simply by changing barrels, and in some cases spring weights, you can fire the 10mm Auto, 9x25, .40 Smith and Wesson, and .357 SIG out of your Glock 20 or 29. Since they are all based on roughly the same case, I don't believe you even need to change magazines. If you want to shop around Lonewolf Distributors, you can find a 6 inch slide and barrel for your Glock 20 to give you a little bit more velocity and you can choose barrel lengths from standard 4.6", in the case of the Glock 20, to 5.5" from the standard slide--allowing you a lot of leeway in how you want your pistol set up for a specific task. You can have a 6 inch slide and 10mm Auto barrel loaded with 200 gr hardcast projectiles and equipped with a red dot sight for hogs and deer, then slap on the standard slide and barrel and a Surefire, load the pistol up with 135 gr JHPs and be set for home defense. If you decide you want to turn money into noise but don't want to go through as much money as noise, you can slap a standard length .40 S&W barrel in it and pick up a couple boxes of WWB from the local Wally-World on the way to the range. And you can explore other cartridge options on a whim. If you decide even the 135 grainers in the 10mm don't offer enough velocity for you, slap in a 6 inch BarSto chambered for the 9x25 and shoot some 115 gr Gold Dots out at 1800 fps. That load is, admittedly, probably well beyond the threshold the bullet was designed to perform at, but if all you want to some varmint or small game disposal or a change to blow up some water bottles--it'd do the trick. Point is, that is a lot of options and we haven't even discussed buying the Glock 21 slide and barrel from Lonewolf, which allows us to further explore the .400 Corbon and .45 Super with varying barrel lengths and a couple 13 round Glock 21 mags. And none of this requires more effort than field stripping your pistol and swapping barrels, recoil assemblies, and/or slides. Admitting that at $150 bucks a pop for the barrels, $20 a pop for the magazines, and $10 a pop for the springs, as well as several hundred for the individual slides, this system could get expensive in a hurry, you still have to admit that regardless of your impression of the Glock or the 10mm Auto, to those of us that fit the pistol and cartridge well, that is a lot of versitility.
JOE MACK
December 6, 2005, 11:09 PM
Well, because it's the closest thing to the .41Magnum I can shoot in a reasonable-sized semi-auto handgun. My DE is NOT a reasonably-sized semi. I don't bother with 10mm revolvers 'cause I've got a lot of .41Magnums and it would be a major step down in power. I've got a Glock 20, Glock 29, and two custom 1911s. I'm thinking about the Kimber now that it's on Kaliforniastan's "safety" list. If Coonan would have put out enough .41Magnums that I could've glombed onto one... Now, if they made semi-autos for a rimless .41, I'd dump my 10mms in a heartbeat.:neener:
JohnKSa
December 6, 2005, 11:22 PM
Let me see if I can summarize...
The 41 Magnum is obviously better than the 10mm based on having much higher velocity and energy compared to the 10mm. In fact "there truly is no comparison".
But the 10mm isn't any better than the .40S&W even though it has much higher velocity and energy compared to the .40S&W. In fact its performance is actually suspect due to its having higher velocity and energy.
The 41 Magnum is obviously better than the 10mm based on having much higher velocity and energy compared to the 10mm. In fact "there truly is no comparison".
But the 10mm isn't any better than the .40S&W even though it has much higher velocity and energy compared to the .40S&W. In fact its performance is actually suspect due to its having higher velocity and energy.
cz75bdneos22
December 6, 2005, 11:25 PM
+1 MTMilitiaman...
good points...
that's why i settled on G20...;)
good points...
that's why i settled on G20...;)
MTMilitiaman
December 6, 2005, 11:27 PM
Let me see if I can summarize...
The 41 Magnum is obviously better than the 10mm based on having much higher velocity and energy compared to the 10mm. In fact "there truly is no comparison".
But the 10mm isn't any better than the .40S&W even though it has much higher velocity and energy compared to the .40S&W. In fact its performance is actually suspect due to its having higher velocity and energy.
If you believe what you hear :rolleyes:
Personally, if I wanted anything more than the 10mm it would be as a designated hunting handgun and I would be willing to sacrifice versitility to get more accuracy and power at a longer range from something like a Ruger in .44 Mag--.41 Mag wouldn't even be a consideration. If I wanted something less than the 10mm for self defense, well I can't personally really explain why I would do such a thing but suffice to say my choice wouldn't be the .40 Smith and Wesson.
The 41 Magnum is obviously better than the 10mm based on having much higher velocity and energy compared to the 10mm. In fact "there truly is no comparison".
But the 10mm isn't any better than the .40S&W even though it has much higher velocity and energy compared to the .40S&W. In fact its performance is actually suspect due to its having higher velocity and energy.
If you believe what you hear :rolleyes:
Personally, if I wanted anything more than the 10mm it would be as a designated hunting handgun and I would be willing to sacrifice versitility to get more accuracy and power at a longer range from something like a Ruger in .44 Mag--.41 Mag wouldn't even be a consideration. If I wanted something less than the 10mm for self defense, well I can't personally really explain why I would do such a thing but suffice to say my choice wouldn't be the .40 Smith and Wesson.
Guns_and_Labs
December 6, 2005, 11:47 PM
If I wanted something less than the 10mm for self defense, well I can't personally really explain why I would do such a thing but suffice to say my choice wouldn't be the .40 Smith and Wesson.
While I happily carry a 10mm in the 'burbs or the woods, I think it's a bit much for the urban scene. To each his own, but I find a BHP in 9mm gives me enough cumulative power with less risk of overpenetration. And you can't beat a Kahr P9 for pure concealability. Yes, they have .40's in each model, but I'm already downloading, so I might as well go down to a 9mm that I can reliably get to make a doubletap/headshot combo. YMMV.
While I happily carry a 10mm in the 'burbs or the woods, I think it's a bit much for the urban scene. To each his own, but I find a BHP in 9mm gives me enough cumulative power with less risk of overpenetration. And you can't beat a Kahr P9 for pure concealability. Yes, they have .40's in each model, but I'm already downloading, so I might as well go down to a 9mm that I can reliably get to make a doubletap/headshot combo. YMMV.
MTMilitiaman
December 6, 2005, 11:58 PM
While I happily carry a 10mm in the 'burbs or the woods, I think it's a bit much for the urban scene. To each his own, but I find a BHP in 9mm gives me enough cumulative power with less risk of overpenetration. And you can't beat a Kahr P9 for pure concealability. Yes, they have .40's in each model, but I'm already downloading, so I might as well go down to a 9mm that I can reliably get to make a doubletap/headshot combo. YMMV.
Fair enough. I don't personally CCW and even if I did would probably opt for a 10mm or .45. If overpenetration was a serious concern I would look into the 135 gr Nosler JHPs and sleep well but to each his own. I breifly consider the Kahr myself but after seeing a recent advertising campaign of theirs opted against it. Even if I did go with something less right now it would probably be a Glock 26 9mm.
Fair enough. I don't personally CCW and even if I did would probably opt for a 10mm or .45. If overpenetration was a serious concern I would look into the 135 gr Nosler JHPs and sleep well but to each his own. I breifly consider the Kahr myself but after seeing a recent advertising campaign of theirs opted against it. Even if I did go with something less right now it would probably be a Glock 26 9mm.
Devonai
December 7, 2005, 01:10 AM
I've been wondering about the .40 barrels for the Glock 20/29. Do the rounds stay seated properly in the 10mm magazines or can they shift forward? If they do shift to the front of the magazine, can that have a detrimental effect on feeding?
Also, where can I find out more about the 9x25mm?
Also, where can I find out more about the 9x25mm?
MachIVshooter
December 7, 2005, 01:30 AM
The .357 Magnum was originally loaded much hotter than typically seen today. Compare the Buffalo Bore 180 grain from 6" barrel (1500+ fps) to original Norma ballistics: 200 grain @ 1200 fps or 165 grain @ 1360 fps from 5" barrel.
The .357 Magnum, loaded to potential, is still considerably more powerful than the 10mm.
Do remember that a 6" magnum revolver vs. a 5" auto is an additional ~2.5" of barrel. You could probably consider it an extra 1.5-2", once you factor in pressure loss form the cylinder gap, depending on the revolver (S&W's are damn tight!). So whe one considers that, and the fact that a hot 10mm load will gain 35-50 FPS per inch (within reason) they are truly equal with top loads. *this is not unfounded, as I have done extensive chronographing of dozens of loads from my 3.5" Witness Compact and 5" Kimber and S&W 1006, as well as from my various .357's*
Also, some .357 loads that were topping 800 ft/lbs (various primer/powder/bullet combo's) required smacking the ejector on the truck tailgate to get the shells out. No bueno! Some 158 grain loads that came in at 814 ft/lbs created a small crack at the bottom of the forcing cone on my Security-Six stainless.:eek: I scrapped the remainder of those loads. The only .357 loads that will equal my top 10mm loads from a 4" revolver that aren't overpressure are using 110 grain pills, which I consider far too light for reliable performance/penetration at such extreme velocities. I stick to loading most .357 rounds to develop ~600 ft/lbs from 4" barrels. OTOH, I've had no issues whatsoever with my 790 ft/lb 10mm loads. I've even been able to load the Remington Nickel brass 5 and 6 times at such pressures.
I like the 10mm, but it is not a .357 (or even, its twin, unless you compare a weakly loaded .357 with a stoutly loaded 10mm), and it certainly does not equal the .41 Magnum in the real world.
John
The reason this comparison is so frequently made is that the average off-the-shelf .41 mag load is only in the 750-800 ft/lb arena from 4"-6" guns, which is totally obtainable by a 5" 10mm. Most of us are aware that there are .41 mag loads besting 1,150 ft/lbs. But the average winchester/remington/federal .41 mag loads are not all that impressive. And again, these super .41 loads are coming out of a 7.5" tube. Barrel length matters!
Along these lines, a 4" wheelgun is very comparable to a 5" bottom-feeder for velocity.
As to the bullet design argument, with Speer being cited so much on the GD I will only mention that they make 180 and 200 grain bullets that they do not load in factory ammunition, so the claim that they are designed for Speer's own .40 loads is null and void. Also, the Remington Gold Sabre 180 performs extremely well at 1,400 FPS.
PENETRATION:
In this department, the 10mm is unsurpassed by other autopistol cartridges, sans the .45 win mag, .50 AE, etc. I got hold of some 1/2" ballistic lexan and decided to do some testing. We cut it into 6"x8" pieces and then screwed the peices together in pairs for a total of 1" We had enough 1" thick pairs to test a single round of each load. First, rifles. Even a 35 gr. V-max out of a .22 Hornet punched through 2 layers at 100 yards like nobody's business. Anyway, testing was done with .380 90 gr., 9mm 115, 9mm 124, .40 155, .40 165, .45 200, .45 230, .357 125 JHP, .357 158 JSP, 10mm 180 and 10mm 200 (all are FMJ except the noted .357 rounds, and all were stout handloads). .45 (both loads) and .380 did not even get through the first sheet. The .357 158 grainers nearly got through, cracking the back of the second sheet. The 9mm loads were lodged in the rear sheet. The .40 loads were stuck between sheets, bulging the rear sheet a bit. Only the 10mm loads punched both 1/2" sheets completely (and lodged 2" into the rail road tie behind). I did try some factory 10mm 180 grain Black Talons just for the helluvit. They performed similarly to the 155 gr. FMJ .40 loads. Bottom line: the 10mm is a penetrating SOB. Since handguns have a rather lowsy reputation in this department anyway, I'd rather take any advantage I can get.
We also tried a 325 gr. Speer JHP .50 AE load at 1520 FPS and a 240 gr. XTP-JHP 454 Casull load at 1915 FPS on the extra couple pieces. I can't say if the actually penetrated the lexan, since the stuff blew into many peices on impact with these two rounds:evil: .
I also carry my 1006 with 180 grain GSHP's while hunting, in case I jump a deer and do not have time to unsling my rifle.
The .357 Magnum, loaded to potential, is still considerably more powerful than the 10mm.
Do remember that a 6" magnum revolver vs. a 5" auto is an additional ~2.5" of barrel. You could probably consider it an extra 1.5-2", once you factor in pressure loss form the cylinder gap, depending on the revolver (S&W's are damn tight!). So whe one considers that, and the fact that a hot 10mm load will gain 35-50 FPS per inch (within reason) they are truly equal with top loads. *this is not unfounded, as I have done extensive chronographing of dozens of loads from my 3.5" Witness Compact and 5" Kimber and S&W 1006, as well as from my various .357's*
Also, some .357 loads that were topping 800 ft/lbs (various primer/powder/bullet combo's) required smacking the ejector on the truck tailgate to get the shells out. No bueno! Some 158 grain loads that came in at 814 ft/lbs created a small crack at the bottom of the forcing cone on my Security-Six stainless.:eek: I scrapped the remainder of those loads. The only .357 loads that will equal my top 10mm loads from a 4" revolver that aren't overpressure are using 110 grain pills, which I consider far too light for reliable performance/penetration at such extreme velocities. I stick to loading most .357 rounds to develop ~600 ft/lbs from 4" barrels. OTOH, I've had no issues whatsoever with my 790 ft/lb 10mm loads. I've even been able to load the Remington Nickel brass 5 and 6 times at such pressures.
I like the 10mm, but it is not a .357 (or even, its twin, unless you compare a weakly loaded .357 with a stoutly loaded 10mm), and it certainly does not equal the .41 Magnum in the real world.
John
The reason this comparison is so frequently made is that the average off-the-shelf .41 mag load is only in the 750-800 ft/lb arena from 4"-6" guns, which is totally obtainable by a 5" 10mm. Most of us are aware that there are .41 mag loads besting 1,150 ft/lbs. But the average winchester/remington/federal .41 mag loads are not all that impressive. And again, these super .41 loads are coming out of a 7.5" tube. Barrel length matters!
Along these lines, a 4" wheelgun is very comparable to a 5" bottom-feeder for velocity.
As to the bullet design argument, with Speer being cited so much on the GD I will only mention that they make 180 and 200 grain bullets that they do not load in factory ammunition, so the claim that they are designed for Speer's own .40 loads is null and void. Also, the Remington Gold Sabre 180 performs extremely well at 1,400 FPS.
PENETRATION:
In this department, the 10mm is unsurpassed by other autopistol cartridges, sans the .45 win mag, .50 AE, etc. I got hold of some 1/2" ballistic lexan and decided to do some testing. We cut it into 6"x8" pieces and then screwed the peices together in pairs for a total of 1" We had enough 1" thick pairs to test a single round of each load. First, rifles. Even a 35 gr. V-max out of a .22 Hornet punched through 2 layers at 100 yards like nobody's business. Anyway, testing was done with .380 90 gr., 9mm 115, 9mm 124, .40 155, .40 165, .45 200, .45 230, .357 125 JHP, .357 158 JSP, 10mm 180 and 10mm 200 (all are FMJ except the noted .357 rounds, and all were stout handloads). .45 (both loads) and .380 did not even get through the first sheet. The .357 158 grainers nearly got through, cracking the back of the second sheet. The 9mm loads were lodged in the rear sheet. The .40 loads were stuck between sheets, bulging the rear sheet a bit. Only the 10mm loads punched both 1/2" sheets completely (and lodged 2" into the rail road tie behind). I did try some factory 10mm 180 grain Black Talons just for the helluvit. They performed similarly to the 155 gr. FMJ .40 loads. Bottom line: the 10mm is a penetrating SOB. Since handguns have a rather lowsy reputation in this department anyway, I'd rather take any advantage I can get.
We also tried a 325 gr. Speer JHP .50 AE load at 1520 FPS and a 240 gr. XTP-JHP 454 Casull load at 1915 FPS on the extra couple pieces. I can't say if the actually penetrated the lexan, since the stuff blew into many peices on impact with these two rounds:evil: .
I also carry my 1006 with 180 grain GSHP's while hunting, in case I jump a deer and do not have time to unsling my rifle.
crackerjack
December 7, 2005, 01:44 AM
Years ago the French conducted ballastic tests that were respected to reflect closely to real world encounters LE and self defence. They used goats closely matching human weights. The 357 Mag performance was proven in actual field use years afters there testing and closely matched (as well as many other calibers)the tests results. My point would a effective round on deer not be expected to be as effective on a person ? In this day of modern protective gear, overpentration will probabely be my after the fact consideration. Is is great that we have many tools (calibers) to obtain results in many different situations. Always thought 10mm was perfect backup hunting (in my area) and self defense.
Free air, Free advice, and no the water is not free
Free air, Free advice, and no the water is not free
Nail Shooter
December 7, 2005, 03:27 AM
by MachIVshooter:
"Bottom line: the 10mm is a penetrating SOB. Since handguns have a rather lowsy reputation in this department anyway, I'd rather take any advantage I can get."
+1 on that post by MachIVshooter.
I've done some informal "tests" of my own, and found that nothing in the other common semi auto calibers seemed to slide thru stuff like the 180FMJ's loaded near max. Since statistics show that the majority of bullets fired at the bad guy (at least by the police) probably miss anyway, why am I to worry about a little "overpenetration"? :rolleyes: Give me a bullet that I know will make it into or thru the target and feeds reliably. As an added bonus, I would think that pelvis shots would be particularly devastating w/ the 10mm.
One of Clint Smith's favorite sayings is: "Two holes bleed better than one."
"Bottom line: the 10mm is a penetrating SOB. Since handguns have a rather lowsy reputation in this department anyway, I'd rather take any advantage I can get."
+1 on that post by MachIVshooter.
I've done some informal "tests" of my own, and found that nothing in the other common semi auto calibers seemed to slide thru stuff like the 180FMJ's loaded near max. Since statistics show that the majority of bullets fired at the bad guy (at least by the police) probably miss anyway, why am I to worry about a little "overpenetration"? :rolleyes: Give me a bullet that I know will make it into or thru the target and feeds reliably. As an added bonus, I would think that pelvis shots would be particularly devastating w/ the 10mm.
One of Clint Smith's favorite sayings is: "Two holes bleed better than one."
Bob R
December 7, 2005, 07:38 AM
Wow, this thread sure has had its ups and downs. I thought we were going to have to send people to their rooms for a while.
I really like my 10mm, but tell me, if you don't have a 10mm, which is better, 9mm or 45? :evil:
Bwaahaaaaaahaaaa
bob
Am I glad I don't have to worry about that!!!
I really like my 10mm, but tell me, if you don't have a 10mm, which is better, 9mm or 45? :evil:
Bwaahaaaaaahaaaa
bob
Am I glad I don't have to worry about that!!!
jc2
December 7, 2005, 07:39 AM
Let me see if I can summarize...
The 41 Magnum is obviously better than the 10mm based on having much higher velocity and energy compared to the 10mm. In fact "there truly is no comparison".
Actually, John, as typical, you do a much better job with misstating than summarizing.
No qualitative comparison was made between the .41 Magnum and the 10mm. The only comparison that was made was quanititive, and "there truly is no comparison" when speaking quanitatively--the top .41 Magnum loads easily generate up to 50% more ME than the top 10mm loads.
But the 10mm isn't any better than the .40S&W even though it has much higher velocity and energy compared to the .40S&W. In fact its performance is actually suspect due to its having higher velocity and energy.
No, John, what was actually stated was there is more to consider when selecting a calibre for LE/defence that merely velocity (unless you are one of those absolutists who truly believe "velocity is everything"). It's easy to focus on simple number like MV or MV and ignore the big picture.
The 41 Magnum is obviously better than the 10mm based on having much higher velocity and energy compared to the 10mm. In fact "there truly is no comparison".
Actually, John, as typical, you do a much better job with misstating than summarizing.
No qualitative comparison was made between the .41 Magnum and the 10mm. The only comparison that was made was quanititive, and "there truly is no comparison" when speaking quanitatively--the top .41 Magnum loads easily generate up to 50% more ME than the top 10mm loads.
But the 10mm isn't any better than the .40S&W even though it has much higher velocity and energy compared to the .40S&W. In fact its performance is actually suspect due to its having higher velocity and energy.
No, John, what was actually stated was there is more to consider when selecting a calibre for LE/defence that merely velocity (unless you are one of those absolutists who truly believe "velocity is everything"). It's easy to focus on simple number like MV or MV and ignore the big picture.
Guns_and_Labs
December 7, 2005, 08:42 AM
Since statistics show that the majority of bullets fired at the bad guy (at least by the police) probably miss anyway, why am I to worry about a little "overpenetration"? :rolleyes:
I thought we had already determined in a previous thread that THR'rs never missed. ;)
I thought we had already determined in a previous thread that THR'rs never missed. ;)
Lennyjoe
December 7, 2005, 09:32 AM
I really like my 10mm, but tell me, if you don't have a 10mm, which is better, 9mm or 45?
Bob, you trying to stir the pot a little.;)
Bob, you trying to stir the pot a little.;)
Phaetos
December 7, 2005, 09:55 AM
As I am the OP, I will state this fact: I started a vitural ???? storm here! Fighters to your corners! Man..... a simple question turns into a slugfest.
JohnKSa
December 7, 2005, 10:49 PM
It's easy to focus on simple number like MV or MV and ignore the big picture.Clearly it is--you reduced the 41 vs 10mm to a straight MV/ME comparison and made it plain that simple comparison was conclusive. No need for consideration of capacity issues, ammunition costs, shootability issues, etc.
Same thing when comparing the .357 to the 10mm. You made it clear that MV/ME comparison is sufficient to establish that they are ballistic twins. End of discussion.
But when comparing the 40 to the 10mm, somehow we have to touch every base; gun size, bullet performance, bullet selection, ammo cost, ammo selection, weapon selection, firearm ergonomics, detailed analysis of ammo suppliers, etc. We have to focus on short-range encounter LE/Defence applicability without getting into hunting or the longer range capability of the 10mm. AND, THIS time, the significant MV/ME differences are minimized--even couched as being a disadvantage of the 10mm.
Same thing when comparing the .357 to the 10mm. You made it clear that MV/ME comparison is sufficient to establish that they are ballistic twins. End of discussion.
But when comparing the 40 to the 10mm, somehow we have to touch every base; gun size, bullet performance, bullet selection, ammo cost, ammo selection, weapon selection, firearm ergonomics, detailed analysis of ammo suppliers, etc. We have to focus on short-range encounter LE/Defence applicability without getting into hunting or the longer range capability of the 10mm. AND, THIS time, the significant MV/ME differences are minimized--even couched as being a disadvantage of the 10mm.
jc2
December 8, 2005, 07:20 AM
And clearly, John, you persist in pulling remarks out of context, misstatement, and occassionaly, outright prevarication.
The discussion in this thread of the .357 Magnum and .41 Magnum clearly centered on ballistics (which are most often distilled to MV/ME) and relative power levels. Even then, it was clearly acknowledged there are differences in platform (e.g., the 10mm is the bottom feeder equivalent of the .357 Magnum). Ballistically, there is no comparison between the top-end .41 Magnum loads and the top-end 10mm loads (which barely equal the top-end .357 Magnum loads). I would hope most people reading the thread clearly understand the differences between revolvers and bottom feeders.
The other discussion within the thread centered on LE/defence applications which clearly involves more than ballistics. So, yes John, more than just ballistics were addressed that discussion. Again, it is hoped most people partipating or merely reading the thread would understand more than just ballistics are involved selecting a handgun for LE/defence. BTW, I think just about all the service calibres (9x19/357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP)--not just the .40 S&W--are better suited in a strictly LE/defence than 10mm.
The discussion in this thread of the .357 Magnum and .41 Magnum clearly centered on ballistics (which are most often distilled to MV/ME) and relative power levels. Even then, it was clearly acknowledged there are differences in platform (e.g., the 10mm is the bottom feeder equivalent of the .357 Magnum). Ballistically, there is no comparison between the top-end .41 Magnum loads and the top-end 10mm loads (which barely equal the top-end .357 Magnum loads). I would hope most people reading the thread clearly understand the differences between revolvers and bottom feeders.
The other discussion within the thread centered on LE/defence applications which clearly involves more than ballistics. So, yes John, more than just ballistics were addressed that discussion. Again, it is hoped most people partipating or merely reading the thread would understand more than just ballistics are involved selecting a handgun for LE/defence. BTW, I think just about all the service calibres (9x19/357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP)--not just the .40 S&W--are better suited in a strictly LE/defence than 10mm.
warriorsociologist
December 8, 2005, 07:59 AM
And clearly, John, you persist in pulling remarks out of context, misstatement, and occassionaly, outright prevarication.
The discussion in this thread of the .357 Magnum and .41 Magnum clearly centered on ballistics (which are most often distilled to MV/ME) and relative power levels. Even then, it was clearly acknowledged there are differences in platform (e.g., the 10mm is the bottom feeder equivalent of the .357 Magnum). Ballistically, there is no comparison between the top-end .41 Magnum loads and the top-end 10mm loads (which barely equal the top-end .357 Magnum loads). I would hope most people reading the thread clearly understand the differences between revolvers and bottom feeders.
The other discussion within the thread centered on LE/defence applications which clearly involves more than ballistics. So, yes John, more than just ballistics were addressed that discussion. Again, it is hoped most people partipating or merely reading the thread would understand more than just ballistics are involved selecting a handgun for LE/defence. BTW, I think just about all the service calibres (9x19/357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP)--not just the .40 S&W--are better suited in a strictly LE/defence than 10mm.
:rolleyes: Sorry to dissapoint you, oh wise one...glad we have experts around like you who can help us "little people." That's all I'm going to direct at this sub-plot since this tit-fot-tat has already gone well past the point of foolishness and to continue this schoolyard slap-fest is counterproductive. Just let it go...bruised egos will heal provided you don't contunue to reopen the wound (or invite more verbal "discipline").
The discussion in this thread of the .357 Magnum and .41 Magnum clearly centered on ballistics (which are most often distilled to MV/ME) and relative power levels. Even then, it was clearly acknowledged there are differences in platform (e.g., the 10mm is the bottom feeder equivalent of the .357 Magnum). Ballistically, there is no comparison between the top-end .41 Magnum loads and the top-end 10mm loads (which barely equal the top-end .357 Magnum loads). I would hope most people reading the thread clearly understand the differences between revolvers and bottom feeders.
The other discussion within the thread centered on LE/defence applications which clearly involves more than ballistics. So, yes John, more than just ballistics were addressed that discussion. Again, it is hoped most people partipating or merely reading the thread would understand more than just ballistics are involved selecting a handgun for LE/defence. BTW, I think just about all the service calibres (9x19/357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP)--not just the .40 S&W--are better suited in a strictly LE/defence than 10mm.
:rolleyes: Sorry to dissapoint you, oh wise one...glad we have experts around like you who can help us "little people." That's all I'm going to direct at this sub-plot since this tit-fot-tat has already gone well past the point of foolishness and to continue this schoolyard slap-fest is counterproductive. Just let it go...bruised egos will heal provided you don't contunue to reopen the wound (or invite more verbal "discipline").
VirgilCaine
December 8, 2005, 08:58 AM
Simply by changing barrels, and in some cases spring weights, you can fire the 10mm Auto, 9x25, .40 Smith and Wesson, and .357 SIG out of your Glock 20 or 29. ... Admitting that at $150 bucks a pop for the barrels, $20 a pop for the magazines, and $10 a pop for the springs, as well as several hundred for the individual slides, this system could get expensive in a hurry, ...
9x25? Haven't heard of that one before.
Not very cheap, but if you can only have one handgun...
Very interesting, thanks.
9x25? Haven't heard of that one before.
Not very cheap, but if you can only have one handgun...
Very interesting, thanks.
JShirley
December 8, 2005, 10:50 AM
Virgil, the 9x25mm is basically a 10mm case necked down to 9mm.
OTOH, the 9x23 is similar to the .38 Super, but has no rim, and was designed from inception for very high pressure. Winchester brass is extremely thick and strong. I saw the White Box JSP available for some very good prices for a while. Looks like it's starting to creep up, but you can still find some pretty reasonably, if you look around.
John
OTOH, the 9x23 is similar to the .38 Super, but has no rim, and was designed from inception for very high pressure. Winchester brass is extremely thick and strong. I saw the White Box JSP available for some very good prices for a while. Looks like it's starting to creep up, but you can still find some pretty reasonably, if you look around.
John
JohnKSa
December 8, 2005, 07:45 PM
I would hope most people reading the thread clearly understand the differences between revolvers and bottom feeders. ....
it is hoped most people partipating or merely reading the thread would understand more than just ballistics are involved selecting a handgun for LE/defence.These are all bounds and limitation that YOU placed on this thread to drive it in the direction that best supports your premises. The original question was purely one of caliber, or one of ballistics, if you please.
YOU decided it was only a question about autopistols.
YOU decided it was only a question about LE/Defense.
YOU decided it was about handgun selection.10mm? What purpose and why? Why do you need a 10mm? More velocity out of the barrel? Slightly higher energy? And who makes a 10mm?Remember this very simple question? You're the one who complicated the thread by trying to introduce any and every bit of minutia you could dredge up that might cast the 10mm (one of your favorite calibers :rolleyes: ) in a negative light.
And no matter how you try to tapdance out of it, it is painfully obvious that you believe simple ballistics are more than sufficient for comparisons that don't flatter the 10mm. And just as painfully obvious that when these comparisons DO make the 10mm look superior, that you find it imperative to bring up any and every minor detail you can think of that might make the 10mm (your favorite "bottomfeeder" :rolleyes: ) seem less attractive.I think just about all the service calibres (9x19/357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP)--not just the .40 S&W--are better suited in a strictly LE/defence than 10mm.I'm puzzled as to why you feel it necessary to post this. You've made this abundantly plain in every post on the 10mm you've ever made on this forum, on TFL, and on Glocktalk. Did you somehow think that perhaps there was some doubt in ANYONE'S mind as to your opinion about the 10mm? Thanks for stating it plainly--too bad it's irrelevant--this thread wasn't about LE/defense until you tried to twist it in that direction.you persist in pulling remarks out of context, misstatement, and occassionaly, outright prevarication.Gotta give you points for consistency--as always when the fact abandon you (as they frequently do--it's only fair since you so frequently abandon them) you resort to patronizing tones, pontification and accusations.
it is hoped most people partipating or merely reading the thread would understand more than just ballistics are involved selecting a handgun for LE/defence.These are all bounds and limitation that YOU placed on this thread to drive it in the direction that best supports your premises. The original question was purely one of caliber, or one of ballistics, if you please.
YOU decided it was only a question about autopistols.
YOU decided it was only a question about LE/Defense.
YOU decided it was about handgun selection.10mm? What purpose and why? Why do you need a 10mm? More velocity out of the barrel? Slightly higher energy? And who makes a 10mm?Remember this very simple question? You're the one who complicated the thread by trying to introduce any and every bit of minutia you could dredge up that might cast the 10mm (one of your favorite calibers :rolleyes: ) in a negative light.
And no matter how you try to tapdance out of it, it is painfully obvious that you believe simple ballistics are more than sufficient for comparisons that don't flatter the 10mm. And just as painfully obvious that when these comparisons DO make the 10mm look superior, that you find it imperative to bring up any and every minor detail you can think of that might make the 10mm (your favorite "bottomfeeder" :rolleyes: ) seem less attractive.I think just about all the service calibres (9x19/357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP)--not just the .40 S&W--are better suited in a strictly LE/defence than 10mm.I'm puzzled as to why you feel it necessary to post this. You've made this abundantly plain in every post on the 10mm you've ever made on this forum, on TFL, and on Glocktalk. Did you somehow think that perhaps there was some doubt in ANYONE'S mind as to your opinion about the 10mm? Thanks for stating it plainly--too bad it's irrelevant--this thread wasn't about LE/defense until you tried to twist it in that direction.you persist in pulling remarks out of context, misstatement, and occassionaly, outright prevarication.Gotta give you points for consistency--as always when the fact abandon you (as they frequently do--it's only fair since you so frequently abandon them) you resort to patronizing tones, pontification and accusations.
jc2
December 8, 2005, 08:06 PM
These are all bounds and limitation that YOU placed on this thread to drive it in the direction that best supports your premises.
No, John, that is the context in which the remarks you pulled out of context were made.
Did you somehow think that perhaps there was some doubt in ANYONE'S mind as to your opinion about the 10mm?
I like the 10mm and make no bones about it. I just can acknowledge that it is not be all and end all of calibres. It has its strengths, and it has its weaknesses--just like every other calibre out there. Its strength is that it is a very versatile calibre--it is a decent low-end hunting calibre and a decent LE/defence calibre (though it is better suited for hunting than for LE/defence). Its weakness is that there are much better hunting calibres available and better defence calibres available. Unless you have a specific need (or just want) a weapon to fill both roles--hunting and defence--there are better choices available for hunting and for LE/defence. That's not a slam on the 10mm--just a realistic appraisal based on a lot of experience with calibre.
this thread wasn't about LE/defense until you tried to twist it in that direction.
Actually, John, had you bothered to read the thread from the beginning you would know that it was a poster who styles himself "MTMilitiaman" who twisted the thread in a LE/defence direction (see post #10).
No, John, that is the context in which the remarks you pulled out of context were made.
Did you somehow think that perhaps there was some doubt in ANYONE'S mind as to your opinion about the 10mm?
I like the 10mm and make no bones about it. I just can acknowledge that it is not be all and end all of calibres. It has its strengths, and it has its weaknesses--just like every other calibre out there. Its strength is that it is a very versatile calibre--it is a decent low-end hunting calibre and a decent LE/defence calibre (though it is better suited for hunting than for LE/defence). Its weakness is that there are much better hunting calibres available and better defence calibres available. Unless you have a specific need (or just want) a weapon to fill both roles--hunting and defence--there are better choices available for hunting and for LE/defence. That's not a slam on the 10mm--just a realistic appraisal based on a lot of experience with calibre.
this thread wasn't about LE/defense until you tried to twist it in that direction.
Actually, John, had you bothered to read the thread from the beginning you would know that it was a poster who styles himself "MTMilitiaman" who twisted the thread in a LE/defence direction (see post #10).
JohnKSa
December 8, 2005, 08:28 PM
No that is the context in which the remarks you pulled out of context were made.Wow, did you actually type that thinking it was an intelligent response?...had you bothered to read the thread from the beginning you would know that it was a poster who styles himself "MTMilitiaman" who twisted the thread in a LE/defence direction (see post #10).As a matter of fact, MTM did mention defense in post #10, but he was replying to a comment in post #8. From which he actually quoted, lest there be any question why he said what he did. I believe that post #8 was the first to mention defense as being a less than strong point of the 10mm.
Post #8 was made by--JC2.
HEY! That's YOU! IMAGINE THAT! :eek:
I guess that maybe you just forgot that he was quoting and replying to YOUR post... :rolleyes:I like the 10mm and make no bones about it. blah, blah, blahYeah, you make no bones about it allright.
jc2 says: "The 10mm's strengths are that it does nothing particularly well compared to other calibers and its weaknesses are, well, pretty much everything. And, oh yeah, I'd carry it except that I carry some other caliber..."
What a joke.
Post #8 was made by--JC2.
HEY! That's YOU! IMAGINE THAT! :eek:
I guess that maybe you just forgot that he was quoting and replying to YOUR post... :rolleyes:I like the 10mm and make no bones about it. blah, blah, blahYeah, you make no bones about it allright.
jc2 says: "The 10mm's strengths are that it does nothing particularly well compared to other calibers and its weaknesses are, well, pretty much everything. And, oh yeah, I'd carry it except that I carry some other caliber..."
What a joke.
jc2
December 8, 2005, 08:41 PM
John, you lack the ability to address any issue within context it was made. You cannot make a point without pulling something out of context and/or just plain misquoting it. You persist in pulling remarks out of context, misstatement, and occassionaly, outright prevarication.
JohnKSa
December 8, 2005, 08:44 PM
What, no comment on the big, BIG, surprise that MTMilitiaman wasn't actually the person who brought up defense on this thread?
You know, like you said he was?
BTW, most folks realize that 'prevarication' is just a fancy way to call someone a liar. Is there some reason that you think it's ok to post personal insults on THR? (That's ok, it'll just be our little secret.) ;)
You know, like you said he was?
BTW, most folks realize that 'prevarication' is just a fancy way to call someone a liar. Is there some reason that you think it's ok to post personal insults on THR? (That's ok, it'll just be our little secret.) ;)
jc2
December 8, 2005, 08:46 PM
Yep, because it a very succinct and accurate description of your style.
What, no comment on the big, BIG, surprise that MTMilitiaman wasn't actually the person who brought up defense on this thread?
There you go again, John, another typical misstatement. Sure, I mentioned LE/defence in my post #8 as part of very legitimate response to the question the thread asked, "10mm? What purpose and why?" MTMilitiaman is the one who chose to make defence issue (or "to twist it around in that direction," as you, John described it.)
Here's what was said in my post #8:
Its strength is that it is a good general purpose round that is adequate for hunting (at least up to whitetail-size game), and it is a decent defence round (though it is pretty DOA as a LE round).
Its weakness is that there are better hunting rounds, and there are better defence rounds.
Nothing particular inflammatory--just an honest reply and certainly nothing "to twist it" in a LE/defence direction. Just another example of one of your typical misstatements. It was MTMilitianman who chose to twist the thread in a LE/defence direction.
BTW, I see your back to editing your posts after they are replied to. I should know by now that I have to go ahead and quote you so you don't edit it.
Oh, if you're really worried about personal insults on THR, go back and check post #90 by some fellow who calls himself "JohnKSa." You'll be surprised at what you find--maybe even a pot calling the kettle black.
What, no comment on the big, BIG, surprise that MTMilitiaman wasn't actually the person who brought up defense on this thread?
There you go again, John, another typical misstatement. Sure, I mentioned LE/defence in my post #8 as part of very legitimate response to the question the thread asked, "10mm? What purpose and why?" MTMilitiaman is the one who chose to make defence issue (or "to twist it around in that direction," as you, John described it.)
Here's what was said in my post #8:
Its strength is that it is a good general purpose round that is adequate for hunting (at least up to whitetail-size game), and it is a decent defence round (though it is pretty DOA as a LE round).
Its weakness is that there are better hunting rounds, and there are better defence rounds.
Nothing particular inflammatory--just an honest reply and certainly nothing "to twist it" in a LE/defence direction. Just another example of one of your typical misstatements. It was MTMilitianman who chose to twist the thread in a LE/defence direction.
BTW, I see your back to editing your posts after they are replied to. I should know by now that I have to go ahead and quote you so you don't edit it.
Oh, if you're really worried about personal insults on THR, go back and check post #90 by some fellow who calls himself "JohnKSa." You'll be surprised at what you find--maybe even a pot calling the kettle black.
JohnKSa
December 8, 2005, 08:53 PM
STILL no comment on how it could be possible that although you said MTMilitiaman was the person who brought up defense on this thread that it turns out that YOU actually did it?
And that he was actually quoting YOU when he brought it up?
Come on, this will be entertaining...
(Of course, you can just insult me some more if you'd rather not talk about the 10mm)
I see you're editing your posts after they are replied to. ... I have to go ahead and quote you so you don't edit it.You've got to be kidding me. YOU'RE griping about my editing my posts but then you respond with a one liner to my previous post, and suddenly after I reply to your one liner your post becomes a small novel? :D
Feel free to quote me all you like.I mentioned LE/defence ...MTMilitiaman is the one who chose to make defence issue (or "to twist it around in that direction,"OK, I get it now. YOU bring up defense and when someone else responds, THEY'RE twisting the thread in that direction.
And that he was actually quoting YOU when he brought it up?
Come on, this will be entertaining...
(Of course, you can just insult me some more if you'd rather not talk about the 10mm)
I see you're editing your posts after they are replied to. ... I have to go ahead and quote you so you don't edit it.You've got to be kidding me. YOU'RE griping about my editing my posts but then you respond with a one liner to my previous post, and suddenly after I reply to your one liner your post becomes a small novel? :D
Feel free to quote me all you like.I mentioned LE/defence ...MTMilitiaman is the one who chose to make defence issue (or "to twist it around in that direction,"OK, I get it now. YOU bring up defense and when someone else responds, THEY'RE twisting the thread in that direction.
jc2
December 8, 2005, 09:19 PM
I really wonder what you get. The thread asked the question "10mm? What purpose and why?" Are suggesting the 10mm doesn't have LE/defence purpose?
you respond with a one liner to my previous post, and suddenly after I reply to your one liner your post becomes a small novel?
Just addressing the changes you made in your post. Do you remember what your original post (one liner) was?
you respond with a one liner to my previous post, and suddenly after I reply to your one liner your post becomes a small novel?
Just addressing the changes you made in your post. Do you remember what your original post (one liner) was?
VirgilCaine
December 8, 2005, 09:29 PM
Virgil, the 9x25mm is basically a 10mm case necked down to 9mm.
OTOH, the 9x23 is similar to the .38 Super, but has no rim, and was designed from inception for very high pressure. Winchester brass is extremely thick and strong.
Ah.
OTOH, the 9x23 is similar to the .38 Super, but has no rim, and was designed from inception for very high pressure. Winchester brass is extremely thick and strong.
Ah.
MTMilitiaman
December 8, 2005, 09:59 PM
There you go again, John, another typical misstatement. Sure, I mentioned LE/defence in my post #8 as part of very legitimate response to the question the thread asked, "10mm? What purpose and why?" MTMilitiaman is the one who chose to make defence issue (or "to twist it around in that direction," as you, John described it.)
You brought it up, I just thought it pertinent to challenge you to expound. Like I said previously, the 10mm may not be perfect for everyone and I really don't care if you carry something different. But when someone asks about a cartridge in earnest trying to learn something, he/she might find facts more relevent and useful than opinions, which are not to be confused--especially in your case sense you seem far more full of opinions than fact.
The fact remains you made first reference to the cartridge's role in the LE/defense role. I quoted you in an attempt to get you to support your allegations. You tried but were unable to do so because I provided literature from a reputable bullet manufacture that countered your claims that the 10mm Auto, when loaded to its potential, pushes bullets beyond their capabilties.
So unless you actually have something new to add to this topic, preferrebly more fact than fiction, I'd say you've already discredited yourself enough and don't really need to drag this topic into page five or six.
You brought it up, I just thought it pertinent to challenge you to expound. Like I said previously, the 10mm may not be perfect for everyone and I really don't care if you carry something different. But when someone asks about a cartridge in earnest trying to learn something, he/she might find facts more relevent and useful than opinions, which are not to be confused--especially in your case sense you seem far more full of opinions than fact.
The fact remains you made first reference to the cartridge's role in the LE/defense role. I quoted you in an attempt to get you to support your allegations. You tried but were unable to do so because I provided literature from a reputable bullet manufacture that countered your claims that the 10mm Auto, when loaded to its potential, pushes bullets beyond their capabilties.
So unless you actually have something new to add to this topic, preferrebly more fact than fiction, I'd say you've already discredited yourself enough and don't really need to drag this topic into page five or six.
JohnKSa
December 8, 2005, 09:59 PM
Are suggesting the 10mm doesn't have LE/defence purpose?I presume you mean "Are YOU suggesting..." And the answer would be no. You said that. Remember this?it is pretty DOA as a LE round and this? I think just about all the service calibres ... are better suited in a strictly LE/defence than 10mm.or this?The 10mm has several shortcomings as defensive roundor maybe this?When it comes to defence, platform (size, weight, ergonomics) argues against the 10mmPerhaps you remember this?The 10mm was long dead as a LE/defence roundWhat about this?It's rather silly to bet your life on what are essentially unproven/untested loadsAnd yes, I KNOW, ALL of these quotes are taken out of context. And the 10mm is your favorite "bottomfeeder" caliber and all... :rolleyes:
It's no wonder you don't carry it with OPINIONS like that. (Although, yes, I KNOW you WOULD carry it except for the fact that you carry something else.) :rolleyes:
It's no wonder you don't carry it with OPINIONS like that. (Although, yes, I KNOW you WOULD carry it except for the fact that you carry something else.) :rolleyes:
jc2
December 9, 2005, 06:44 AM
Yes, John, you stated the facts correctly:
1. The 10mm is pretty much DOA as a LE round (and has been for sometime).
2. The service calibres (9x19/357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP) are better suited in a strictly LE/defence role than 10mm.
3. The 10mm does indeed have several shortcomings as a LE/defence round. There are good reasons several other calibres are far more popular with LE and for defensive use than the 10mm.
4. When it comes to defence, platform (size, weight, ergonomics) argues against the 10mm. That is one of major shortcomings of the 10mm as a LE/defence (and one of the reasons it was dumped by LE).
5. The 10mm is long dead as a LE/defence round--just look at the lack of LE/defence ammo offered by the major manufacturers. It's long gone the way of the .41 Magnum as a LE/defence round. Of the major manufacturers, the only ones still in the game at all are Winchester with the Silvertip and Federal with the Hydra-Shok--both old technology rounds (i.e., no R&D dollars spent on the 10mm because there is no LE market). Compare that to their offerings (along with Remington's and Speer's offerings) in the 9x19/357SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP, and you can easily see what calibres are alive and well in the LE marketplace and which are DOA.
6. It's rather silly to bet your life on what are essentially unproven/untested loads. Of course it is John. There are numerous rounds out there with a long history of good test results in the lab and good results in actual LE use. If anything, "silly" is to mild a word to describe choosing an untested/unproven load for carry when there are other loads available with very good performance records.
I want a calibre that can perform adequately in a hunting and a defence role--even though it does mean compromises in both. The 10mm fills that role well as does the .357 Magnum. Right now, I have almost moved strictly to wheelguns so the .357 Magnum is what I carry. When I carried bottom feeders, John, I carried the 10mm--for the same reason I now carry the .357 Magnum (after all they are basically ballistic twins). I still have my 1076 (and about a half of case of Silvertips). If I ever feel the need to go back to a bottom feeder, it will my 1076 and the 10mm.
And John, if you cannot understand it is possible to like calibre (or anything else) despite it have certain shortcomings, then there's something lacking in you. I appreciate 10mm's stengths and weakness. The world is not perfect--and neither is the 10mm.
MTMilitiaman, you provided data that supported exactly what I said:
The only "full-power" defence/LE ammo available for 10mm besides the 175-grain Silvertips relies on bullets designed for the .40 S&W pushed the the far upper end (or beyond) the optimum performance window for those bullets (and they are all totally unproven in actual defence/LE use).
The message you posted verified the accuracy of my statement that the bullets in question (180-grain Gold Dots) are "pushed the the far upper end (or beyond) the optimum performance window." The fact remains, no matter how hard it is for some to digest, the boutique loads which were the subject of the discussion are "totally unproven in actual defence/LE use." They will likely remain unproven because the "10mm is pretty much DOA as a LE round (and has been for sometime)."
1. The 10mm is pretty much DOA as a LE round (and has been for sometime).
2. The service calibres (9x19/357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP) are better suited in a strictly LE/defence role than 10mm.
3. The 10mm does indeed have several shortcomings as a LE/defence round. There are good reasons several other calibres are far more popular with LE and for defensive use than the 10mm.
4. When it comes to defence, platform (size, weight, ergonomics) argues against the 10mm. That is one of major shortcomings of the 10mm as a LE/defence (and one of the reasons it was dumped by LE).
5. The 10mm is long dead as a LE/defence round--just look at the lack of LE/defence ammo offered by the major manufacturers. It's long gone the way of the .41 Magnum as a LE/defence round. Of the major manufacturers, the only ones still in the game at all are Winchester with the Silvertip and Federal with the Hydra-Shok--both old technology rounds (i.e., no R&D dollars spent on the 10mm because there is no LE market). Compare that to their offerings (along with Remington's and Speer's offerings) in the 9x19/357SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP, and you can easily see what calibres are alive and well in the LE marketplace and which are DOA.
6. It's rather silly to bet your life on what are essentially unproven/untested loads. Of course it is John. There are numerous rounds out there with a long history of good test results in the lab and good results in actual LE use. If anything, "silly" is to mild a word to describe choosing an untested/unproven load for carry when there are other loads available with very good performance records.
I want a calibre that can perform adequately in a hunting and a defence role--even though it does mean compromises in both. The 10mm fills that role well as does the .357 Magnum. Right now, I have almost moved strictly to wheelguns so the .357 Magnum is what I carry. When I carried bottom feeders, John, I carried the 10mm--for the same reason I now carry the .357 Magnum (after all they are basically ballistic twins). I still have my 1076 (and about a half of case of Silvertips). If I ever feel the need to go back to a bottom feeder, it will my 1076 and the 10mm.
And John, if you cannot understand it is possible to like calibre (or anything else) despite it have certain shortcomings, then there's something lacking in you. I appreciate 10mm's stengths and weakness. The world is not perfect--and neither is the 10mm.
MTMilitiaman, you provided data that supported exactly what I said:
The only "full-power" defence/LE ammo available for 10mm besides the 175-grain Silvertips relies on bullets designed for the .40 S&W pushed the the far upper end (or beyond) the optimum performance window for those bullets (and they are all totally unproven in actual defence/LE use).
The message you posted verified the accuracy of my statement that the bullets in question (180-grain Gold Dots) are "pushed the the far upper end (or beyond) the optimum performance window." The fact remains, no matter how hard it is for some to digest, the boutique loads which were the subject of the discussion are "totally unproven in actual defence/LE use." They will likely remain unproven because the "10mm is pretty much DOA as a LE round (and has been for sometime)."
Iron bottom
December 9, 2005, 10:29 AM
When a person thinks about all those people who have used those old Winchesters, Colts, Sharps, Springfields and whatever else they could get their hands on without the knowledge of their performance in the lab on a chunk of jelly, it just makes a fellow want to dig 'em up and slap 'em. :rolleyes:
Re law enforcement reports on the 10 mm, I don't expect to see any law enforcement reports on .44 mag, .45 long colt, .454,.460 smith, 500 smith, 480 ruger and the others that did not find favor with law enforcement either. It would be silly to think that any of these rounds could not be used in self defense or that they would not do the job as well as the law enforcement rounds. Or Heaven forbid, better.
Re law enforcement reports on the 10 mm, I don't expect to see any law enforcement reports on .44 mag, .45 long colt, .454,.460 smith, 500 smith, 480 ruger and the others that did not find favor with law enforcement either. It would be silly to think that any of these rounds could not be used in self defense or that they would not do the job as well as the law enforcement rounds. Or Heaven forbid, better.
warriorsociologist
December 9, 2005, 05:00 PM
:confused:
jc2,
What exactly are you trying to prove? I know what you ARE proving to many of us by carrying on in the way you have been...but I just can't see what you think is in it for you to dig your hole even deeper. Remember that everytime you post something here, it brings this thread back up to the top so that even people who haven't yet seen it or read all the posts that got you into this mess might see them.
Personally I'd like to suggest that a Mod lock this thread. I'm not sure if there is anything more about the original topic that can be said here...and the current direction of this thread is not productive.
jc2,
What exactly are you trying to prove? I know what you ARE proving to many of us by carrying on in the way you have been...but I just can't see what you think is in it for you to dig your hole even deeper. Remember that everytime you post something here, it brings this thread back up to the top so that even people who haven't yet seen it or read all the posts that got you into this mess might see them.
Personally I'd like to suggest that a Mod lock this thread. I'm not sure if there is anything more about the original topic that can be said here...and the current direction of this thread is not productive.
MTMilitiaman
December 9, 2005, 05:04 PM
jc, you can make bulleted lists and regurgitate the same stuff over and over again, but until you provide evidence, it is nothing more than an echo. You still haven't provided one lick of data that supports your conclussion that the more popular rounds are better LE/defense rounds.
I never said that the 10mm Auto didn't push bullets to the upper end of their velocity spectrum--it most certainly does. But I did provide an email from a Speer representative stating that, in my case, the bullet in question was designed to perform at those velocities. Everything you have said afterwards has been pretty hollow--which is maybe why it echos so well.
Go ahead and tell the topic starter that "you think" the other rounds are better for strictly LE/defense, but you have no real evidence to support this. Don't go spouting it off like it is fact. In fact both the bullet manufacture and the ammunition manufacture provide evidence to concluded the ammunition does perform, I have no reason not to believe them. The physics involved isn't exactly rocket science. And unlike you, I don't claim to know more about a bullet than the company who designed and marketed it.
Popularity is overrated. The internet means I have an unlimited suppply of ammunition in a variety of bullet weights and styles at my finger tips. All I have to do is order in advance and stockpile. I know a store that stocks the Silvertips enough that when I run out of Double Tap, I have a decent backup on hand. Until then, I use Double Tap because I have no reason not to believe it will not perform as advertised--and you have yet to provide any.
If the other cartridges are better for that particular role, we are going to need evidence. The 10mm Auto may not be perfect, but if you try to detract from it without anything but the hot air exiting your mouth, some people are bound to call you on it. I just didn't think it would take you long enough for 90+ posts to accumulate still presenting opinion as fact with no evidence. The point here is that the cartridge may not be as popular as some other rounds, but I think it is due more to people spouting nonesense about it than any real fault of the cartridge itself. If the cartridge was given its due, it could be as popular as the .45 ACP. Maybe more so.
You can twist and stammer and studder but all you've done for three pages or more is say the same stuff over and over again and it is still as unsupported as when you first said it. And all I have done is ask you to provide something that supports it. Rinse and repeat doesn't work here. Evidence is what I am after, not seeing how many times you can say the same thing over and over again in how many different ways while avoiding the entire point. I did notice, however, that you dropped the question of who brought up the LE/defense role of the cartridge first. It was pretty well documented and foolish for you to even attempt to deny credit/blame for that. Like John, I was anxious to see how you would attempt to wiggle out of it.
I never said that the 10mm Auto didn't push bullets to the upper end of their velocity spectrum--it most certainly does. But I did provide an email from a Speer representative stating that, in my case, the bullet in question was designed to perform at those velocities. Everything you have said afterwards has been pretty hollow--which is maybe why it echos so well.
Go ahead and tell the topic starter that "you think" the other rounds are better for strictly LE/defense, but you have no real evidence to support this. Don't go spouting it off like it is fact. In fact both the bullet manufacture and the ammunition manufacture provide evidence to concluded the ammunition does perform, I have no reason not to believe them. The physics involved isn't exactly rocket science. And unlike you, I don't claim to know more about a bullet than the company who designed and marketed it.
Popularity is overrated. The internet means I have an unlimited suppply of ammunition in a variety of bullet weights and styles at my finger tips. All I have to do is order in advance and stockpile. I know a store that stocks the Silvertips enough that when I run out of Double Tap, I have a decent backup on hand. Until then, I use Double Tap because I have no reason not to believe it will not perform as advertised--and you have yet to provide any.
If the other cartridges are better for that particular role, we are going to need evidence. The 10mm Auto may not be perfect, but if you try to detract from it without anything but the hot air exiting your mouth, some people are bound to call you on it. I just didn't think it would take you long enough for 90+ posts to accumulate still presenting opinion as fact with no evidence. The point here is that the cartridge may not be as popular as some other rounds, but I think it is due more to people spouting nonesense about it than any real fault of the cartridge itself. If the cartridge was given its due, it could be as popular as the .45 ACP. Maybe more so.
You can twist and stammer and studder but all you've done for three pages or more is say the same stuff over and over again and it is still as unsupported as when you first said it. And all I have done is ask you to provide something that supports it. Rinse and repeat doesn't work here. Evidence is what I am after, not seeing how many times you can say the same thing over and over again in how many different ways while avoiding the entire point. I did notice, however, that you dropped the question of who brought up the LE/defense role of the cartridge first. It was pretty well documented and foolish for you to even attempt to deny credit/blame for that. Like John, I was anxious to see how you would attempt to wiggle out of it.
P95Carry
December 9, 2005, 05:38 PM
Have tried not to prematurely irrigate folk's Cheerios but frankly - enough is enough. I think things have gotten pretty worn out now and future thread prospects appear to be probably more ''battle'' oriented than measured discourse.
Thx to those who have added some useful info and comment.
Thx to those who have added some useful info and comment.
If you enjoyed reading about "10mm? What purpose and why?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.