[intercooler]

As you may know I test all kinds of ammo and now added a .44 to the mix. Haven't done any Chrony work with it yet but hopefully this weekend!

I'm trying to piece together the losses in the revolver versus auto for these calibers. I didn't realize until I looked it up that .357 will hold max 27gr. vs 10mm at 24gr. The 10mm always gets billed as stronger which so far my data agrees. However if both were shot out of a 6" auto I might say the .357 wins out. I'm almost thinking the 10mm with premium ammo out of a 6" may equal a .44 Magnum of the same length barrel in a revolver with gap losses.

[jackpinesavages]

IIRC, the best parallel ballistics for the hotter 10mm loads is the .41 Mag.?

[intercooler]

Yea I know low level .41 Magnum. Comparisons using commercial available ammo is a hard thing to do.

[jameslovesjammie]

Commercial ammunition is your downfall. When reloading, the upper level .357 ammo (180 and 200 grain) will be quite comparable to 10mm loadings. The .41 will out do the 10mm in velocity and penetration and can take bullets up to 265 grains. The .44 is all over the 10mm, going up to a 310+ grain bullets. Handloading will get you the best benefit for all revolver calibers, both in terms of velocity and bullet weig6ht. The most equal test you could do is a S&W 627, 610, 657, and 629. All these are identical except chambered in .357, 10mm, .41, and .44. I believe the only common barrel length that they were all available in was 4".

[hariph creek]

I really like both .357mag and 10mm. I consider them more or less even.
Frankly they are about as much cartridge, as I care to shoot. In a service size handgun.
It's just a matter of which platform you prefer. I know either round can be made to work in either platform. That seems like more trouble than it's worth.

I really don't think .357mag or 10mm compares to .41mag or .44mag.
Some say 10mm is similar to .41mag? Look at the energy in ft/lbs. There's a significant gap.
Now, 10mm vs .41 ''special,'' I'd buy that.

[intercooler]

It's a shame what MFG's have done to the ammos. If they had a standardized load across the board it would sort things out. It will be interesting to see how the .44 testing goes.

[harrygunner]

'intercooler' What gun are you using to chronograph the .44 Mag rounds? None listed in your signature, so thought I'd ask.

The 10mm and .357 Mag have performance ranges that overlay quite a bit. The fringe areas are up for discussion, but their ballistic ranges are very similar.

Personally, I see no reason for comparing a 10mm to a .44 Mag. They are simply too different. I have 340gr .44 Mag rounds that are spec'ed to leave my 5.5" Ruger at 1400 ft/s for about 1480 ft-lb of energy. Very different from a 10mm.

[fatcat4620]

Barrel length is the key factor here.

[336A]

Commercial ammunition is your downfall. When reloading, the upper level .357 ammo (180 and 200 grain) will be quite comparable to 10mm loadings. The .41 will out do the 10mm in velocity and penetration and can take bullets up to 265 grains. The .44 is all over the 10mm, going up to a 310+ grain bullets. Handloading will get you the best benefit for all revolver calibers, both in terms of velocity and bullet weig6ht. The most equal test you could do is a S&W 627, 610, 657, and 629. All these are identical except chambered in .357, 10mm, .41, and .44. I believe the only common barrel length that they were all available in was 4".

While it is true that the most common heavy bullet available for the .41 is 265gr, there sre versions of the SSK out there. The SSK bullets will run anywhere from 275gr to 300gr. There is a article in the recent Hanloader mag done by John Haviland, he got 1354fps with a 275gr SSK bulletfrom his 6.5" Ruger BH. However I do feel that the 265gr bullet really is a better fit for a heavy weight bullet in the .41 magnum.

I think that the 10mm would be more compareable to a .41SPL if there was such a animal.

[intercooler]

Oh. I have a Redhawk 7.5" barrel. I'm going to concentrate on the 180gr bullets since they are there all three.


I got 1409 FPS/800 LBS yesterday out of the Hunter 6" using 180's. Curious to see what the Redhawk spits them out at this weekend. I know it will lose some but want to see how close they come.

[AABEN]

Try checking out the 357 sig. I think you will like the 357 sig.

[DesertFox]

I would think that 357 Sig would be a great shooter and a poor reloader.

[parisite]

Power loss in the barrel cylinder gap in revolvers is highly exaggerated.

My 6" 45acp revolver gives consistently higher velocities than a 5" 1911.

[hariph creek]

If you load a 180gr bullet in a .44mag, to it's full potential. It would exceed .357 &10mm, by a large margine (heh-heh, I almost said ''large Marge,'' heh-heh).

It's like saying... ''I'll compare a Camaro to a Corvette. After all they're both fast cars, right? Since they both have two doors and a V-8. I wonder which will win a race? Just to be fair, I'll put the same brand of tire on both of them.
Hmm...I think the Camaro's got a shot. After all the track will be the same length for both cars.''

[hariph creek]

This whole thing seems silly?
Maybe, I'm misunderstanding this?

[intercooler]

Creek you are. Lots of things come into play. Barrel lengths, auto/revolver, good ammo/bad ammo.

This is ruling out handloads. Just factory available.

[hariph creek]

You comparing the three against each other, right?
Are you talking just, commercial, self defense ammo?

180gr .357mag & 10mm are heavier for caliber, than a .44mag. The amount of powder available to propel a 180gr bullet in a .44mag is substantial, compared to the other two. With less pressure to boot.

As far as barrel lengths and cylinder gaps and such. Are seeing if you can devise a scenario where-in the smaller two calibers can match the .44? With a given bullet weight, making velocity the measureing stick? Assuming of course you handicap the .44, enough to skew the results?

[intercooler]

I will post some data. I'm trying to get some Coonan results.

[GJgo]

I have a S&W 610 (10mm) w/ the 6" barrel. I shoot 200gr bullets at approx. 1350 fps, give or take. Looks to be around 800 FPE at the muzzle.

I don't know how this compares to a 6" 357, maybe someone can post up their numbers for comparison. I *suspect* a standard load here is more like 600 FPE at the muzzle.

I used to own a 6.5" S&W 629 (44 mag). It was definitely more powerful, more like 1100 FPE at the muzzle. Kicked a lot harder, too. (same frame, same length, ect..)

[2zulu1]

I'll be looking forward to your Speer Gold Dot tests in ballistic gel between the three calibers, also the Nosler Partitions and Swift A-frames. :)

[fatcat4620]

Power loss in the barrel cylinder gap in revolvers is highly exaggerated.

My 6" 45acp revolver gives consistently higher velocities than a 5" 1911.
This is because a 6 inch revolver in .45 would equal almost a 7 inch in a auto loader. People forget how the measure revolver/auto barrels and factor that into the MV and ft/lbs.

[jmr40]

With the best loads a 10mm fired from a 4.5" Glock 20 will slightly beat the best loads from a 4" 357 mag revolver. Shoot the 357's from a 6" barrel and I'll call it a tie. Go with a barrel longer than 6" and the 357 wins. With the best loads a 4" or longer 44 mag is another step or so up the ladder of performance.

The 10mm is a fine round, and my personal favorite among these, but is only equal to the very lightest 41 mag loads. With the best loads a 41 mag is right on the heels of a 44 mag and I would call it a tie personally.

The 3 all serve very different roles in my opinion. I like the Glock in 10mm as my hiking and woods gun. I get 357 mag perfromance in a much smaller, lighter, more compact gun. Remember a 357 mag would have to have a 6" barrel just to equal 10mm performance. A G-20 is the same overall length as a 3" revolver and much lighter.

The revolvers are better hunting guns. With longer barrels you get a bit more performance and with better triggers more accuracy.

To me the 357 is the round stuck in no mans land. If I need or want more than the 10mm can give me, I'd jump straight to the 44. With the wide variety of loads available I can shoot 44 specials and have much less recoil and blast than 357's, and with hotter loads can far outperform either.

With full size L frame and N frame guns the 44 isn't enough bigger to make carry anymore difficult. The smaller framed 357's with sub 4" barrels lose so much velocity they are in reality just very loud 5 shot 9mm's.

[hariph creek]

I don't think of the .357mag as a ''no man's land.'' I feel it is close enough to the 10mm. It's really question of...do you like revolvers or autos? Pick your weapon, get your cartridge. They're close enough.
It seems the question should be....357mag vs. 10mm. With barrel lengths and cylinder gaps and such.

.44mag is another beast entirely.

I have carpal tunnel and arthritis. 10 & .357 are about all the abuse I can take, and still shoot often enough to stay proficient.

[jackpinesavages]

Hey creek-love that Hemingway quote-which book?

[hariph creek]

I can't remember. Wrote it down, when I read it, years ago.
I used to say, ''just because you're moving fast, doesn't mean you're working fast.''
You know, those people that do a task all frantic and herky-jerky? They think they're so quick.
I move steady and effecient and get done at the same time. But, my results are better and I'm less likely damage things or myself.

Or, it applies to people who feel that they or somebody ''needs to do something!'' About a problem they don't understand. Doesn't have to help, just has to look like it's being reacted to.

"Never confuse motion, for action.'', sounds better.

I also love ''An armed society, is a polite society.'' But, it's used so much already.

[Jaxondog]

I have all three, and love all of them. Waiting on test result's.

[jmr40]

I don't think of the .357mag as a ''no man's land.'' I feel it is close enough to the 10mm. It's really question of...do you like revolvers or autos? Pick your weapon, get your cartridge.

I think you misunderstood my meaning. I agree 100% that the 357 and 10mm are essentially equals with the best loads in each gun. The 10mm slightly outperforms short barreled 357's and in long barrels the 357 slightly outperforms the 10mm. A Glock in 10mm essentially offeres 357 mag performance in a much smaller package, with 3X the ammo capacity. If I wanted a revolver, and I have both revolvers and auto's, I's just go straight to the 44.

By being in "no mans land" I'm referring to the difference between 357 and 44 mag. I have nothing against revolvers, but if I were buying a full size revolver I can't justify a 357. They are essentially the same size and weight. Close enough that no one will ever notice the difference between them as a carry gun.

The performance of 44 ammo covers a wide sprectrum from light 44 specials that have no more recoil than 38 specials, to hot 44 specials or light 44 magnums which outperform 357 mags in SD roles without the recoil or blast. If needed you still have to option of full power loads which take you to another level above either 10mm or 357.

I've owned many 357's over the years, but sold them all several years ago and settled on the Smith 629's as my revolver choices. While there is nothing wrong with a 357, I wouldn't go back.

[336A]

I have a S&W 610 (10mm) w/ the 6" barrel. I shoot 200gr bullets at approx. 1350 fps, give or take. Looks to be around 800 FPE at the muzzle.

I don't know how this compares to a 6" 357, maybe someone can post up their numbers for comparison. I *suspect* a standard load here is more like 600 FPE at the muzzle.

I used to own a 6.5" S&W 629 (44 mag). It was definitely more powerful, more like 1100 FPE at the muzzle. Kicked a lot harder, too. (same frame, same length, ect..)

:eek: great googly moogly man where are you getting your load data from? I referenced this article http://www.gunblast.com/SW-610.htm and your getting 100fps more than what he got. At that point you might as well go with a .41 magnum. Why risk injury to yourself or damage such a fine revolver, I got it the 10mm is a great cartridge but there are limits.

With more and more folks magnumizing the 10mm I often wonder if it would be feasable for a manufacturer to resurect the ol' .401 Powermag. That way folks would have a true 10mm magnum, and I bet if it were cut to accept moon clips you could use .40 S&W, 10mm, and .401 ammo.
http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell401PowerMag.htm

[hariph creek]

Ok, jmr40. I get you now. You're quite right, .44 is very versatile.
I have to disagree about the platforms being about the same size. I find the K or L-frames (for instance) to be more ''carry friendly'' and handy, than the N-frame (for instance).
That is only my opinion and preference, and in no way invalidates yours.
I've said it before but, if Ruger made a ''Tracker'' version of the GP100 (no porting!). In say .41/.44/.45? I'd be all over it, especially .41 or .44.
Until such a beast exists, .357mag and 10mm meet my requirements.
Energy roughly equal to 200gr at 1200 fps, more or less. With a hard cast bullet and reliability.
.41 & .44 would be better, though. I could do it with less pressure and without pushing the envelope.

[intercooler]

Here is some interesting 10mm data with a 610, Contender and a couple of autos:

http://www.ar15armory.com/forums/Sunday-afternoon-chrono-t106036.html

All the 10mm owners say the 610 loses big velocity and I believe it in my own testing versus my 6" barrel auto.

Also as to the Coonan .357 auto some say a 125gr Remington hits 1900 FPS plus out of a 5". In my 4.2" GP100 I got mid 1400's so again if true it shows a revolver loses a bunch. That Coonan would put out 1000 lbs of muzzle if the numbers are true. All that data would show a comparable .357 auto is indeed stronger than any 10mm:

http://www.ar15armory.com/forums/Coonan-Delta-Elite-t117749.html

Same would hold true if you are spitting .44's which aren't up pretty good in the loadings versus .357 and 10mm autos.

[GJgo]

336A, in the 610 I can load pretty long which increases powder space & drops pressures. I assure my load has no pressure signs whatsoever in my gun, started low & worked it up. The N frame is pretty beefy..

I'm not being a speed freak about it, this load was simply more accurate for me than the slower loads were.

[2zulu1]

Still waiting to see the test results and what ammunition was used.

[intercooler]

I'm still trying to get a Coonan owner to do some testing. Posted was the Remington 125gr data. Posted was the 10mm data and my .357 data out of the GP100 (search). Just need to get some .44 Magnum data with different loads but if someone has Chrony data out of a .44 with factory ammo post up.

[hariph creek]

intercooler... "...if you are spitting .44's which aren't up pretty good in the loadings..." Do you mean downloaded .44? I admit, .357 & 10 could rival a handicapped .44.

The 125gr Remington you mention doing 1900fps can't possibly be a factory load from Remington. No 125gr .357mag doing 1900fps, is a standard factory load, from a ''standard'' handgun (as in, not a carbine). I know SwampFox does something in that range. I doubt Coonan recommends that load for their gun. But, if you're going that route? Why not compare a .44 that's pushed to the edge?
I thought you were talking 180gr all around to keep it equal? It seems using a given caliber's nominal weight would be advisable.
.357mag=158gr
10mm=175gr(?)
.44mag=230gr
Choose a manufacturer that makes a comparable grade of load in each caliber. Then compare calibers, platforms, barrel lengths, cylinder gap, etc...

[joed]

It's a shame what MFG's have done to the ammos. If they had a standardized load across the board it would sort things out. It will be interesting to see how the .44 testing goes.
The problem is SAAMI. They have continuously downgraded revolver rounds and I do not know why. The .38 and .44 Spl are nothing but squib loads anymore and .357 has been downgraded. Can't say on the .44 mag though.

[intercooler]

Creek did you read the links? Some of those Coonan owners said yup.. 1850+ out of factory Remington 125.

[2zulu1]

I'm still trying to get a Coonan owner to do some testing. Posted was the Remington 125gr data. Posted was the 10mm data and my .357 data out of the GP100 (search). Just need to get some .44 Magnum data with different loads but if someone has Chrony data out of a .44 with factory ammo post up.
Tests to me is an action word that exhibits what different bullet designs/construction can do against different kinds of mediums.

Bullets designed/constructed for magnum velocities typically have a strong advantage over bullets designed/constructed for 40 S&W fired at 10mm velocities.

Reading paper data isn't the same as "seeing" test results. :)

[GJgo]

I agree with 2zulu1. Current 40 cal bullet offerings don't hold together well at full house 10mm velocities- it would be nice to see an XTP-FP or a JSP offering in the 180-200 gr range that would take full steam. That more than any other reason could convince me to switch back to 44 mag.

[hariph creek]

yup...I read 'em. Not everybody there believes it, either. I think ''Happy'' summed it up best, when he suggested gases being read by the chrono. I don't deny that the Coonan gets higher velocities than a revolver with the same length barrel. I don't even argue that 10mm is more ''powerful.'' The Coonan numbers could be right? Who knows?

Again, it's comparing .357 & 10 to .44mag. Without basically rigging the test, there's no comparison.

As far as velocity losses or gains between platforms, in a given caliber.
Controls are needed...the same round used in each type, for instance.
A verified proper use of test equipment. Not ''claims'' made.
If for example the velocity listed for the Coonan. Was compared to the velocity of the same round; over the same chrono, on the same day, from a 4"-6" revolver (in good working order). We could conclude, ''Those numbers seem consistent with known velocities for a revolver. So the Coonan numbers should be reliable.''
A person can find all kinds of exceptions and extreme variations, to argue any case.
Putting one tid-bit against another tid-bit establishes nothing but trivia.

[intercooler]

I picked up a box of Federal 240gr JHP's tonight and have Underwood 180/240's as well. I will fire them across and see what I get in the morning. I can't find a bunch of .44 Chrony and have no idea what they may give.

[Jaymo]

How exactly does a .357 hold 27 grains of powder, when 27.5 grains of Vihtavuori N110 is all you cam put into a .44 mag case and still be able to cram a 180 grain bullet on top?
That load runs about 1850 from my 7.5" Redhawk. It's been years since I chronied it, so I can't pinpoint the last 10 fps.

.357, 10mm, and .44 mag are all great rounds.
The .44 mag is much more powerful than .357 and 10mm.
I sure wish Marlin would bring back the 9mm and .45 ACP Camp Carbines, and also offer them in 10mm. A 10mm Camp Carbine would be nice little beast of a carbine.

[hariph creek]

intercooler...I just want to say, publicly, I hope I don't offend you. I, sometimes, enjoy picking at things. Mainly just in the spirit of debate or maybe akin to devil's advocate. I hope I haven't gone to far. I've been known to misinterpret ancient greek text and social situations.

[hariph creek]

Jaymo...I wonder if he means water? You can use water to get a base line measurement of case capacity. There can be differences from brand to brand, within the same caliber.
I've never done it, seems as I've read of it, though.

[hariph creek]

Jaymo... I'd love a 10mm carbine. Without going the Mech-Tech route. Something light weight, synthetic/stainless and sleek with an adjustable stock. Peep sights and/or a red dot? The Ruger .44 carbine, in 10mm, would be great. Rotary mag or tube fed, I bet it would feed better.

Of course, what I really want is a 10mm Thompson.

[intercooler]

Jaymo,

I don't hand load and can only go by published data on case capacity totally empty. That's kind of why I thought the .357 would be stronger than any 10mm (if loaded up) because it holds more totally empty. Here is where I got that data:

http://kwk.us/cases.html

.44 is 39 and .357 27

[intercooler]

Creek,

I don't get offended. Sometimes I don't explain what I am looking at or trying to figure out for myself right. What I have been working on is over the counter commercial stuff for the last couple of years since I got into this. I don't handload at all so these are what I look at, buy, test, etc... For me I probably never will since I get factory ammo cheaper than people are reloading plus I don't have the time or equipment. So every so often I will buy a box of X and see what it does. All I can say is WOW how it all varies! Add on top of that how the .357, .44 and 10mm have been downloaded and most none of it is true to original anymore.

[intercooler]

My other look is revolver loss versus the auto's. A .44 or .357 without having really strong loading won't put out as much as many may think in a revolver versus say a Coonan .357, Desert Eagle .44 or 10mm auto.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ak5OC6bPsjO8dHRYQjg2VzRjWEpUVlhXbjN0ZVMybFE#gid=0

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ak5OC6bPsjO8dEh6eGZ3N3hpUU13SXM5cm9pZy16T0E#gid=0


Those are what I have so far. I will be adding a new one for the .44's I test this morning. Off now to see what a .44 gives!

[intercooler]

- 10mm P10 HS1 H 180gr HS (Match 4.75") 1035, 1008, 1034, 1022. 1024.75 FPS/ 419.62 LBS. This shot like a little Kitten and coupled with the known reliability of the Hydra-Shok expansion is a great HD round!


- .44 Magnum Federal WMAE44A 240gr JHP (7.5" Redhawk) 1509, 1505, 1510, 1512, 1548. 1516.8 FPS/ 1224.18 LBS. Had some real pop!
- .44 Magnum Underwood Ammo 240gr FMJ (7.5" Redhawk) 1383, 1354, 1273, 1276, 1392, 1383. 1343 FPS/ 961.70 LBS. I do believe these were from the period where Kevin's powder supplier switched without notice.
- .44 Magnum Underwood Ammo 180gr XTP (7.5" Redhawk) 1700, 1674, 1682, 1670, 1735, 1681. 1680.82 FPS/ 1128.93 LBS. Real pop and do believe this is with corrected powder.


- .357 Magnum PD357HS2 H 130gr HS (GP100 4") 1311, 1320, 1410, 1329. 1342.5 FPS/ 520.14 LBS. Pretty tame in a GP100 and great HD round.

[intercooler]

.44 sheet:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ak5OC6bPsjO8dFlJSEh0WWctdThTRGlpaFljS2x4VlE#gid=0

[jackpinesavages]

The 125gr Remington you mention doing 1900fps can't possibly be a factory load from Remington. No 125gr .357mag doing 1900fps, is a standard factory load, from a ''standard'' handgun (as in, not a carbine).

Yes, 125gr. was a factory load, produced for LE and the S&W model 28 Patrolman, IIRC.

[buttrap]

Seems silly to me .44 vs .357 thats kind of like M-4 sherman tanks vs tiger tanks or 8 inch gun tin clad curisers vs battleships with 14 inch guns. And for 1900 fps loads with a .357 thats out of a carbine. The old super vel blow up colt loads wont even do that.

[intercooler]

Well butt you may be wrong but that's what we are trying to figure out.

[baylorattorney]

The other nite while firing at cinder blocks with my Ruger New Model Blackhawk 6.5 inch bbl 357mag and New Model Colt Delta Elite I felt a bit surprised that the .357 was hitting harder, a lot harder than my 10mm auto was. I'll get the ammo data in here tomorrow.


Waste not want not. :)

[intercooler]

I'm actually a little pissed that the ammo MFG's have messed with the SAAMI specs of original offerings taking things to where they are today. I would venture to guess the original .357 Magnum loadings exceeded 10mm even loaded to it's max. Some of today's .44 Magnum loads look pretty weak too.

Kevin's .357 125gr is the strongest I have tested. Wish I had a Coonan to see what it would do out of a 5" or 6" barrel. If I got 1550 FPS I can see it hitting 1800.

[2zulu1]

Here's some chrono data;

Remington factory 125gr SJHP;

Dan Wesson/4" - 1456fps, ES 58fps, SD 18fps.

M686P/6" - 1627fps, ES 51fps, SD 22fps.

Sierra #5 ( latest edition) has full power 357 mag loading data.

From Lyman #47, factory equivalent 125s is 17.7grs/2400 powder;

M686P/4" CCI magnum primers;
5@1561fps - ES 32fps, SD 12fps.

Win mag primers;
5@1562fps - ES 38fps, SD 19fps.

AA #9/17.0grs - CCI mag primers;
5@1564fps - ES 54fps, SD 22fps.

The above loads are under max using Sierra #5 data, work up with caution and use proper loading protocol.

For those who are concerned about cylinder gap:

M629/6.5" 240gr Nosler JHP, N110/20.6grs/CCI 350;
6@1421fps - ES 34fps, SD 15fps.

Desert Eagle/6" 240gr Hornady XTP, N110/20.7grs/WLP;
6@1305fps - ES 23fps, SD 08fps.

N110/21.0grs;
6@1336fps - ES 15fps, SD 06fps.

[Deaf Smith]

I thought you guys might be interested in this..

http://www.casr.ca/ft-harper1-6.htm

"To protect members of its Sirius Patrols in Greenland, Denmark has adopted a 10mm Glock automatic pistol."

They use them to protect themselves from POLAR BEARS!!!

Interesting!

Deaf

[2zulu1]

I thought you guys might be interested in this..

http://www.casr.ca/ft-harper1-6.htm

"To protect members of its Sirius Patrols in Greenland, Denmark has adopted a 10mm Glock automatic pistol."

They use them to protect themselves from POLAR BEARS!!!

Interesting!

Deaf
As is the Winchester M70 in 30-06.

[seed]

Kinda old thread, I know. But Intercooler (and whoever else has tried the 180gr Underwood XTP's), I am interested in using these rounds in my Desert Eagle, however I want to make sure they will be reliable. Ordinarily, DE's are supposed to use 240gr HP's or SP's to work reliably, but I figure that if the Underwoods are that much more powerful, it would make up for the lighter weight of the bullet to cycle the slide. What do you think?

[intercooler]

Yes it should cycle your slide fast. They are a good deal so go for the Underwood 180's. Please report back too ;)

[Big Lew in NC]

Yeah the 41 Mag and 10 mm are about the same. The difference would ie in the number of bullets you want and if you want to throw big bullets or not. The 357 is a great round but the 10 can throw 200 grains or a little more and you can get 15+1 capacity. That is how I always saw it.

With regards to the 44 Mag, a revolver may lose a little in the cylinder gap but that depends on the pistol. My Freedom Arms has a tiny cylinder gap while my Ruger 357 has more. That being said, the possible output of the 44 Mag simply cannot be approached by the 10 mm, so again, it comes down to what you are trying to do with it.

Best to all,
BL in NC

[918v]

Don't look at the numbers blindly. Look to see what is available for a given application, i.e. self-defense, and compare performance in the appropriate test medium. You might find the 10mm exceeds 44 Mag performance in ballistic jello.

[seed]

I contacted Underwood about their 180gr stuff and this was their reply:

"They will definitely fit in the Mag. We do not have a 44 DE to test them out
of, but I do know many of our customers do use them in their DE's and we
have not had any problems reported.

Thanks, Kevin"

So I'll be ordering from them pretty soon!