Glock 29-10mm out of short barrel


PDA






wild cat mccane
March 29, 2013, 05:32 PM
do people have an opinion on the glock 29 and bullet performance when compared to similarly sized calibers?

For example, the 29 is close to the 19 in size. So how does 10mm compare against 9 +P in a longer barrel? Or 40.

think about one for hiking.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 29-10mm out of short barrel" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ku4hx
March 29, 2013, 05:40 PM
Which is a "better" round, +P 9mm or a full house 10 in the 29, well, that's the stuff cans of worms just wait for.

The times I've been in the woods, I carried a 10mm sometimes because I wanted the greater power considering what my targets might be. In terms of power, a full house 10mm in a G29 is a good bit greater than a +P 9mm.

I hand load for 9mm, 40 and 10mm. The 40 has more power than the 9 and the 10 has more power than both the 9 and the 40. But the thing is, can you place your shots as they need to be considering the G29 power? If you haven't shot a full power 10mm (Buffalo Bore and others) the round can be quite "impressive" to say the least. If you have, then you know what I mean.

My favorite woods load for the 10mm is a 175/180 grain cast bullet at about 1,100 fps. You can come very close to that in a G29 and my opinion is it's superior to any 9mm load.

wild cat mccane
March 29, 2013, 05:52 PM
But I am quite convinced that the 10mm requires larger barrel length to be the round that legend makes it.

is the give of a larger gun (29) worth it when compared to a small gun like a 26/27?

jmr40
March 29, 2013, 07:43 PM
FWIW. Doubletap advertises 1300 fps for 200 gr 10mm ammo from a G-20. My gun chronographs 1315 fps with that ammo. They advertise 1240 fps from a G-29.

In my experience semi-autos seem to get pretty close to advertised velocities because they are tested in realistic length barrels. Magnum revolver rounds from common barrrel lengths are often VERY short of advertised because they are tested in 8" test barrels that no one actually uses.

Deaf Smith
March 29, 2013, 08:49 PM
Well a 200 grain bullet at 1240 compares to a Glock 26 using +p+ Winchester 127 at the very same velocity quite well.

See I chronoed the 26 with that very load and that is what it gets, 1240 fps.

Now I like my 26 and feel it's a fine CCW gun but a 200gr at 1240 sure ups the ante!

Deaf

wild cat mccane
March 29, 2013, 09:18 PM
thanks!

For me, that a +p 9mm goes just as fast (though weighting less) is enough not to go for the glock 29 for woods.

thanks!

olderguns
March 29, 2013, 09:29 PM
You could always do what I did drop a lonewolf extended barrel in, I can now have G20 power out of my G29,

But I still want A G20 so I can put in a 6 or 6 and a half inch barrel for even more fun.

Stevie-Ray
March 29, 2013, 10:10 PM
thanks!

For me, that a +p 9mm goes just as fast (though weighting less) is enough not to go for the glock 29 for woods.

thanks! I don't think you were quite getting Deaf's point. His point was 200 gr at 1240 is far better than 127 at 1240.

Your skin, of course, but I prefer my G29 in the woods way over my G26.

Girodin
March 29, 2013, 10:35 PM
I don't think you were quite getting Deaf's point. His point was 200 gr at 1240 is far better than 127 at 1240.

Not only is a 200 grain projectile going that speed making more energy than the 127, you also need to look at bullet construction, sectional density, etc. For the woods I'd much rather have the 200 grain hard cast. For the streets, I'd be happy with a 124 grain gold dot standard or +P and the quicker (at least for me) follow ups. I'd happily carry a 9x19 in the streets but I like a .357 mag for the woods.

Carne Frio
March 29, 2013, 10:42 PM
One of my favorite guns is a Model 29 Glock.
A lot of power in a fairly small package. Here
is some data for ballistics comparison.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/10mm.html
You can also get a 40 S&W conversion barrel and
shoot those out it.

ku4hx
March 30, 2013, 08:04 AM
But I am quite convinced that the 10mm requires larger barrel length to be the round that legend makes it.

is the give of a larger gun (29) worth it when compared to a small gun like a 26/27?
Here are some definitive MV comparisons:
http://glocktalk.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-1361241.html

I own a G20 and a friend of my owns a G29. Although not as extensive, my PACT2 chronograph mirrors the Glocktalk posting. I got similar results with my S&W 1006

Yes, there are differences. But from what I've found in clocking various loads in my G20, friends G29 and my Smith 1006 they're not worth worrying about. At practical defense distances, the slightly lower MV a G29 presents (average of 67fps slower for the G29 in the Glocktalk posting) is not likely going to matter to the recipient of the slug.

CDW4ME
March 30, 2013, 09:01 AM
My Glock 29 SF averages 1,278 fps / 562# KE with 155 gr. Hornady XTP, not the hottest 10mm out there.

I got 1,116 fps / 456# KE out of my Glock 27 with Winchester Ranger T 165, one of the hotter 40 S&W rounds.

In my little comparison, an average full power 10mm has 19% more KE (power) than a hot 40 S&W (and that 40 load delivers more KE than the 9mm Ranger T +P+).

Is about 20% more power worth it?

jmr40
March 30, 2013, 10:10 AM
For me, that a +p 9mm goes just as fast (though weighting less) is enough not to go for the glock 29 for woods.




I'm not exacty sure I understand you here. If your concern is SD from 2 legged predators then I'd agree. I own semi-autos in 9mm, 10mm, and 45, as well as several magnum revolvers. When I'm in the woods hiking, camping etc., and if in an area where there is no possibility of large animal predators I routinely carry either the G-26 or G-19. because of their smaller size. I'm perfectly content that against a human attaker they are as good as any.

When in an area where black bear are present my G-20 goes loaded with the 200 gr DoubleTap ammo. I usually carry a magazine full of lighter 155 gr bullets as well. A G-29 would be a very good option here as well. Slightly smaller, with little performance loss.

The hot 10mm offers me magnum revolver performance, but in a much lighter, more compact package holding nearly 3X the rounds. A 44 mag revolver would be a slighlty better option for bear, but the hot 10mm is close enough, and is a better choice for the more likely possiblity of human attackers.

That is my philosophy anyway.

SDGlock23
March 30, 2013, 11:11 AM
My general way of thinking is that if I need more than a .40 or .45 then it's time to bring out the big .45 Colt 300gr+ loads.

I used to load for the 10mm, and there really isn't that much velocity loss between a G29 and a G20, often less than 100 fps. For packing around the G29 has an advantage but then again there's not a huge weight difference between it and the 20 plus the G20 holds more.

I ultimately got out of the 10mm for two reasons. One, the .40 will do just about everything the 10mm will. Simple example, from a 6" barrel the 10mm can throw a 180gr a little over 1400 with a hot load. With a 6" barrel, the .40 can achieve over 1300 fps with a dose of Longshot. When you go lighter than 180gr, the difference is even less. Even with 200gr, you might get a little over 1300 from a 6" 10mm, which is good yes, but a 6" .40 will exceed 1200 fps. I'm not getting worked up over 7-8% increase in velocity shooting the exact same bullet.

Second reason is I load .45 Super out of my 5" KKM 4 port Glock 21 Gen4. The only advantage the 10mm has over the .40 is a slight bump up in velocity, where as the .45 Super gives me a larger caliber and heavier bullets as well, and still respectable velocity. 230gr XTP/hardcast at nearly 1250 fps, 250gr JHP/hardcast at around 1200 fps or a 280gr WFNGC hardcast at over 1100 fps.

I have to watch out because I have nothing against the 10mm, but it does come off sounding like I do. I do genuinely believe that if a .40 or .45 acp/super won't stop a threat, neither will the 10mm.

ku4hx
March 30, 2013, 01:41 PM
My general way of thinking is that if I need more than a .40 or .45 then it's time to bring out the big .45 Colt 300gr+ loads.

I used to load for the 10mm, and there really isn't that much velocity loss between a G29 and a G20, often less than 100 fps. For packing around the G29 has an advantage but then again there's not a huge weight difference between it and the 20 plus the G20 holds more.

I ultimately got out of the 10mm for two reasons. One, the .40 will do just about everything the 10mm will. Simple example, from a 6" barrel the 10mm can throw a 180gr a little over 1400 with a hot load. With a 6" barrel, the .40 can achieve over 1300 fps with a dose of Longshot. When you go lighter than 180gr, the difference is even less. Even with 200gr, you might get a little over 1300 from a 6" 10mm, which is good yes, but a 6" .40 will exceed 1200 fps. I'm not getting worked up over 7-8% increase in velocity shooting the exact same bullet.

Second reason is I load .45 Super out of my 5" KKM 4 port Glock 21 Gen4. The only advantage the 10mm has over the .40 is a slight bump up in velocity, where as the .45 Super gives me a larger caliber and heavier bullets as well, and still respectable velocity. 230gr XTP/hardcast at nearly 1250 fps, 250gr JHP/hardcast at around 1200 fps or a 280gr WFNGC hardcast at over 1100 fps.

I have to watch out because I have nothing against the 10mm, but it does come off sounding like I do. I do genuinely believe that if a .40 or .45 acp/super won't stop a threat, neither will the 10mm.
Yeah, but 16 rounds of 180 grain bullets at 1,350 fps or 200 grain at 1,100 fps has a certain amount of "firepower appeal". If a 10mm doesn't seem up to the task, I move to a .44 Magnum or a .454 Casull. If they are not sufficient, it's time to put down the hand guns and grab a rifle. I tend to favor heavy loading in .308 or .338 calibers.

All cartridges have their place, and the key I've found over the years is to match cartridge/load to the intended target.

Deaf Smith
March 30, 2013, 03:16 PM
I don't think you were quite getting Deaf's point. His point was 200 gr at 1240 is far better than 127 at 1240.

Your skin, of course, but I prefer my G29 in the woods way over my G26.
Well my point was the 127 +p+ at 1240 is a good load and the Glock 26 compact enough for daily wear (and I wear it daily!)

Now the 29 IS defiantly more powerful, I used to own one, and it is a handful to shoot with 10mm ammo.

If you can control the 10mm, one handed, rapid fire, with such ammo as the 200gr at 1240, then sure pack but keep in mind you just might have to fire it one handed in SD.

Now for woods where you might have more time (or at least time for two hands) it may be a better ticket.

But most folks won't be able to control that beast, at least one handed, rapid fire, for self defense.

The 26 will do so for most people.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=169179&d=1343703778

This is my 26, a Bowie Tactical Concepts, with the stripling, Heine night sights, NY-1/3.5lb connector, and stainless steel guide rod. A very constant companion. I also have the 27 and 33 but I don't use them so much (but excellent guns no less.)

My woods gun is a 629 mountain gun.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=176000&d=1355098863

I use it in the woods cause I prefer a revolver where I can load a few shot cartridges and just cycle the action a few times to get the type of round needed in a moment.

Oh and the other N frame there is my .45 ACP 625-3.

Deaf

PabloJ
March 30, 2013, 03:23 PM
do people have an opinion on the glock 29 and bullet performance when compared to similarly sized calibers?

For example, the 29 is close to the 19 in size. So how does 10mm compare against 9 +P in a longer barrel? Or 40.

think about one for hiking.
I switched over from G29 to G20. The grip was too short w/o extension and bottom of back strap dug into heel of my hand. I bought it as all around kind of weapon with goal of having only ONE handgun.

wild cat mccane
March 30, 2013, 03:31 PM
already two recommends on the glock 20.

As a hiking gun, that is just too big as the 20 is bigger than the 19. I think a 19 is too big for hiking. Much prefer that weight and space be trail mix :)

PabloJ
March 30, 2013, 04:55 PM
already two recommends on the glock 20.

As a hiking gun, that is just too big as the 20 is bigger than the 19. I think a 19 is too big for hiking. Much prefer that weight and space be trail mix :)
It's a good pistol and one can always order 'hunting barrel' (looks like 6") from Glock for little more velocity out of the cartridge.

harrygunner
March 30, 2013, 05:05 PM
Here are the chronograph readings for my 3Gen Glock 29 with the factory barrel and a standard 17# recoil spring:

Underwood Ammo - Altitude: 3221 ft, Temperature: 48 degrees, Barometric pressure: 26.9 inHg

180gr XTP : 1263, 1266, 1255, 1253, 1299 : avg 1267 ft/s 640 ft-lb
200gr XTP : 1133, 1120, 1141, 1153, 1170 : avg 1143 ft/s 579 ft-lb
220gr HC : 1075, 1082, 1084, 1104, 1094 : avg 1088 ft/s 577 ft-lb

wild cat mccane
March 30, 2013, 06:38 PM
hum...

bigwheel
March 30, 2013, 06:47 PM
Well the story as it was told to me..the 10 mm shot the guns apart so they calmed it down and called it a .40. Me and metrics do not play well together..lol. Supposedly both were invented in order to keep the Guv'ment from looking bad for allowing its FBI agents to carry around .38 snubbies in the big shoot out down in Florididdy. They had to claim there was not any better choice out there..so a new caliber had to be invented. Now is this hot or warm?

mokin
March 30, 2013, 07:07 PM
I wouldn't feel under gunned with either. I own a G29 and really like it. That being said, if I was to do it again, I'd go with a 20 and get a 9mm for edc. If you go with a 10mm I recommend you also handload for it. And get an after market barrel in 40S&W just for fun. If you shoot at a public range you won't worry about lost brass as much. As far as power goes, I've chronographed around 100 fps lower on average but as others have written, in the end that's not a big difference.

Stevie-Ray
March 30, 2013, 07:40 PM
already two recommends on the glock 20.

As a hiking gun, that is just too big as the 20 is bigger than the 19. I think a 19 is too big for hiking. Much prefer that weight and space be trail mix Which is why I opted for the 29. Lighter weight and smaller means something to me for all the time I've carried. Used to be a Delta Elite in the wild for decades, but the ugly Glock wins out over the gorgeous Colt in the messy woods. I also have a G20 magazine with sleeve that, If I wish, gives me the hilt and capacity of a 20 and the length of a 29. Mostly though, I simply use it with factory mag, as I have no trouble holding it or shooting it and the butt is nice and small. 200 gr XTP DT.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 29-10mm out of short barrel" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!