10mm vs .40 S&W
- Thread starter Johnny420
- Start date
- Status
Reloadron
Contributing Member
Maybe because some people simply enjoy shooting a well made extremely accurate revolver for what it is? Much like some members would prefer a 10mm semi-automatic pistol like a Colt Delta Elite 1911 frame over a Glock G20, G29 or G40. Just a matter of personal choice, ain't America great?
Ron
The .40 S&W is probably the most widely available cartridge out there. Even during times when you can never find .22 lr or 9mm on the shelves at Walmart I can't recall ever being unable to find any .40 S&W ammo. The 10mm is less available than the .45 acp and usually expensive when you do find it. The .40 was designed to fit guns that were sized to fire 9mm rounds but it generates the power level of a .45acp. Because of it's smaller size a .40 S&W can fill more rounds in a magazine than a .45acp. The .40 is also a good round for IPSC shooting. It's power levels put it in the "Major" category. The 9mm doesn't have enough power to make "Major". Some IPSC shooters use the .38 super because this round generates just enough power to make major but the .38 super is even harder to find than the 10mm and it's just as expensive. In my opinion the .40 S&W is the most popular, easiest to find and is a cheaper replacement for the .45acp.
Well, for every class except Open, making major in USPSA requires a bullet diameter of at least .400. So that's why you can't make major in Limited with 9mm... nor can you make it with .38 super.
In Open, there are now a LOT of shooters making major with 9mm. They're loaded way up past SAAMI specs, but they're doing it.
As for the expense of ammo, nobody is shooting USPSA/IPSC on even a semi-serious level is "finding" ammo on shelves. They're either reloading their own (vast majority) or getting it from gamer-focused loaders like Atlanta Arms.
bangswitch
Member
Maybe not a L-frame, but I'd love to have a S&W 66 or a Colt Python, just to hang on the wall and look at. Two of the most beautiful handguns ever made.
dakota1911
Member
I like 10mm. You can load it up or down if you hand-load. Like a 357 or 44 mag.
The 10 mm actually does make sense to me, more so than the 40 S&W. To my mind a 40 S&W offers no advantage over a 9mm for a carry gun. However, when I go to the woods a 10 mm Glock brings something new to the table. It gives me a weapon that is very similar to what I already carry and have a lot of experience with. With the right loads I think it makes a better defensive pistol for four legged threats and hunting. I prefer it to a magnum revolver because I think it is a better gun for two legged threats, which frankly are more of a worry to me even up in the mountains (and certainly coming or going.) If I came across an illicit grow (which they find some every year in the mountains near me) I'd rather have a 10 mm Glock than a Ruger Red Hawk. If I ran into any of the critters that cause me concern in the woods around here, I'd rather have a G20 than a G17 or even a G22. Although I own multiple guns chambered in 40 S&W, for me it is a cartridge I have little use for and prefer either 9x19 or more of a step up.
The 10 mm isn't going to be the best choice for defense for most people IMHO. But neither is 40 S&W. The very same things that led many LEO users to the go to 40 S&W are now leading agencies to go back to 9x19 in droves. The fact that 10 mm is not the most sensical choice for most LEO or armed citizens around town doesn't mean that it might not have a useful role outside of that.
As to the availability of ammo. 10 mm is a hand loaders cartridge IMHO. Like 357 mag you don't really get what you can out of that cartridge with a lot of factory loads and its versatility lends its self to hand loading.
The 10 mm isn't going to be the best choice for defense for most people IMHO. But neither is 40 S&W. The very same things that led many LEO users to the go to 40 S&W are now leading agencies to go back to 9x19 in droves. The fact that 10 mm is not the most sensical choice for most LEO or armed citizens around town doesn't mean that it might not have a useful role outside of that.
As to the availability of ammo. 10 mm is a hand loaders cartridge IMHO. Like 357 mag you don't really get what you can out of that cartridge with a lot of factory loads and its versatility lends its self to hand loading.
Last edited:
Monac
Member
Girodin, maybe I have not read this thread closely enough, but I don't understand what you mean by that. Do you mean the qualities that led law enforcement agencies to pass over the 10mm in favor of the 40 S&W are now leading them to drop 40 S&W for 9x19mm? That is, too much recoil and smaller magazine capacity?
Also, I thought people liked 40 S&W because it had somewhat more kinetic energy than 9x19mm. Sort of like preferring 38 Special +P to standard 38 Special.
Last edited:
Yes. The fact is that in a gun of similar size most people will be able to shoot a 9x19 better than a 40 S&W when time and accuracy are the metrics used. Given the same size gun a 9x19 will hold a slightly greater number of cartridges. When it comes to shooting people with modern hollow points terminal ballistics are basically a wash. At least one of the head firearms trainers for my states highway patrol opined that he also believes cost of ammo is a factor.
One thing that doesn't play into it is that 40/9x19 are the same size guns where as 40 S&W guns were able to be smaller than 10mm guns. That was part of the reason the 40 came to be. Instead of down loaded 10mm in a big gun a smaller case in a smaller gun made more sense. In sum, yes LEAs are moving back to 9x19 because its easier to shoot well and there is no real terminal ballistics advantage to the 40 S&W.
It does have more kinetic energy (when comparing apples to apples). However, that doesn't really mean it has better terminal ballistics. Those are two distinct inquiries.
Monac
Member
Thanks, Girodin!
- Status
