Discussion in 'Handguns: General Discussion' started by Driftertank, Nov 18, 2020.
I’d rather 6 for sure than 15 maybe.
I had a Hi Point Carbine in 9mm. Liked it but had some FTF and Jamming issues. Could Only Get factory 115s to Run in it. Also The Hi Point was Not Available in 10MM at the time I got my MeckTeck. Because the MeckTeck would not function with the Trigger Mods I had on my 40 MOS I opted to Buy another Reciever and use it with the MeckTeck Rifle. They tell you on the Meckteck Site that some trigger mods may not function. Suprisingly even as little as Changing the connector to a ghost connector would cause it not to fire. Being on such a heavy rifle the factory Glock Trigger was Fine especially with a 25 cent trigger job. Can be a lot of difference in Glock stock triggers also. The one I took out to replace with the Ultimate Adjustable Trigger by LoneWolf was the better one so I put it in the Carbine receiver. Still have not figured Out if it is possible to run any other trigger Mods on the Meckteck yet. I do know the connector change did not work but I don't know for sure if the Ultimate Trigger with out any other trigger mods would work. May have to try a switch a see what happen. I realkly do like That LW Trigger. So I do Have a Complete Pistol and Carbine in 10mm.
k, that didn't answer my question. Do you see no use to a 10mm carbine that doesn't use Glock mags? Or do you not see a use for a carbine that uses magazines that can't be used in your pistol?
I'm thinking it's worth trying the Hi Point before I try other 10mm carbines that use Glock mags.
Real 10mm Ammo was either old stock Norma or Talons which were still out there. Or new silvertips. You could also order from Georgia arms or BVAC back then if you wanted more .40ish level ammo. American eagle/ Remington/Hornady custom were also available but high.
So yeah it is definitely made progress.
I Do Like having a carbine and a pistole that Use the same mags. But i would still Buy What i wanted regardless of brand or mags. To me more of a conveniance than a neccesity. In Other words I would Not Base my decision based on Mags.
I asked others and it seems everyone is in agreement it's not necessary and, for 10mm, I think agree largely because when it comes to 10mm carbines pretty much all of them except the Hi Point use Glock mags. Someone said that to them it's more important that the pistol and carbine both shoot the same ammo well and I hadn't been thinking about that, but it's true and that's also what I want.
So, I figure that I'm going to try the Hi Point 10mm first and see if it shoots the 10mm handloads I use for my Glock. If it does, success, I'll live with the Hi Point, if not, I'll sell it and have to try the TNW survival rifle in 10mm next.
Same here. I can get a Kris Vector for ~$1250 with the military discount but I think I’ll toy with the Hi Point in the HTA stock for a bit first. I found Hi Point 10 round mags for about $16 each on Gunbroker so I grabbed a couple extra.
Hard to say--it depends on the situation. I've got a Model 28 and I've shot a lot of "proper loads" through it over the years. I've also got a Model 29 that I've shot a lot of full power loads through. I don't have a Model 57 or 58, so I'm going to use my Model 29 for this comparison. There's no question that a good .44 mag load through my Model 29 trumps the 10mm loads in my new Springfield XDm.
If I have to walk through the back alleys of a dangerous neighborhood, I'll take the 10mm hands down. If I'm hiking in bear country, I'll take the Model 29 hands down.
Kind of an apples vs. oranges situation.
6 vs 15? It's not even about the capacity, it's about the having a gun with you vs not and the 10mm is easier and thus much more likely to be brought, not too mention if we're talking strictly concealed carrying here.
Because A LOT of people are drinking the 10mm-for-bears Kool Aid and it will invariably get brought up every time.
Why is a 10mm considered so much easier to carry? I carry an LC9 every day because it's slim and light. A full size 10mm is not "light" when loaded. A loaded G20 is 40oz, or about the same as a 629 Mountain Gun. If you can conceal a G20, you can conceal a 4" revolver. The subcompacts are a different story.
See above- my apologies. Recovering from surgery
"Why is a 10mm considered so much easier to carry? I carry an LC9 every day because it's slim and light. A full size 10mm is not "light" when loaded. A loaded G20 is 40oz, or about the same as a 629 Mountain Gun. If you can conceal a G20, you can conceal a 4" revolver. The subcompacts are a different story"
One good thing on the G20, you can keep pumping the extra 7 rounds in the bear while he's chewing on you. After your 6th and final with the 629 you can only bludgeon him until you bleed out <sarcasm>
I don't agree about the 10mm-for-bears being Kool Aid-level crazy. Last summer, prior to hiking in Colorado, I tested my G20 and my SW629 for bear defense by shooting them into 2x8s. 10mm with 180 FMJs penetrated within an inch or two of the 629 with 240gr FMJ, both going through 5 2x8s and into the newspaper behind. Granted, the wider, heavier bullet of the 44 earns extra points. But the goal of bear defense is to break bones, right? 10mm penetrates probably 95% as far as .44 mag, at least with the loads I tested. And since my aim was a balance between critter defense and two-legged predator defense, the 10mm is pretty competitive. The 15 rounds carried extra weight in that consideration. (So naturally, on my hiking trip, I carried the 629. Because Dirty Harry, dammit. LOL). I guess my point is that carrying a 10mm for bear protection doesn't strike me as drinking Kool Aid.
A few points. First is that shooting into wood boards doesn't really tell us anything useful. Bullets don't behave in wood the way they behave in tissue. Secondly, I can understand why the two bullets you tested performed within an inch or two of each other, although an inch or two might be as much as 20% and that is enough to matter. Because the .44 still had a significant SD advantage. Neither bullet is optimal, either by weight or design. FMJ in handguns is not the great penetrator many people seem to think. They are made to be cheap and to feed reliably. The jacket is usually thin and over a soft, pure lead core. They usually deform. All that aside, the .44 is capable of FAR heavier bullets than the 10mm will ever be capable of and mass has a huge effect on penetration. I wouldn't carry a 240gr .44 any more than I would a 180gr 10mm. Heavier, tougher bullets are needed and that is where the big bore revolver cartridges shine. Where the 10mm tops out at a 230gr at 1100fps, the .44 does the same thing with a 355gr out of a 4" barrel. We're not talking a slight difference but a bullet like that will double up on a 180gr 10mm in terms of penetration.
I don't take issue with folks carrying 10mm's in bear country. What I take issue with and what the Kool Aid reference was really referring to, are those who somehow are able to convince themselves that it's somehow superior. Either because they think they can shoot faster or because it holds more rounds. These are dangerous things to put your faith in, because you're not likely to get more than 2-3 shots and if those don't get it done, it won't matter anyway.
Amen! Can I get another, AMEN!
I’m nominating this as the best quote of 2021.
First run at indoor range with some different loads.
1. I agree with you on the big picture: no 10mm load can hang with the best .44 mag loads.
2. What do you mean that shooting boards "doesn't tell us anything useful?" What affordable and handy material is an approximation of bone? Maybe you mean it's not an exact analogue for bone, which anyone should agree with, but why is it useless? The point I was making was that 10mm is capable of serious penetration. That's all. If you know of a better material that approximates bone, I'd love to use it.
3. I agree that 44 mag can be loaded with heavier bullets. The 10mm/180 vs. 44/240 was my attempt to make an apples-to-apples comparison with what I had available. The penetration was not a 20% advantage in favor of the 44; it was more like 5%, as I said in my previous post. Also, you are right about SD--the 10mm/180 has a SD of .161, while the 44/240 has a SD of .185. I don't know if you consider that "significant," but the effect on total penetration was not much (~1-2 inches in total penetration of ~12 inches of wood.
4. I'd love to know what tests you've performed where 44 doubles the penetration of 10mm, apples to apples. 44/355 compared to 10mm/180 is not apples to apples.
Looks Like a Keeper for Sure.!!!!
2" out of 10-12" is significant.
Performance in wood has no bearing on performance in tissue. Jacketed bullets often won't even expand in wood.
Why would I unnecessarily hamstring the .44 with lighter bullets to make it fair for the 10mm? That's kinda the point.
And LPPs are currently available, while SPPs are unobtanium.
Anyone want to spot me a couple grand?
Separate names with a comma.