10mm. How does it rate as a man stopper?

Status
Not open for further replies.
For the "45ACP is king" naysayers, David DiFabio did a test a while back of the DT 135gr "frag nasty" ( :D ) load and found that its permanent wound cavity was larger in total volume than the 230gr Winchester Ranger.

That puts some thoughts back in the puzzler, and this from a guy who loves the mighty .45...though I am admittedly a 10mm fanatic.
 
you haven't seen anything yet.. wait until they come out with the 11mm..

--Throws away plans for 10.5mm away in disgust--

Always 0.5 steps ahead of me, aren't you?

Seriously, 9 is fine- so is .45, .357 Sig, .40, .357 Magnum, .38 Special, and 10mm. There isn't a huge amount of difference between the major defensive cartridge. Use a JHP, and practice, practice, practice.
 
Well, I reckon we've already got an 11mm, called the .45 ACP, etc.
We've got a 12mm with the .475 Linebaugh and .480 Ruger.
And .50AE covers the 13mm.
Hey! How about a 14mm handgun cartridge called the 550 Rhinostopper! :what:

Anybody who comes up with it, it's my idea originally so he/she should leave $5000 in a brown paper bag on top of the Coke machine at the Walmart in Irondale, Alabama. :D

[I surpassed myself in silliness with that one! :eek: )
 
No better or worse than the 40 or 45, or a good 9mm for that matter. McNett put up some penetration figures over on Glock talk. Although the 10mm is moving faster than a comparible weight 40, it doesn't get much more penetration.

Of course penatration isn't the only factor but once you get to a certain level, going above it isn't going to make your target anymore dead.

The 10mm is a really versatile round. But for puching paper or defense the holy trinity of semiauto self defense rounds (9mm, 40 and 45) work just fine, can be had in guns that conceal better and ammo costs less and is substantially easier to find.
 
I trust my family's life to the 10mm cartridge everyday. It rates pretty high in my book.
-Mike
 
10mm might expand but .45 won't shrink .



:neener:


If you question whether or not 10mm is sufficient for self defense , I'd suggest giving up on the idea of a repeating handgun and maybe considering a .45-70 TC or the like .
 
I believe it was Irlene Mandrell, country singer Barbara Mandrell's sister, that killed a wild hog at 50 yards with a Glock 20, and Ted Nugent killed a warthog in Africa at 100 yards with a Glock 20.

If the 10mm will work on four legged badguys, it will work on two-legged badguys too :).

Just my .02,
LeonCarr
 
Someone posted earlier about shooting beyond 21ft is asking for
murder charges. Mas Ayoob and others have preached the 21ft for years, but there seems to be some new thinking about that. Something to think about anyway: Rethinking the 21 Foot Rule

How fast can you cover 21 feet? A few seconds? Years ago a few "Martal artist" used to claim that they will win a gunfight with a knife or even their bare hands everytime.

Granted most of this was bull... But.

-Bill
 
At 21 feet, if one guy has a knife, and the other a holstered pistol. I would bet on the guy with the knife winning, but it would probably be close, and definitely depend on the people involved.
 
This past season I took a whitetail doe at about 52yards from a rest in a box stand. The load was a 180 gold dot over 11.2gr of Blue Dot at 1275-1300fps. Hit her in the neck and she dropped in her tracks.

Good medicine for deer under the right conditions.

Not sure about it as a manstopper. I would think that it would be at least as good as the .45acp.


Nice place you folks have around here, think I'll sit a spell....

Steve
 
Ya know, I've been toying with the same questions. Several months ago I had the opportunity to fire a friends Glock 20 and I was surpprised at just how much a pussycat that it was. I was expecting it to spin me around, knock me down and dig a trench with me. No not really!! It was loaded with a 180gr load and to me was remarkably milder in recoil than the .357 mag. 158gr. that I customarly fire with regularity. I say this to say that I'm not recoil sensitive. I carry a .357 snub and have been for some time considering an auto. I don't think that I'm interested in a 9mm but have considered the .40, the .357 sig, the .45 acp and the 10mm. As I understand the .40 is a water downed 10mm,.38 vs .357 mag. The .357 sig is a necked down 40 and sometimes have functioning problems. The .45 acp has been around forever and for a long time the king. Like Mr Mikul, (handle??) when is enough too much. Where does it end? A 20 kiloton nuke pretty well evaporates a large area so why a 100 megaton your just as equally evaporated. Is the 10mm a 100megaton nuke when the 45 calibre 20kiloton will do the job just as well or is 9mm MOAB (Mother Of All Bombs) equally as sufficient. So for now I'm still carring my snub nose .357. The whole point is to consistently hit what you're aimming at with enough kenitics to stop the threat or down the dangerious animal when in most cases the .38 spl will do the .357 mag certianly will do. One can study ballistics tables and test fire untill they are blue in the face and not be absolutely certian that they should be armed with ??????. Is the 10mm too too much or or or or. I have yet to find anyone who can say where the 10 fits. This thread just further stirs my curiosity. Very Very interesting!! Regards Pistol Toter
 
Its not significantly better than any other service caliber. I personally used to carry a Glock 20 but now prefer the 21. The +p 230 grain 45 acp Ranger has about 500 foot pounds expands to .79 caliber and penetrates about 14.5 inches. Not many 10mm loads I know will do all of that with the same recoil.
Pat
 
Like someone said earlier, a .22 has stopping power.
Heck 10mm is my favorite caliber but getting the real deal 10mm is not easy to come by (unless you order from Double Tap, GeorgiaArms, etc.). I've bought from a few local places and believe me, it ain't the stop that people are hollering about. Now, if you're a reloader, you can come across some serious hand bleeding recoil, data. In my G-20, I've made some loads where you can literally see the blue and white flames blow out. Heck, I'm 5'11 175lbs and at times, that SOB blows me back. But, what's the use of seriousl power if you can't handle it. That's the problem that a lot of shooters forget. I rather have a lower caliber hand gun that I can manage than something harsh that I can't manage. For example, my .44 Magnum vs. a S&W 500 :neener:
 
I haven't read the linked article yet, but what Massad Ayoob has written for years is that it is very well documented that a man can close from 21 feet in about 1.5 seconds, NOT that anything over 21 feet will be questionable.

Sam
 
Yes, that's correct.

The gist of the "21-foot rule" is that an assailant armed with an edged weapon, even after being struck by gunfire, can still close that distance and kill you, unless your round(s) causes his IMMEDIATE incapacitation, i.e., "stopped and dropped" or DRT.

Otherwise, if he remains ambulatory at 21-feet or less, he's still considered a lethal threat. While this is derived from studying police and civilian "knife vs. gun" incidents, you have to understand that's it's stated as a general rule - not as a guarantee that you're automatically safe if a knife-wielding thug is shot at 22ft or more.

By the way, the only thing worse than bringing a knife to a gunfight is bringing a 9mm to a knifefight. :what:

:neener:

:evil:
 
I think there was some confusion about my 21foot rule post above.

The article is saying, and Mas Ayoob is beginning to write that direction, that 21foot is actally pretty close, and maybe the shoot/no shoot distance should be moved out further away. Not sure why some folks thought I was saying 21ft was too far to shoot....... take a read of the link above, it's interesting material.

Food for thought at least... and I'll keep carrying my overpenetrating, recoil monster wrist busting 10mm as often as I can.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top