10mm v 357 magnum

[willypete]

10mm is ~ |____| this big.
.357" is ~ |___| this big.

They both leave O-shaped holes in stuff.

You probably won't notice a difference of .043" on a hole made in the elastic skin of a furry critter that's several feet long.

Can we move on to the 9mm vs .45 debate? Because that one isn't played out, either.

 

[Cluster Bomb]

357 all the way. people who post ballistics and base everything on fps are....well dumb.

you must take into consideration the flight path..is it flat or does it peak.

what is the fps out of the muzzle? i prefer the magnums as i can get loads that have low muzzle energy and hit my target at short ranges and not worry about what i may hit on the other side opposed to a 1200+ fps out of the muzzle.

and i belive that only an idiot believes an auto-loader is far more reliable than a revolver. I have shot many autos, glocks, rugers, hi point, walthers, colt etc. and all have had a jam of sorts. except the hi point and colt. while my revolvers all fired their rounds. just because its a glock does not exclude it from fact or an exception.

S&W makes a revolver in 357 with 8 rounds, its called 627 i belive.

 

[Texan Scott]

Both catridges are generally capable of violent overpenetration on human targets, even with hollowpoint ammunition, I.E., both cartridges have more kinetic energy at the muzzle than they can effectively use in a human torso. Since the 'bad guy' is unlikely to care which one you use, it probably doesn't matter in any practical way.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Sorry but I find these caliber wars to be ridiculous. Hit what you aim at with a good self defense round and call it good.

I for one carry a .38 Special loaded with 135gr Speer SD ammo and I feel just fine about it.

 

[NG VI]

and i belive that only an idiot believes an auto-loader is far more reliable than a revolver. I have shot many autos, glocks, rugers, hi point, walthers, colt etc. and all have had a jam of sorts. except the hi point and colt. while my revolvers all fired their rounds. just because its a glock does not exclude it from fact or an exception.

Most of the people who feel that way do because it's rare to have an auto malfunction in a way that isn't correctable in a second or two, while nearly any malfunction beyond a dead primer is a fatal error in a revolver until you can get it home and work with it.

Personally I'd rather flee in terror while yanking the slide a couple of times than be totally chickenloved because a poorly crimped cartridge let it's bullet bind my revolver up irretrievably.

 

[Inebriated]

10mm get's my vote because of platform. I prefer autos (and the gen 4 G20 is out, so that's even sweeter), and I prefer 15 rounds instead of 6.

 

[Big Lew in NC]

357 is statistically the best man-stopper. BUT the 10mm can be found in 15+1. My pillow gun is a GP100 with a 6" barrel and 125 g 357. You also get more jams with an auto than with a revolver but it is indeed what you feel most comfortable with and perform better with in a very stressful situation. As many have said either is good. I have an auto but prefer the 357 because of my confidence I can mow down someone with it and quickly.

 

[NG VI]

357 is statistically the best man-stopper.

Whose statistics, Marshall and Sanow's? I believe they did their best to try to get a handle on ballistics, and failed, and then took a lot of Cor-Bon's money for product placement.

I don't believe anyone is concerned with what gun is best for mowing people down.

And are your autos so unreliable that you can't even make it through a single magazine without a malfunction? Where are all of these pistols that can't even go through a few shooting sessions using properly manufactured ammunition without choking?

I've never bought one that did that, except the CZ 40B I had, with a single magazine, that I had been monkeying with the baseplate on and put the spring back in it upside down. Yes there was a right way to do it.

No I didn't do it that way. Otherwise a pistol choking has been a pretty rare thing for me, even when I've tried.

 

[918v]

Which has more stopping power and devastating effect on the BG?

Don't use anything with "Magnum" in the name or the 10mm. Don't use handloads, or hollow points. Don't use a firearm. The safest bet, legally, is to just run away in a zig-zag pattern taking care not to offend other motorists and pedestrians.

But if you insist on using the 10mm, it does make a bigger and deeper hole. In some loads it penetrates 15" and expands to 1" in ballistic gelatin. The best 357 loads are nowhere near that.

 

[JohnKSa]

Trying to point out significant differences in performance between the .357Mag and the 10mm is not easy. They are surprisingly similar when the top-end loads in each are compared across the board--I don't think it's possible to pick a clear winner without limiting the decision criteria to include aspects of the two cartridges other than raw performance.

Neither one of them comes close to matching what the .41Mag can do. The only, ONLY, ONLY reason that anyone ever mentions the .41Mag and 10mm in the same breath is because Winchester made the rather odd decision to load their high-performance STHP 10mm load hotter than their very mild STHP .41Mag loading. The STHP .41Mag loading doesn't even begin to be representative of what the .41Mag is capable of, while on the other hand, the STHP 10mm loading is pretty close to a top-end loading for the 10mm.

 

[357 Terms]

Neither one of them comes close to matching what the .41Mag can do. The only, ONLY, ONLY reason that anyone ever mentions the .41Mag and 10mm in the same breath is because Winchester made the rather odd decision to load their high-performance STHP 10mm load hotter than their very mild STHP .41Mag loading. The STHP .41Mag loading doesn't even begin to be representative of what the .41Mag is capable of, while on the other hand, the STHP 10mm loading is pretty close to a top-end loading for the 10mm.
__________________

That is so true.

I can't even tell you how many time I have rolled my eyes or face/palmed when I have heard someone compare the 10mm to the 41 mag, ridiculous.

 

[918v]

Trying to point out significant differences in performance between the .357Mag and the 10mm is not easy. They are surprisingly similar when the top-end loads in each are compared across the board--I don't think it's possible to pick a clear winner without limiting the decision criteria to include aspects of the two cartridges other than raw performance.

Comparing the top 357 Man Stopper, a 125 Gold Dot @ 1500 FPS, to the top 10mm man stopper, a 180 Gold Dot @ 1300 FPS, you find similar penetration but the 10mm has 30% greater expansion. So how is that insignificant within the confines of the OP's question?

 

[R.W.Dale]

Comparing the top 357 Man Stopper, a 125 Gold Dot @ 1500 FPS, to the top 10mm man stopper, a 180 Gold Dot @ 1300 FPS, you find similar penetration but the 10mm has 30% greater expansion. So how is that insignificant within the confines of the OP's question?

Because believe it or not to this day there's only one degree of stopped or dead.

If 357 is making baddies point their boots skyward well over 90% of the time on the first shot what EXACTLY is 10mm going to do better?


10mm its a really expensive 45acp for semiautomatic lovers with an accute case of magnumitus

 

[NG VI]

If 357 is making baddies point their boots skyward well over 90% of the time on the first shot what EXACTLY is 10mm going to do better?

Is it?

Who's running the numbers?

 

[JohnKSa]

Comparing the top 357 Man Stopper, a 125 Gold Dot @ 1500 FPS, to the top 10mm man stopper, a 180 Gold Dot @ 1300 FPS, you find similar penetration but the 10mm has 30% greater expansion. So how is that insignificant within the confines of the OP's question?

If you do apples to apples, you'll get numbers that are so close that it's pointless to try to make something out of the differences.

In other words, instead of comparing a heavy bullet 10mm loading to a light bullet .357Mag loading, compare light bullet loadings in both or heavy bullet loadings in both.

The .357Mag will drive a 125gr bullet up to maybe 1500fps to 1600fps out of a 4" revolver while the 10mm will drive a 135gr bullet up to 1400fps to 1600fps out of a 4.5" bbl service pistol.

The .357Mag will drive a 200 gr bullet up to 1150fps to 1200fps out of a 4" revolver while the 10mm will drive the same weight bullet up to 1050fps to 1275fps out of a 4.5" bbl service pistol.

If you want to look at the 180gr bullets, you'll find that the 10mm maxes out around 1350fps while the .357Mag seems to top out at about 1300-1400fps.

If there are significant differences there, I'm not seeing it. The .357Mag looks like it might have a slight energy edge with light bullets while the 10mm may have a small edge with the heavy bullet loads. At one point I got exercised on this topic and did a complete survey of all the ammunition companies that publish ballistic data on the internet and did a comparison with all the available data I could find comparing the .357Mag and the 10mm. Basically it convinced me that the two calibers are almost identical in performance.

You can find differences, but they're only significant if you can make something out of 50-75fps here and 10-15 gr there.

I stand by my original statement.

 

[jmr40]

and i belive that only an idiot believes an auto-loader is far more reliable than a revolver.

Someone needs to do a little research instead of just repeating fairy tales.

A revolver given a lot of TLC, kept in a safe or nightstand and cleaned after each use will likely go a lifetime with no issues. A quality semi might see a couple of malfunctions given the same care.

But in the real world where guns are actually used "Stuff Happens". Guns sometimes have to work after they are dropped, dirty or have seen harsh use. Under real world conditions revolvers have far more things that can go wrong. They have far more delicate parts requiring close tolerences, they have many vital moving parts outside the guns frame. Under harsh conditions any gun will eventually stop working, but a quality semi will continue to work longer, and be faster to get back in action if a problem does happen. If a revolver stops on you, it is about as useless as a rock until it can be taken apart and properly fixed.

100 years of military field testing has proven this beyond any doubt.

 

[Inebriated]

If an auto fails, you have a much higher chance at fixing it immediately, than if a revolver fails. So the decision (if ONLY looking at reliability) is do you want to have the possibility of more frequent, but minor failures? Or the possibility of a less frequent, but show-stopping failure?

 

[kozak6]

Ah, the ol' 10mm vs .357 debate.

Ballistically, the two are really close enough that it seems a bit disingenuous to argue about it.

For defense purposes, it really seems to distill down to one or two very personal questions:
1) Do you reload?
2) Revolver or Glock?

The 10mm is really a reloader's cartridge. If you currently reload or plan on taking it up, it would be a fine choice since you will pretty much need to anyways. Otherwise, the .357 is the way to go.

As for pistol choice, it's pretty much Glock (full size or compact) vs a wide variety of revolvers from many manufacturers over decades and decades. If you can Glock it, good for you and please, tell us how superior your selection is. If revolvers are ok, that's also quite wonderful.

Really, it's more personal preference than anything.