.357 Magnum and .44 Magnum versus 10mm Auto

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

intercooler

member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
986
As you may know I test all kinds of ammo and now added a .44 to the mix. Haven't done any Chrony work with it yet but hopefully this weekend!

I'm trying to piece together the losses in the revolver versus auto for these calibers. I didn't realize until I looked it up that .357 will hold max 27gr. vs 10mm at 24gr. The 10mm always gets billed as stronger which so far my data agrees. However if both were shot out of a 6" auto I might say the .357 wins out. I'm almost thinking the 10mm with premium ammo out of a 6" may equal a .44 Magnum of the same length barrel in a revolver with gap losses.
 
Yea I know low level .41 Magnum. Comparisons using commercial available ammo is a hard thing to do.
 
Commercial ammunition is your downfall. When reloading, the upper level .357 ammo (180 and 200 grain) will be quite comparable to 10mm loadings. The .41 will out do the 10mm in velocity and penetration and can take bullets up to 265 grains. The .44 is all over the 10mm, going up to a 310+ grain bullets. Handloading will get you the best benefit for all revolver calibers, both in terms of velocity and bullet weig6ht. The most equal test you could do is a S&W 627, 610, 657, and 629. All these are identical except chambered in .357, 10mm, .41, and .44. I believe the only common barrel length that they were all available in was 4".
 
I really like both .357mag and 10mm. I consider them more or less even.
Frankly they are about as much cartridge, as I care to shoot. In a service size handgun.
It's just a matter of which platform you prefer. I know either round can be made to work in either platform. That seems like more trouble than it's worth.

I really don't think .357mag or 10mm compares to .41mag or .44mag.
Some say 10mm is similar to .41mag? Look at the energy in ft/lbs. There's a significant gap.
Now, 10mm vs .41 ''special,'' I'd buy that.
 
It's a shame what MFG's have done to the ammos. If they had a standardized load across the board it would sort things out. It will be interesting to see how the .44 testing goes.
 
'intercooler' What gun are you using to chronograph the .44 Mag rounds? None listed in your signature, so thought I'd ask.

The 10mm and .357 Mag have performance ranges that overlay quite a bit. The fringe areas are up for discussion, but their ballistic ranges are very similar.

Personally, I see no reason for comparing a 10mm to a .44 Mag. They are simply too different. I have 340gr .44 Mag rounds that are spec'ed to leave my 5.5" Ruger at 1400 ft/s for about 1480 ft-lb of energy. Very different from a 10mm.
 
Commercial ammunition is your downfall. When reloading, the upper level .357 ammo (180 and 200 grain) will be quite comparable to 10mm loadings. The .41 will out do the 10mm in velocity and penetration and can take bullets up to 265 grains. The .44 is all over the 10mm, going up to a 310+ grain bullets. Handloading will get you the best benefit for all revolver calibers, both in terms of velocity and bullet weig6ht. The most equal test you could do is a S&W 627, 610, 657, and 629. All these are identical except chambered in .357, 10mm, .41, and .44. I believe the only common barrel length that they were all available in was 4".
Click to expand...

While it is true that the most common heavy bullet available for the .41 is 265gr, there sre versions of the SSK out there. The SSK bullets will run anywhere from 275gr to 300gr. There is a article in the recent Hanloader mag done by John Haviland, he got 1354fps with a 275gr SSK bulletfrom his 6.5" Ruger BH. However I do feel that the 265gr bullet really is a better fit for a heavy weight bullet in the .41 magnum.

I think that the 10mm would be more compareable to a .41SPL if there was such a animal.
 
Oh. I have a Redhawk 7.5" barrel. I'm going to concentrate on the 180gr bullets since they are there all three.


I got 1409 FPS/800 LBS yesterday out of the Hunter 6" using 180's. Curious to see what the Redhawk spits them out at this weekend. I know it will lose some but want to see how close they come.
 
Power loss in the barrel cylinder gap in revolvers is highly exaggerated.

My 6" 45acp revolver gives consistently higher velocities than a 5" 1911.
 
If you load a 180gr bullet in a .44mag, to it's full potential. It would exceed .357 &10mm, by a large margine (heh-heh, I almost said ''large Marge,'' heh-heh).

It's like saying... ''I'll compare a Camaro to a Corvette. After all they're both fast cars, right? Since they both have two doors and a V-8. I wonder which will win a race? Just to be fair, I'll put the same brand of tire on both of them.
Hmm...I think the Camaro's got a shot. After all the track will be the same length for both cars.''
 
Creek you are. Lots of things come into play. Barrel lengths, auto/revolver, good ammo/bad ammo.

This is ruling out handloads. Just factory available.
 
You comparing the three against each other, right?
Are you talking just, commercial, self defense ammo?

180gr .357mag & 10mm are heavier for caliber, than a .44mag. The amount of powder available to propel a 180gr bullet in a .44mag is substantial, compared to the other two. With less pressure to boot.

As far as barrel lengths and cylinder gaps and such. Are seeing if you can devise a scenario where-in the smaller two calibers can match the .44? With a given bullet weight, making velocity the measureing stick? Assuming of course you handicap the .44, enough to skew the results?
 
I have a S&W 610 (10mm) w/ the 6" barrel. I shoot 200gr bullets at approx. 1350 fps, give or take. Looks to be around 800 FPE at the muzzle.

I don't know how this compares to a 6" 357, maybe someone can post up their numbers for comparison. I *suspect* a standard load here is more like 600 FPE at the muzzle.

I used to own a 6.5" S&W 629 (44 mag). It was definitely more powerful, more like 1100 FPE at the muzzle. Kicked a lot harder, too. (same frame, same length, ect..)
 
I'll be looking forward to your Speer Gold Dot tests in ballistic gel between the three calibers, also the Nosler Partitions and Swift A-frames. :)
 
parisite said:
Power loss in the barrel cylinder gap in revolvers is highly exaggerated.

My 6" 45acp revolver gives consistently higher velocities than a 5" 1911.
Click to expand...
This is because a 6 inch revolver in .45 would equal almost a 7 inch in a auto loader. People forget how the measure revolver/auto barrels and factor that into the MV and ft/lbs.
 
With the best loads a 10mm fired from a 4.5" Glock 20 will slightly beat the best loads from a 4" 357 mag revolver. Shoot the 357's from a 6" barrel and I'll call it a tie. Go with a barrel longer than 6" and the 357 wins. With the best loads a 4" or longer 44 mag is another step or so up the ladder of performance.

The 10mm is a fine round, and my personal favorite among these, but is only equal to the very lightest 41 mag loads. With the best loads a 41 mag is right on the heels of a 44 mag and I would call it a tie personally.

The 3 all serve very different roles in my opinion. I like the Glock in 10mm as my hiking and woods gun. I get 357 mag perfromance in a much smaller, lighter, more compact gun. Remember a 357 mag would have to have a 6" barrel just to equal 10mm performance. A G-20 is the same overall length as a 3" revolver and much lighter.

The revolvers are better hunting guns. With longer barrels you get a bit more performance and with better triggers more accuracy.

To me the 357 is the round stuck in no mans land. If I need or want more than the 10mm can give me, I'd jump straight to the 44. With the wide variety of loads available I can shoot 44 specials and have much less recoil and blast than 357's, and with hotter loads can far outperform either.

With full size L frame and N frame guns the 44 isn't enough bigger to make carry anymore difficult. The smaller framed 357's with sub 4" barrels lose so much velocity they are in reality just very loud 5 shot 9mm's.
 
I don't think of the .357mag as a ''no man's land.'' I feel it is close enough to the 10mm. It's really question of...do you like revolvers or autos? Pick your weapon, get your cartridge. They're close enough.
It seems the question should be....357mag vs. 10mm. With barrel lengths and cylinder gaps and such.

.44mag is another beast entirely.

I have carpal tunnel and arthritis. 10 & .357 are about all the abuse I can take, and still shoot often enough to stay proficient.
 
I can't remember. Wrote it down, when I read it, years ago.
I used to say, ''just because you're moving fast, doesn't mean you're working fast.''
You know, those people that do a task all frantic and herky-jerky? They think they're so quick.
I move steady and effecient and get done at the same time. But, my results are better and I'm less likely damage things or myself.

Or, it applies to people who feel that they or somebody ''needs to do something!'' About a problem they don't understand. Doesn't have to help, just has to look like it's being reacted to.

"Never confuse motion, for action.'', sounds better.

I also love ''An armed society, is a polite society.'' But, it's used so much already.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

N
  • Locked
.357 compared to 10mm?
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
Jim March
J
N
  • Locked
Hey, 10mm Guys!
Replies
14
Views
1K
Old Fuff
O
N
  • Locked
10mm vs. .357 Mag
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
10K
Deaf Smith
Deaf Smith
medic68
  • Locked
Autoloader or Revolver in 10MM or 44 Mag?
2 3 4
Replies
77
Views
7K
Magnus Böner
M
B
  • Locked
Why do some handgun cartridges cost so much?
Replies
17
Views
938
ezypikns
E
Back
Top