Ammo differences

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by mrbladedude, Nov 16, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mrbladedude

    mrbladedude Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2011
    Messages:
    213
    Location:
    Oregon
    Small difference between these two however for animal defense in North America ( no Grizzly ), which is better ?

    Screenshot_20161116-064347.png
     
  2. badkarmamib

    badkarmamib Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,243
    Location:
    VA
    All else being equal, muzzle energy will have the most impact. At distance (>200 yards), heavier bullets will (generally) retain their energy better, but 10MM isn't a distance round. So, I would use the 220-grain. Heavier bullet, hitting with more energy, (USUALLY) means more damage.
     
  3. Randy in Arizona

    Randy in Arizona Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Messages:
    434
    Location:
    East of the Democratic People's Republic of Tucson
    I doubt that the bear would be able to tell the difference.
    I would go with the heavier bullet for deeper penetration.

    418
     
  4. Tirod

    Tirod Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    5,292
    Location:
    SW MO
    " no Grizzly"

    Ok, moose, then, as they can be aggressive and are easily 1,500 pounds on the hoof. Usually encountered near water which restricts your movement.

    Would you want to be armed with just a 10mm in a herd of 1,500 pound animals which require you to defend yourself? Compare that to say, .458 or .375 SOCOM with at least 2,000 foot pounds and 2,000 fps from the muzzle. My point is to show the slight, incremental difference of the 10mm cartridges is largely insignificant in the big picture. Trying to turn one or more galloping moose might need a lot more power and effort.

    Of course, I say that having been out hunting whitetail with an AR pistol yesterday, the alternative choice was .45ACP. It was an easy choice, the 5.56 has 1,000 foot pounds of energy at 80m while the .45 doesn't rate that at the muzzle. Another example of what is or isn't a significant difference. Me, I would buy the less expensive 10mm ammo IF it's been shot enough to trust as a reliable in that pistol. As is, the minor ballistic advantage of one over the other is just one tick mark on a longer list of what to use.
     
    Neo-Luddite likes this.
  5. JohnnyFlake

    JohnnyFlake Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    284
    Location:
    Henderson, Nevada
    With respect to the two examples you give, the difference is pretty much insignificant!
     
  6. lpsharp88

    lpsharp88 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2012
    Messages:
    998
    Location:
    Berea, KY
    Which one is better? The one you can make faster, more accurate hits with. The difference is negligible
     
  7. jmr40

    jmr40 Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    15,204
    Location:
    Georgia
    I'd carry either of those loads in grizzly country. Both are more than enough for black bear
     
  8. mrbladedude

    mrbladedude Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2011
    Messages:
    213
    Location:
    Oregon
    Thanks I ended up getting the 220 grain
     
  9. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Sixgun Nut

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    20,877
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    I can't wait for the day that people stop paying attention to energy figures, especially when it comes to handguns. It's a meaningless number and most effective as a marketing tool.

    What's important with cast bullets in handguns is weight, nose profile and meplat diameter. Smaller meplats penetrate better, larger meplats make larger wound channels. Heavier bullets tend to penetrate better than lighter ones. There could be a real, measurable difference between the two and there could be none. Generally speaking, bullets of similar sectional density and profile/shape tend to penetrate similarly. Velocity and energy don't even enter into the equation. The shortcoming of the 10mm is bullet weight, it is limited. While a 220gr is heavy for the caliber, it is not what would be considered a "heavy" bullet. So that 220gr at 1200fps load is comparable to Elmer Keith's heavy .44Spl load, only smaller. A far cry from the heavy +300gr .44 and .45 loads. Not a load I would want to use on something as large as moose and certainly not brown bears.
     
    DHart likes this.
  10. badkarmamib

    badkarmamib Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,243
    Location:
    VA
    Wow, that is news to me. I would think that a bullet traveling 800 FPS would penetrate better than one traveling, say, 300 FPS (numbers being irrelevant). While mass holds energy ?mass? better through the impact, I am enlightened that the speed and energy have no consequence.
     
  11. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Sixgun Nut

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    20,877
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    Ridiculous examples do not apply but it is a true statement that a cast bullet traveling at 1400fps won't penetrate any better than it would at 1200fps. Energy tells us nothing useful.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice