Question about using a Ruger 10mm

Assuming I am following you correctly it's seem unfair to compare 10mm from boutique loader like Buffalo Bore or Double Tap to cheap 44 mag from the big three (Rem, Win, Fed). Compare that boutique 10mm to 44 Mag from the same loaders, That seem the fairest.

Or compare reloading data that has pressure, velocity and barrel length data where both loads are at SAAMI max pressure for their respective cartridges.

 

While I don’t disagree at all the majority of people hear .44 Mag and common factory ammo comes to mind. It’s that way with most everything ammo. It’s whats common that tends to come to mind for the majority. Of course handloaders and those who do buy from the few companies that sell hotter ammo go outside, if not well outside, the common.

So yes, I’d say it’s much more fair to compare apples to apples, but the majority of folks are more familiar with oranges, and so in that window or spectrum I can see (at least it’s what I figured, and I could certainly be wrong) where he was coming from with that comparison. And I feel even handloaders and those that buy from the boutique guys still see the general factory ammo in that common theme, at least to a degree.

There’s no way a 10mm Auto can compete with the .41 Mag (or .44 Mag) when it comes to pushing it to its limits.

 

Well, I tend to prefer my Ruger Blackhawk with .45 Colt firing a 300 grain XTP over a healthy dose of Li'l Gun. It pushes near 1100 ft lbs from a 4 5/8" barrel. Lately, I take that with me hog hunting in case I have to track a hog in the dark. I can't see beyond the head lamp at night and that Blackhawk is quick on target. I'm pretty good with it, too. I haven't had to shoot in that situation in over 25 years, but it's comforting to have that revolver in my hands at times like that.

 

The 10mm is a fine choice for your needs. I would personally prefer a 220-230gr hardcast over any jacketed load. Although I like the 5" model over the 3".

It's startling how many people try to apply self defense combat logic to carrying a sidearm in the woods. Different tools for different jobs. In general, regardless of context, the importance of capacity in civilian use is greatly exaggerated. Nowhere is that more true than when you get off the pavement. On no planet does capacity make up for lack of terminal effect, round for round. Nor does the Glock's coarse sights, heavy trigger and combat accuracy compete with a good revolver. Of course, since most will never fire a shot, this is more about "feeling" well armed than having the right tool for the job.

This is another one of those nonsensical things you post and then never reply to the responses.

The 10mm is a good and capable cartridge. However, a 230gr 10mm at 1100fps is a LOOOOONG way from a 355gr .44 at 1100fps. The Buffalo Bore 340gr load still does over 1200fps out of the short barreled Ruger Alaskan.

Could have fooled me.

 

"Generally." Would you have used a Glock 9mm? Or a .45ACP?

What percentage of all handguns are chambered for cartridges equal to or greater in power than the .44 Maggie?

Please don't misunderstand: I definitely respect those who make clean kills with handguns. Ross Seyfried wrote of a one-shot kill on an Australian water buffalo with (IIRC) a .454 Casull. Late 1980s or early 1990s.

 

I also agree, and think something in .41 mag better than 10mm auto, even when that 10mm is in a revolver.

I thought from what I've read that the 10mm Auto was the choice in semi-autos for a lot of folks, in black bear country, because the platform plus the power were a good combination, and adequate.

When you put the 10mm Auto into a revolver it improves some, but not enough. The response is why not a .357 Magnum or better yet, why not a .41 magnum? I have found both the .357 mag and the .41 mag in revolvers are quite accurate and with "hot" factory ammo, are quite manageable. And if you're going to be using a revolver platform, which is a good idea if you think there is a real possibility of having to deal with a bruin and defend yourself, then go with a bit more (or a good deal more) power.

Chuck Hawks writes:
" Ballistically, pretty much anything the 10mm Auto can do the .357 Magnum can do slightly better. ...,The 10mm (a .40 caliber cartridge) is clearly inferior to the .41 and .44 Magnums in every way. ...., In reality, there isn't anything the 10mm Auto can do in a revolver that a revolver cartridge cannot do better, so what is the point? "

LD

 

The one thing a 10mm can do better than most rimmed cartridge revolvers is reload speed. It may or may not matter to someone but a factory 10mm Auto revolver will be a faster reloading revolver than a 41 Mag revolver, unless you have dropped the coin to have the 41 Mag cut for moonclips. In that case the 10mm still has the advantage of thicker more robust moonclips and a shorter length case both which make them more robust and a touch quicker reload.

Also don't forget if you ream a 10mm Auto revolver to 10mm Mag you get 41 Mag ballistics and thick robust moonclips for the fast reload.

 

Reload speed is completely irrelevant to me as a hunter. If that first round or two don't stop a charge, you're bear poop. Spray and pray has no place in the woods....or IMHO self defense, but that's another forum. I often carry my .38s and .357 magnums, though. Necessity of the firepower of a 9mm or such is overblown. I guess if you're being attacked by MS13, it might be more relevant, but a bear or a pig, not IMHO. And, thus, my favorite outdoor carries are Ruger Blackhawks.

 

I understand it might not be relevant to some or even many but it is a thing it can do better despite what Mr Hawks says. Spray and pray and fast reloads don't have any interdependence on each other. Just because you have a fast reload available does not mean you have to spray and pray and just because you have a slow reload does not mean you will not spray and pray. Go to a practical pistol match and you will see all possible combination of those two qualities. I have used a speedy reload on more than one occasion to harvest game I would have otherwise fail to successfully take, though never with a revolver, yet.

 

Yep, that is plenty enough gun to do the job, just keep shooting until the target stops moving, don't admire
you work until you are really safe.
A good way to practice these situations is to run around your house about 3 times then immediately stop
15 yards from the target , fast draw-safely- & get 3 of 5 shots in center.
Revolvers are more dependable in a wrestling match !!!

 

Well, I actually PISTOL hunt with a .30-30 Contender most of the time. One shot, one kill, reloads are for losers. I've shot both IDPA and IHMSA and have attended many local pistol matches of all sorts. I'm a believer in you can't shoot fast enough to miss. I like my rounds to hit every time and I'll slow down to achieve that.

 

Who here is getting 1200fps out of a 220gr in 357? Who here shoots .401" projectiles in their 357's? I don't agree at all with the assertion that the top end 357 does anything better than the top end 10mm.

And, even if the 10mm is just equal to a 357, and we are recommending a 357, then what in the world is wrong with a 10mm?


I find it strange that so many people are so against shooting 10mm in a revolver. When people shoot 45 acp in a revolver, most people think oh that's handy and cool! 10mm? Blasphemy! Why!?! It's not a 44 mag so what's the point!?

Put it in a Glock or 1911 and oh my God, what a great cartridge for bear defense!

 

Same here, except mine is loaded with their 200 gr XTP. Not even sure they still load that, but I still have a decent supply. I have some 180 gr XTPs also, but the 200 is far more accurate for some reason in my personal 29. Normally, I carry .45 ACP, but on dedicated National Forest hikes, I'll take the above gun and load, usually with a G20 magazine and filler-insert, depending on how long the hike is.

 

Well, I shoot my 180 grain XTPs at 1400 fps out of my 6.5" Blackhawk and I submit to you that they'll stop anything any 10mm load will and owing to the sectional density of that bullet, could well out penetrate a 200 grain 10mm, though of course, I haven't done any comparisons on that. I've never claimed the .357 was BETTER than the 10, though, but just as good as is my feeling on that comparison. The one charging wounded hog I had to stop was done with a .357 magnum revolver. Of course, my one shot was a head hit at about 5 yards and closing. Stopped him in his tracks. After the shot I had to sit down and shake for about 5 minutes. Guess it was the adrenaline working off. Whatta rush! LOL

I kinda prefer my 165 grain cast SWCs in .357 that I cast and gas check. It shoots 1470 fps out of the same Blackhawk. I've taken a hog with that bullet at 60 yards, DRT. It wasn't a charging hog, just a feeding hog, pretty good size, near 200 lbs. I think that load, a wide Keith style SWC, is about as good as a 180 grain JHP and might just get through a big pig better, again no comparisons made as I've YET to kill anything with that XTP. Both of those loads are very accurate and I can put either on a paper plate with a good rest at 100 yards with that Blackhawk. I don't know if I'd try a shot that far in the field, though. Don't have to worry about crippling a paper plate.

 

Is there really enough difference between 10mm Auto and 357 Magnum from similar barrel lengths for the target to know the difference? From all the various sources I have seen (real world testing of reloading data and the offerings from the boutique loaders) both cartridges top out in the 750-800 ft-lbs of energy with heavy for caliber bullets. Assuming your are using target appropriate bullets I can't see the small of difference between those two cartridges making one noticeable better than the other in the terminal ballistics department.

 

MC, the sectional density on the 180XTP and 220gr Hardcast (.4") has got to be pretty similar. My money is on the 220gr 10bore for penetration but both should be adequate. However, as MCB says, on a real world target, say a 300lb black bear at 15 yards... will the bear care? I doubt it.

My point was just I think it's interesting that so many people seem appalled at the thought of a 10mm in a revolver, AND that they say a 357 is better.

Or they'll say oh a 44 mag is better. Well, so is a 454 Casull. Ya know?

 

Yes, we agree, the 10 or the .357, six of one, half dozen of the other. As I said, I consider them ballistically equal in the real world OR on paper and, yeah, the target ain't gonna know the difference.

Now, since I got my .45 Colt blackhawk a couple decades ago, it has replace my trusty .357 as a pig tracking gun. It fires a 300 grain .451" XTP at 1100 fps from a 4 5/8" barrel. That breaks the 1000 ft lb level and I consider it as good as a .44 magnum. When I bought it, I wanted a .45 Colt just because. But, practically, the Blackhawk is lighter and easier to carry, especially with the .4 5/8" barrel, than a Super Blackhawk. That gun turned out to be just as accurate, too, and so it's my go to for outdoor use.

I own autos, two 9mms (one Kel Tec P11 and one Ruger P85), two .45ACPs (one Ruger KP90DC and one Taurus PT145) and odds and ends like a Radom P64, an old Grendel P12 (.380ACP) and lots of .22s. Most times for carry, though, I have a .357 on my hip. I guess I'm just a revolver guy, pretty much basically it. I love the speed, the accuracy I can hit at short range with my revolvers. I practice a lot at bad breath ranges just point shooting from the hip and have no problem putting first couple of shots into the 10 ring from leather with speed. That and great accuracy out to 25 yards and I see little reason to sacrifice that for firepower. Maybe if I lived in the Houston Ghetto I'd carry my 16 round 9x19, but I don't. I have been known to carry it for trips to Houston, though. In a revolver, I just figure I'll carry a revolver cartridge. If I wanted a 10, I'd find a pistol I liked, probably a CZ or clone because I like DA/SA with decocker over striker guns.

But, none of this is relevant to outdoor uses. Give me my Blackhawk and I'm happy. If I was still able to hike more'n 50 yards without stopping to catch my breath, I have this new model flat top I picked up, a convertible with .357 magnum and 9x19 cylinders. I wanted it for plinking with 9x19 when .22LR was a bear to find and Walmart forgot what they looked like. I still like plinking with 9x19 in it, but it's smaller, lighter than the older Blackhawks I own. The frame is quite a bit shorter and in no way will one of the cylinders fit my old 6.5" Blackhawk, WAY too short. That cuts weight off the gun and that's a good thing for hiking. But, again, I can't go 50 yards anymore without catching my breath. It's a bone marrow disease that causes severe anemia. So, any discussion of guns for hiking is purely theoretical with me. But, I still go out and sit in my box blind and hunt pigs at night with my rifle and take along my .45 Colt just in case I have to track an animal. I still have lots of fun with firearms.

 

Nah, it just takes practice. I can empty (with reasonable accuracy) a high-powered single-action a lot faster than I can a double-action. It's just a matter of getting really intimate with your firearm of choice and practicing to a high level of confidence and competence.

You're right, there is no replacement for displacement and that is why I carry revolvers bigger than a 10mm. All that brings to the table is capacity.

 

At risk of sounding like your typical armchair expert.....

I would buy a used 4” or 3” GP100 in .357 since it will cost less and be more available than the 10mm version ever will be as well as better ammo availability for the same power level.

If your going to go 10mm there is every reason to get an auto instead. Lighter carry weight, increased capacity, more availability pistols to choose from.

I know pure pragmatism is not what generally motivates gun purchases so if you want that 10mm 3” GP100 then I say go for that as well. You won’t be undergunned and that gun will only appreciate in value to boot.

 

Chuck Hawks is a hack and not the last word on anything, except taking up bandwidth.

There is not a huge difference between top loads in the .357 vs 10mm but there is a difference. The .357 will never sling a 230gr .401" bullet at 1100fps. The jump from .357 to 10mm represents an incremental increase in terminal effect. You can never really say you see a measurable difference on critters because every shot fired on flesh is a law unto itself. All you do with each incremental increase is increase your odds of a quicker end.

Yeah, the .41Mag is another incremental increase but it also comes at the cost of a larger revolver. For me, for this reason, the two don't really compete. The .357/10mm really compete with the .44Spl, because they all fit the same sized sixgun. What may be ideal for the GP100 platform would be a rimmed version of the 10mmMag, ala the .401PowerMag and some new bullets in the 250gr range. For now we do what we can with what we have.

 

Well we are talking about a revolver vs. a semiauto. But what you’re saying is YOU can run and empty a single action revolver, that requires movement of two hands (or bare minimum a trigger finger of one hand and thumb from the other hand) to pull the trigger and then rotate the cylinder to align the next round, faster than a semiauto that only requires the movement of a trigger finger to fire and then the action cycles itself? That’s pretty amazing. Can you post a video of that?

The 10mm isn’t a 44 Mag, 454, 460, 480, or 500. The big bore revolvers obviously offer substantially more “power”. But the 10mm does bring enough to the table to handle the largest black bear. It also brings (as you stated) more capacity. However, you tried to minimize the advantage of capacity.

An increased capacity always means an ability to put more rounds on target before needing to stop shooting to reload. That fact shouldn’t be minimalized. We could take that to the extreme on the other end of the spectrum as far as capacity goes. A T/C single action Encore pistol in 375 H&H offers more power than a 500 S&W revolver. But I don’t see anyone advocating carrying that for bear defense. Law enforcement has also chosen capacity over power. So has our military. And no, it doesn’t always mean “spray and pray”. It can simply mean you can fire more without having to stop to reload. So obviously, capacity does make a difference. Especially in high stress situations.

 

I was simply pointing out the fact that revolvers can be run rather quickly with practice and that typically folks think it needs to be a DA revolver if speed is the objective. I can post video if you really want, but that wasn’t the point.

Also, if bear defense is the reason for the sidearm, how many shots do you think you’re going to get off in a charge situation? I think capacity is a moot point. But we’re getting off track.

I don’t know how many black bears you’ve killed, or how many with a handgun, but I’ve seen some pretty big black bears hunting in North Carolina, and I would much rather carry something bigger and more effective than the 10mm. Call me crazy.

 

Off topic but
With those 300 grainers, were you able to utilize the factory sights? I picked up the same Blackhawk and am curious if I'm going to need a taller front sight for the fat loads.
Your load seems close to Underwood's 300gr @ 1300 fps with the xtp bullet. How has the penetration been with that load? My intent is for big north Eastern whitetail

 

I can’t shoot a single action well quickly. But there seem to be a few who can, and can potentially shoot it just as fast (and accurately or more so) as an auto. Bob Munden was spectacular, though I have no idea what kind of load(s) he used. Fascinating just how quick AND accurate he was even from the hip. Truly amazing!

The 1911 was my friend loaded with +P 230’s when I was concerned with getting chewed on. Not much more ammo than a revolver but I was good enough quickly unlike with any revolver I’ve played with.

 

I reckon everybody thinks everybody else is as skilled and committed as they are and with the same equipment. The speed with which a semi-auto can do a mag dump is irrelevant. The speed with which one can deliver accurate, aimed fire from a semi-auto relative to that that can be delivered from a revolver is inconsequential. With a revolver, most of the work is done while the gun is coming down from recoil and the recoil is the price you pay for a cartridge capable of delivering the goods.

It shouldn't be exaggerated either.

Not from where I'm sitting.