Revolver in 10mm Auto/.40 S&W

Status
Not open for further replies.

BlindJustice

Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
2,798
Location
Pullman, WA
Out of production models
S&W 610 aren't pentiful on gunbroker
S&W 310 Nightguard was short lived
S&W 640 .40 S&W with Titanium cylinder

Clements Custom Guns offers

Ruger GP 100 .357 Mag Conversion to 10mm AUto / .40 S&W w/moon clips

http://www.clementscustomguns.com/gp100.html

The moon clips must be common with the 610 ?

Anybody had this done?

Seems the price is more than used 610s go for.

R-
 
Probably easier to get the configuration a shooter wants by using the cheaper Ruger as a base gun. The three 610's on Gunbroker are currently $1,000+ but all pretty much identical, 3 7/8 inch barrels. I'd want a longer barrel so I would have to either wait for a 610 to show up in the configuration I want at unknown cost and time, or send in the Ruger for conversion at a known cost and estimated wait time.


I generally prefer S&W double actions, the 610 with an 8" barrel is on my list but I also want to convert a 4 5/8" .357 Blackhawk to .40 s&w.
 
I think the GP 100 would be 8? oz lighter, but still have enough
weight to tame recoil

I agree about Bbl. Len. S&W did a couple of runs of 5" Bbl. 610s
in the 1990s Saw an 8" 610 getting up above $1500

I have 1911s in .45 ACP & a S&W 625 5" Bbl..45 ACP w/moon clips so I
know the drill. it's 45 oz empty the 610 3 7/8" Bbl. was listed at
47 oz. what's a 6" GP 100 40 oz?

Clements has a price for shortening a 6" GP 100 and make it a 5"
& tune & Bowen Rough Country rearr sight it just goes on


R-
 
Jim, I don't have a GP 100 my shooting buddy does, and he has a Glock
20 - the conversion will be a short conversation on the way to or fro to
the range. I've looked at the Bowen Packages, sigh and those
aren't cheap either. Anyway, I've got mods for a stock Colt Commander
next in line.

R-
 
650 DOESNT sound too bad for custom gun smithing... I may have to look into that myself
 
Why would anyone pay $650 to convert a GP100 to a less powerful cartridge and make the cylinder weaker in the process? It just doesn't make any sense.
 
Since when 10mm Auto is less powerfull than .357 Magnum?

Also, f.e. in competition (at least in my country) you need more than .357 to make major, and 10mm is the largest bullet that allows 6-shot capacity in an L-frame sized revolver - and L-frame is also the largest revolver one can carry concealed without too much hassle, so 10mm GP-100 sounds very interesting.
On the other hand .40 S&W revolver IMO makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
Well the moon clips allow any rimless 10mm/.40 cal round with the same case diameter.

So the .40 S&W is a 'short' round. Plenty of .40 S&W ammo, more than 10mm I'll say that.

As for which is more powerful, .357 or 10mm, keep in mind the revolver has a flash gap and thus velocities will be a bit lower.

Take Buffalo Bore ammo.

.357 Magnum from a 3 inch revolver.

a. Item 19A/20-180gr. Hard cast LFN = 1302 fps

And 10mm 180 gr from a Glock.

1311 fps - Glock model 20 4.6 inch barrel

Well that is kind of shocking, right?

And 200 grain 10mm..

1. 1198 fps - Glock model 20 4.6 inch barrel

So I'll keep my 3 inch GP100 .357 as is.

Deaf
 
I know .40 is the shorter rounf, my point was, making a revolver that can only fire .40 makes little sense.
I know 10mm can be loaded v. hot, underwood ammo f.e. makes 10mm ammunition that's even more powerfull. The point is - there's no real difference in power between 10mm and .357 Magnum, but 10mmm has higher diameter and a lot of modern bullets in different weights to choose from. .357 Magnum? Almost everything above 125-130 gr is made for hunting/target shooting.
 
I know .40 is the shorter rounf, my point was, making a revolver that can only fire .40 makes little sense.
I know 10mm can be loaded v. hot, underwood ammo f.e. makes 10mm ammunition that's even more powerfull. The point is - there's no real difference in power between 10mm and .357 Magnum, but 10mmm has higher diameter and a lot of modern bullets in different weights to choose from. .357 Magnum? Almost everything above 125-130 gr is made for hunting/target shooting.
Uh no, .357 magnum is loaded with weights of 110 gr. to 180. Hunting ammo usually goes from 140 to 180 gr.

Defensive ammo from 110 to 158 gr. (there is some overlap.)

And yes, no real difference in power if both are loaded to the top end.

Deaf
 
Why would anyone pay $650 to convert a GP100 to a less powerful cartridge and make the cylinder weaker in the process? It just doesn't make any sense.

I'll admit it's not a perfect comparison, with limited data, but if you camp are the muzzle velocities taken by Mr Hawks in his reviews of the S&W 610 and the Ruger GP100 Match, it does not apear that there is much of a difference at all.

the closest loading I could find in the two articles was the Corbon JHP. They were different bullet weights (125 grains in the 357 and 135 grains in the 10mm)
The 357 was recorded at 1401 fps
The 10mm was recorded at 1451 fps.
I'd also like to point out that the 610 had a barrel length that was measured at 3.86" while the 357 was recorded out of a barrel measuring 4.2"

So, the same bullet design, from the same manufacturer, gave a velocity 50fps faster in the 10mm, despite it being 10grains heavier and using a barrel aprox 0.34" longer. I'll admit that all of those numbers are very close, and maybe the slightly narrower bullet will penetrate farther. But it does seem to cast a little doubt on the notion that 357 is such a huge advantage over 10mm.

Granted, the numbers aren't all like that, and there are some that show an identacle gullet weight going faster out of the 357, but the Corbon I quoted was the one that seemed to have the fewest variables unchanged (same manufacturer and bullet design.)

So, given that this isn't a perfect test, it's only one sample of data, and there is a small discrepancy in barrel length, I think that it would be safe to say that the 357 and 10mm have more similarities than differences.

The other advantages to 10mm that I can see are:
- ability to use moon clips that may be more user friendly than the ones available for 357 ( I'm not a subject matter expert on moon clips, but I've heard that the ones for a rimmed cartridge tend to be more "finicky" than the ones for rimless. Maybe that's internet rumor, and honestly I never bothered to ask what "they" meant by finicky)
- personally, I find reloading for semi auto cartridges a lot simpler than reloading for .38 special, which I assume would be about the same as reloading for 357. Maybe it was the crappy wad cutter bullet I was using, with the lead/graphite lube that gets EVERYWHERE. Maybe reloading 10mm and 40s&w for a revolver would be just as frustrating, I'm not sure.
- on the subject of reloading, I have several friends that I could "go in on" components for 40/10 and split shipping. I think I have 1 buddy I could do that with 38/357 components with.
- due to the popularity of 40s&w, I have historically had better luck finding brass for it at the range (where it's free if I pick it up off the ground) than I have had with finding 38/357.


It seems like the logical solution is the purchase of 2 GP100 revolvers, so that one can stay in 357 while the other is sent off to become a 10mm. It's funny how adding more than one gun usually solves a problem
 
I went on Gunbroker looking for S&W's .40 S&W they made with a Ti
cylinder and ended up getting hits on

Charter Arms a couple of offerings in .40 S&W

Ciappa Rhino 2" 4" 5" or 6" Bbl. options 6 shot & moon clips
but it's one of the ugliest revolvers Ive ever seen,

& classic Pitbull 5 shooter snub

Why is left to the reader

165 gr. @ 1150 fps or 180 gr. @ 1,000+ Fps

R-
 
Why would anyone pay $650 to convert a GP100 to a less powerful cartridge and make the cylinder weaker in the process? It just doesn't make any sense.

Richard Head, you would need to read some or most of the "41 Special" thread to understand that. Apparently some people feel that 357 Magnum is unpleasant to shoot reasons of flash and blast, and think that a 41 caliber cartridge, shorter and less powerful that 41 Magnum, but still comparable to 357 Magnum and chambered in a medium-sized revolver, would have a lot to offer/.

I may have mis-stated their arguments, so you ought to check the thread itself.

Some other people (me, for one) suggested that 40S&W / 10mm revolver would be a more practical way to reach the desired end.
 
Agreed.
The advantage of a 10mm revolver conversion is that it is a medium caliber with factory ammo and loading data available, unlike the .41 Special which is unlikely to be offered commercially on the basis of the occasional internet fan club, and for which loads have to be made up out of whole cloth.

Me?
I have load data for 195-200 gr .357s. Not nearly as harsh to shoot as the common 125-158 gr magnumbs.
 
Dear Deaf Smith,

I know that there are defensive loadings all the way to 158gr, but above 130-140gr they usually aren't too modern or too effective. The best evidence to prove my point is the fact that 158gr gold dots/XTP bullets were pretty much outperformed (better expansion while still achieving good penetration) by Remington's "ancient" 158gr SJHP (in the tests I've seen) that is pretty much discontinued (no longer listed on their website from what I remember).
Most modern .357 Magnum defensive ammunition comes in 125-130gr, and that's unfortunately a fact.
Also most .357 bullets usually sport less expansion than modern 9mm parabellum loadings.

Now, 10mm Auto has a WIDE selection of modern bullets with great terminal performance all the way from around 135 to over 200 grains. Thanks to modern bullets, nothing really prevents 10mm Auto from being loaded with heavy bullets at subsonic speeds (lower report is a good thing in home-defense scenarios), because these bullets will expand reliably.
170-200gr .357 Magnum bullets on the other hand are basically all hunting bullets. There used to be the Black Talon that was simply a heavy transsonic loading, producing less noise while giving reliable expansion and penetration around the sweet spot of around 16" (over the FBI MINIMUM while still low enough for prevent overpenetration in most cases).



Anyway, I'm not saying 10mm is for some reason greatly superior, but I can see a good reason to have a 10mm L-framed 6-shooter - it's a nice choice for both competition and as a night-stand gun.
 
While I have several 357s, I do have one 10mm revolver. It is a Ruger Blackhawk in 10mm with another cylinder for 38/40. I will never sell this as it is accurate, hits hard, and looks great with the premium bluing and nice scroll markings Ruger used with these. As far as power, the 10mm has the clear edge over a 357 mag if that is what you are looking for. However if you just buy factory ammo, the 357 is likely the better choice. The 10mm has a higher operating pressure capability but a lot of the factory ammo is loaded very soft.

Ruger10-3A_zpsd2f5a084.jpg
 
I'd be cautious loading 'higher pressure' ammo in a converted GP100.

It was not designed for that.

As for heavier weight defensive ammo, the king of defensive ammo is the .357 125 gr load.

I see no point in really heavyweight .357 loads for self defense except maybe bears.

Deaf
 
- due to the popularity of 40s&w, I have historically had better luck finding brass for it at the range (where it's free if I pick it up off the ground) than I have had with finding 38/357.

For the $650 conversion cost you could buy a lot of 357 brass from Starline.
 
I really don't have a dog in this conversation but I would like to point out that when comparing different cartridges people always compare equal bullet weights. The outcome of course will usually favor the larger bore, instead when comparing the two different cartridges you want to look at bullets that have equal sectional densities. In the case of the comparison here the .357 magnum and 10mm, the bullet weights being compared should be 158gr for the .357 & 200gr for the 10mm.
http://www.hornady.com/store/38-Cal-.357-158-gr-HP-XTP/

http://www.hornady.com/store/10mm-.400-200-gr-HP-XTP/

If you look at the product details you will notice that both bullets are near identicle in their SD values.

Most modern .357 Magnum defensive ammunition comes in 125-130gr, and that's unfortunately a fact.

Yes this may be true, but why would anyone need a defensive bullet any heavier than 158gr in the .357 magnum?

170-200gr .357 Magnum bullets on the other hand are basically all hunting bullets. There used to be the Black Talon that was simply a heavy transsonic loading, producing less noise while giving reliable expansion and penetration around the sweet spot of around 16" (over the FBI MINIMUM while still low enough for prevent overpenetration in most cases).

All of the magnum cartridges that use bullet weights above what is the common weight (158gr for .357, 210gr for .41, 240gr for .44) for the given cartridge is meant for hunting. I remember the old 180gr .357 Black Talon as well as the one for the .44 magnum, they were both intended for hunting NOT for self defense.

Now, 10mm Auto has a WIDE selection of modern bullets with great terminal performance all the way from around 135 to over 200 grains. Thanks to modern bullets, nothing really prevents 10mm Auto from being loaded with heavy bullets at subsonic speeds (lower report is a good thing in home-defense scenarios), because these bullets will expand reliably.


Wait what...? so your saying that the .357 has less bullet selection than the 10mm? Sorry to inform you but the .357 caliber has a wider selection of bullet weights available than the 10mm. I've never seen any bullets in .400" over 200gr unless you're talking about cast bullets. If thats the case there are bullets in .357" that are over 200gr as well so that is really a moot point.

I don't really like either cartridge anyway as both are really limited by bullet weight in the case of the 10mm, or bullet diameter in the case of the .357 magnum. Which is why I chose to skip over both and went straight to the .41 magnum:neener: Not saying the either is a bad cartridge because they're not, but at the end of the day it all really boils down to what one like best. Just like me and all the other .41 fanatics out there.
 
@336A It may have been "intended for" but it expanded more than almost all 125gr bullets, available while producing less flash and report and all of that with perfect penetration. I would call that a pretty damn good SD cartridge.

Why would anyone need a heavier .357 Magnum bullet?
To achieve good penetration AND expansion without that much flash and report. Heavier bullet will do the same job at lower speed. I have read quite a few shooting reports where bullets that officialy were just above FBI minimum failed to penetrate deep enough after encountering f.e. bone. Heavier bullet with more momentum and a bit more penetration won't stop so easily.
So heavy bullets have their own advantages and it seems that in every pistol caliber you can choose from a wide range of self-defence bullet weights - 9mm has 90-100gr +P v. fast bullets AND 147gr subsonic ammo, and 147gr is pretty much as heavy as 9mm gets, in .45 ACP 230 gr HP is one of the more popular SD loads, but there are also 150-160gr bullets available.

I just don't get, why do you defend the current .357 Magnum situation, where, unlike in other popular handgun SD calibers, there are no heavy SD bullets available.
.44 Magnum is not considered SD caliber, and .44 Special is usually so low pressure, that it can achieve reasonable velocities and reliable expansion only with v. light bullets for the caliber.

If you look at the product details you will notice that both bullets are near identicle in their SD values.
180gr 10mm will have more momentum than 158gr .357 bullet in most cases, momentum can be exchanged for more penetration at the same expanded diameter or identical penetration with more expansion. Bigger and heavier has its advantages.
Hornady factory 158gr XTP does 1250 fps muzzle velocity out of test 8" barrel. That's way longer than any CCW in .357 Magnum out there.
Hornady 180gr XTP does 1180 gr out of 5" barrel - and 5" is pretty much the norm for this caliber. So as you can see, .357 Magnum XTP is really nothing special and doesn't really compare favourably to its 10mm counterpart. And even when fired at extreme velocities it still pretty much loses to Remington 158gr SJHP HTP ammo, that is currently not listed among ammo types currently offered by remington.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJk_YHO6hDk - underwood, so loaded v. v. v. hot.
vs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqS3ixj-NtQ - factory ammo fired out of 3" barrel.


Also you're nitpicking in a very bad way. You can understand my point without any problems, yet you act like you don't get it.
Wait what...? so your saying that the .357 has less bullet selection than the 10mm?
This one is just horrible or plain not-intelligent.
I'm telling you that SD ammo selection for .357 Magnum is poor when it comes to heavy bullets. That's my point. If you keep refusing to understand, you can go ahead and keep attacking me for things that I didn't say, but you'll have to find someone else to talk to.


@Deaf Smith: and yet for some reason all other modern SD calibers have both light AND heavy SD bullets. If you like light and fast, fine, but different people have different needs (and some like their hearing more than others), and there is really no real scientific evidence that 125gr expanding to f.e. 0,65" and penetrating 16" ballistic gel on average will be any more deadly than 158gr expanding to the same diameter and penetrating f.e. 16" ballistic gel.


I'd be cautious loading 'higher pressure' ammo in a converted GP100.
With the famous US legal system still in place I think no sane person would attempt such conversion if there was any real risk involved.
Remember that Ruger has the cylinder nothes placed in-between the chambers, so there is no real weakspot, unlike f.e. S&W .357 Magnum K-frames or .44 Magnum N-frames. The rest is just physics and engineering - apparently after the conversion the cylinder is strong enough to withstand such pressures without any issues. I would love to know, what is the minimum cylinder wall thickness in 10mm conversion vs cylinder wall thickness at the cylinder notch in .44 magnum N-frame.
 
Last edited:
Krator, I'm not missing your point and I'm not attacking you, there is a reason that there are no heavier bullet weights for self defense ammo in the .357 magnum....it's not needed. The defacto best round for the .357 magnum has been and always will be a full up 125gr SJHP when it comes to SD. When revolvers were what LEO agencies carried, and the .357 mag was what was issued that was the commonly prefered round. Which is exactly why the .357 Sig was invented, to get that level of performance from a semi auto platform.

BTW Remington still catalogs the 158gr SJHP, it's under the HTP line.

9mm has 90-100gr +P v. fast bullets AND 147gr subsonic ammo, and 147gr is pretty much as heavy as 9mm gets, in .45 ACP 230 gr HP is one of the more popular SD loads, but there are also 150-160gr bullets available.

The majority of 9mm 147gr ammo with very few exceptions are subsonic and came about because the FBI wanted a heavier bullet weight for the 9mm. That is the only current cartridge bullet combo that is heavy for caliber seeing as how the Germans intended the 9mm to be used with the 115gr bullet from the out set. The 230gr bullet is not heavy for caliber in the .45 ACP, however a 250gr bullet is. The 150-160gr .45 bullets are realtively new and are extemely light for that caliber.

Fact, John Browning designed the .45 ACP around a 200gr bullet. When he took his new pistol and cartridge to the Army it was rejected as the Army wanted a 230gr bullet which it had much success with in the .45 ammo they were issuing at the time. While the 230gr .45 and 200gr .40 are heavier than the 158gr .357 bullet they are not heavy for caliber for the respective cartridge, which if I'm reading correctly is what you're saying. The 10mm was concieved by Col Jeff Cooper & Whit Colins primarily around the 200gr bullet from the start, again not heavy for caliber. All of that can be found here

http://www.bren-ten.com/website/id7.html

So yes I am getting it but your not, I'd like to know since when has a 230gr .45 ACP, or a 200gr 10mm ever been considered heavy for either of those two cartridges?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFUAmIgR918

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJk_YHO6hDk

Not a tremendously huge difference here if ask me.
 
Last edited:
First of all - I think you should understand that different people have different needs and requirements. F.e. I require high expansion and deep penetration (relatively deep, so the bullet won't be stopped short by a minor bone, f.e. 16") - this can be achieved via v. high velocity 125gr bullet OR by firing a subsonic 180gr bullet with a lot less flash and report.
I consider .45 ACP the best handgun defensive caliber BUT in revolvers high bullet diameter = lower capacity OR higher diameter of cylinder.
So in revolvers .357 Magnum is pretty much the best compromise between bullet diameter and capacity/weapon size. And .357 Magnum, thanks to the overal length can fire both light and v. fast bullets and slow and heavy bullets. Slow and heavy bullets that can succesfully mimic .40 S&W or even .45 ACP performance, but only with a properly designed bullet.
Unfortunately, .357 Magnum's potential is not really fullfilled. It's being shoehorned into a "turbocharged 9mm", and it wouldn't be that bad if its 125gr bullets were really as good as f.e. Ranger-T or HST 9mm. But they're not.

he 230gr bullet is not heavy for caliber in the .45 ACP, however a 250gr bullet is.
It's v. heavy for a HOLLOW POINT. The fact that you can squeeze 250gr hardcast bullet into .45 ACP case doesn't make 230gr HP light. Just like 180gr is the extreme for .357 Magnum hollow point - hollow points are lighter by design - and around 200gr HP is pretty much as heavy as HP gets in 10mm.

You're claiming 125gr bullet is "the best". There is no scientific evidence confirming this statement. Nowadays 125gr bullets don't expand or penetrate any better than 158gr or 180gr, thanks to progress in bullet design. 125gr USED to be the best back in the days of hollow points having problems expanding at lower speeds. v. high speed of light 125gr bullets allowed for reliable expansion.
Nowadays we have way better bullet designs, f.e. 147gr 9mm bullet that expands at subsonic speeds to a larger diameter than most .357 125gr bullets.

It's a fact that there is VERY limited self defence bullet selection above 130gr in .357.
It's a fact that in 10mm you can choose from VERY wide range of SD bullets from 135 all the way to 180-200gr.
It's a fact that faster bullets produce more report for a given diameter, which is further amplified by f.e. confined space - which means that 125gr .357 Magnum is NOT the universally best SD cartridge available and there are situations where slower 158-180gr bullets would be better - too bad there isn't really a lot of these to choose from, while 10mm/.40 S&W gives you plenty to choose from

And really, what do you want to prove by using Underwood ammo that simply pushes the bullet as fast as possible - so there is little difference, because at 1400 fps the bullet expansion is taken to the extreme. The idea is not to produce as much report, flash and recoil as possible, the point is to get the best effect at normal velocities. In case of 10mm ammunition you have more options and way more modern bullets in different weights. In .357 Magnum you once again get LESS expansion than from 9mm, with a lot more recoil, report and flash. What's the point? The main advantage of .357 Mag over 9mm nowadays is that .357 can use a LOT heavier hollow points.
This advantage can be translated into v. good expansion and good penetration without too much report - like in case of Black Talon. Unfortunately, thanks to people like you, ammunition manufacturers are not interested in using full potential of .357 Magnum.



So, to make it simplier for you to understand: in 10mm one can CHOOSE what kind of bullet he wants. In .357 Magnum you have no choice, you either choose ear-splitting 125gr loadings, or you're limiting your choice drastically.
Of course you can keep claiming that the less choice the better and that 125gr .357 Mag in some magical way is superior to everything else, even though most 125gr .357 Mag bullets expand less than 9mm counterparts while producing a lot more noise and flash.

So, to sum it up:
10mm in revolver is a lot better if you want to choose from a wide variety of bullets, from v. fast and light, to heavy subsonic.
.357 Magnum if you don't want to have a choice.
How is not having a choice better?
I don't know, maybe you should explain.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top