Revolver in 10mm Auto/.40 S&W

[kayak-man]

Elkins, you make a very good point regarding brass (hell, or even factory ammo) for the cost of a 10mm revolver. im sure I'll pick one up eventually, but that and Deaf Smith's comment about high pressure ammo being a poor choice definately move it down the list.

Saleen, how do you like shooting 38/40 out of that Blackhawk? Is that a custom gun, or all original Ruger?

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

Elkins, you make a very good point regarding brass (hell, or even factory ammo) for the cost of a 10mm revolver.

That is the upside of the 10mm revolver is not loosing brass and reloading is a must for most that want one.

What moves the Ruger $650 conversion down the list for me is (as first mentioned) the cost compared to picking up a used 610.To me I prefere a 610 and secondly the 0 gain in power only leaves me with 3 reasons to ever do it and that would be 1: because I just want a 10mm revolver and 2: (could attribute to A: reasoning) so I could not lose my brass and 3: so I could shoot 40 if I want as well in a revolver. Those reasons are not reason enough for my cause so I don't consider the Ruger option. However throw in the 4th reason if we were talking about a 610 and I may be game. YMMV

 

[Krator]

650$ conversion cost of GP-100 makes it a not-so-reasoable choice. Factory-made 10mm GP-100 on the other hand would be a v. interesting revolver, but it's not going to happen.

 

[swopjan]

Saleen, how do you like shooting 38/40 out of that Blackhawk? Is that a custom gun, or all original Ruger?

The .38-40/10mm Blackhawk was a limited run of revolvers for Lipsey's. They aren't common but there's usually one or two on gunbroker for $800-1,000. These and the .32 convertibles are known as 'Buckeye Specials.'

There were also limited runs of .32 h&r/.32-20 that go for a little less, of which I have one. As I understand, Lipseys also had a run of .44 magnum/.44-40 convertibles which was extremely small, I've only ever seen one and the asking price was over $1,400.

 

[RealGun]

What moves the Ruger $650 conversion down the list for me is (as first mentioned) the cost compared to picking up a used 610.To me I prefere a 610 and secondly the 0 gain in power only leaves me with 3 reasons to ever do it and that would be 1: because I just want a 10mm revolver and 2: (could attribute to A: reasoning) so I could not lose my brass and 3: so I could shoot 40 if I want as well in a revolver. Those reasons are not reason enough for my cause so I don't consider the Ruger option. However throw in the 4th reason if we were talking about a 610 and I may be game. YMMV

A converted GP100 is more realistic as a carry piece than a bigass 610 N-Frame.

 

[HexHead]

Just get a .44 Mag and be done with it. The L-frame Model 69 is very nice.

 

[336A]

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.

Agreed, yes I understand that folks have different needs/requirements.

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.

This is just patently wrong, the .357 isn't being shoehorned into anything its a MAGNUM it is what it is. Ever since the change over to semi auto pistols happened LEO agencies missed the performance that the .357 Magnum offered hence the .357 Sig. From the out set the .357 magnum was meant to be more of a outdoors cartridge than anything. It wasn't until the advent of the 125gr SJHP that LEO agencies realized what they had.
Fact like it or not the .357/125gr combo has racked up a enviable street record for stopping BG, so much so that no service pistol cartridge in common use today has bested it, though some have come close. It is this performance that service pistol cartridges aspire to achive. Please do tell how this isn't as good as a 9mm Ranger of HST?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxXTNzpBcvM

Ammo comapnies put more emphasis on semi auto cartridges because thats what LEO's accross the country are using. So it's only natural for them to focus on them rather than revolver cartridges. This is evident by the fact that Federal offers no revolver ammo featuring HST bullets, and revolver cartridges are absent in the Ranger-T line as well. Since the change over the .357 has more or less been relegated back to being a outdoors mans cartridge with SD being a secondary role. As such this is why there are no significant advancements in SD ammo for the .357, and why there is a narrow range of bullets offered for it in that role.

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.

There is nothing significant about the weight of a 230gr HP as your trying to portray here. Yes compared to a .357 158gr HP it's heavy, but in the context of .45 caliber handgun cartridges it's actually pretty light.

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.

Again this is where your wrong and I eluded to this moments ago. There are reams of data out there of just how effective the .357/125gr SJHP combo was /is when it comes to stopping BG's. I just don't understand why you fail to understand/recognize this undisputable fact.

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.

And this is due to the fact the the 10mm from the outset was meant to be used for SD first and foremost. Other than the 200gr bullets the other .40 bullets are intended more for the more popular .40 S&W.

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

First part is true but then again any full up .357 is going to be loud, and there is no universally best SD cartridge.

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.

I wasn't trying to prove anything, just didn't want you accusing me of cherry picking so I compared both cartridges from the same company.

In .357 Magnum you once again get LESS expansion than from 9mm,

Uhhh no you don't as clearly shown in the link that I posted.

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.

People like me really guy? as I said earlier the 180gr .357 Black Talon was meant for HUNTING not for SD, all 180gr loads in the .357 are intended for hunting not SD. But if you want to use them for that purpose then by all means go for it. BTW the reason that load and all the other Black Talons are no longer offered is because of all the Leftists out there deemed that bullet to pure evil and inhumane However there are other 180gr .357 loads out there if thats what you like, and guess what they will be loud as they are full power .357 loads.

Also the reason why there are subsonic loads for the 10mm is because that is what the FBI wanted. Because real or fulll power 10mm ammo was to much for some it's agents to handle. However that was not the intended performance parameters for the cartridge as you portray it be.

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.

Your delusional or just being plain ignorant if you think you have more options with a 10mm than you would with a .357 magnum. The reason there are no subsonic .357 loads is because no one wants them, and if they did then you have the .38 SPL for that. No one buys a .357 magnum for subsonic loads they buy them because it is a Magnum hanggun cartridge that suits they're needs. In the context of SD bullets for the .357 you can pick from 110gr -158gr so what. If magnum performance is not what is wanted or needed then go with a .38 SPL load that is your subsonic choice for the .357 magnum. Options ok here is a quick look at options for both cartridges from but one source.

http://www.midwayusa.com/find?sortby=1&itemsperpage=20&newcategorydimensionid=15454

http://www.midwayusa.com/find?sortby=1&itemsperpage=20&newcategorydimensionid=15564

95 options for the .357 vs 42 for the 10mm oh yeah thats a lot more options that the 10mm gives you That doesn't even factor in the option of using .38 SPL ammo either which is another 123 options.

Here are your 180gr .357 options take note that they aren't subsonic and mirror the old 180 Blck Talons that you keep eludeing to. HMMMM I wonder why that is...? oh yeah because they're intended for hunting not SD.

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/71...d-hollow-point-box-of-20?cm_vc=ProductFinding

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/84...-swift-a-frame-box-of-20?cm_vc=ProductFinding

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/68...d-hollow-point-box-of-50?cm_vc=ProductFinding

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/15...d-hollow-point-box-of-20?cm_vc=ProductFinding

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

A converted GP100 is more realistic as a carry piece than a bigass 610 N-Frame.

When did the OP designate it as a carry gun? Missed it evidently.

Anyhow my answer to that point is: why would anyone be chopping it up to begin with. IE 10mm =0 difference in performance on the plus side over the already chambered .357 Magnum? So why blow $650 on a gun that will not upgrade in value or performance to be carried and beat up? In this scenario the extra $650 is even more unjustified IMO.

 

[RealGun]

When did the OP designate it as a carry gun? Missed it evidently.

Why am I controlled by what "the OP designated"?

And what do you offer by harassing what I posted?

As far as opinions about the 10mm conversion, there are practical things to discuss rather than disrespect for those who choose to do it. People have repeatedly offered than a moonclip is the fastest reload for a revolver. Maybe that's really what they want.

 

[Richard Head]

I don't have a problem with 10mm revolvers, but buying a GP100 and spending $600 converting it to 10mm just doesn't make any sense. The 10mm and 357 have nearly identical velocities with the same weight bullets in their respective platforms, but you have to remember you're losing 50-150 fps shooting the same cartridge in a revolver compared to a sa pistol. For a hunting revolver I see no advantage for the 10mm. The greater sectional density and ballistic coefficient of 357 magnum bullets provide superior penetration while shooting flatter and retaining more energy downrange. For self defense the 125 grain bullets seem to do ok from what I've heard. The beauty of the 10mm is being able to have a powerful high capacity semi auto pistol that isn't too big or impractical to carry.

 

[RealGun]

I think the GP100 conversion to 10mm can "make sense", if no other guns are available in a configuration that "makes sense" for anything but competition. I am not one of them, but there is a school of revolver carrier who wants the reload capability of the moon clip rounds, and 10 mm makes about the right size holes for a serious carry gun.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

Why am I controlled by what "the OP designated"?

No one said you were but my response was based on what the OP wrote. You disagreed based on an assumption that it had no parameters. Even if it had the parameters you suggested or added it still (as I pointed out already) in reality is $650 towards no power change in a carry weapon.

And what do you offer by harassing what I posted?

Harassing? you can comment on my post and I cannot respond? I could have said the same about your response to my post correct ?

As far as what I offered it may be beyond explanation to the right person. Some people are open minded and some have opinions that remain facts to themselves. No changing the later.

 

[Krator]

There are reams of data out there of just how effective the .357/125gr SJHP combo was /is when it comes to stopping BG's. I just don't understand why you fail to understand/recognize this undisputable fact.

Nope. The data is non-scientific or anecdotal. 1-shot stops statistics have nothing to do with real scientific study or proper statistical data. There is absolutely no proof that modern 158 or 180gr bullets are less effective than modern 125gr bullets in .357, actually, the evidence points to the contrary.

There is nothing significant about the weight of a 230gr HP as your trying to portray here. Yes compared to a .357 158gr HP it's heavy, but in the context of .45 caliber handgun cartridges it's actually pretty light.

It's a very heavy bullet for this caliber. But hey, lets ignore case length and the available bullet range and treat .45 ACP like it's .45 Colt. The bullet is heavy for THIS SPECIFIC CALIBER, of course you can make even a 10m "bullet" rod in .45 diameter if you want. But it doesn't change the fact that 230gr is also heavy in comparison to any pistol bullet out there, actually, it's one of the heaviest common pistol bullets in existence and it just shows that in .45 you have a wide selection of SD ammo, like in any other popular caliber, unlike .357 Magnum, where it's either light and fast or nothing, even though there are many arguments for the subsonic heavy bullets.

38 SPL load that is your subsonic choice for the .357 magnum

Is this a joke? .38 Special is far behind 9mm in performance, no matter how you look at it, what's the point of using inferior ammunition? The idea is to use the most effective, not the least.

they will be loud as they are full power .357 loads.

Less loud than 125 grainers, and that's the point. Velocity is a very important factor.

Your delusional or just being plain ignorant if you think you have more options with a 10mm than you would with a .357 magnum.

Wow, just wow. You can't deal with the facts, so you resort to simple insults.
Since I have a lot of respect for this forum, I rest my case and will not continue this sad excuse for a discussion.

It is this performance that service pistol cartridges aspire to achive. Please do tell how this isn't as good as a 9mm Ranger of HST?

Pretty good. Same could be achieved with a lot less "bang" though by using a heavier bullet - something you actually can do in 10mm, because 10mm gives you access to effective heavy SD bullets and that's the point that you have intentionally missed over and over again. That 10mm gives you choice - you decide HOW do you want to achieve a desired result. In .357 Magnum you have no choice.

 

[jamesinalaska]

+1 to DeafSmith

I am a reformed 10mm-aholic. I had a s&w 1006, a Colt Delta Elite (a real piece of shaving cream, if you ask) and regular access to my buddy's s&w 1076 (a good firearm). I reloaded for all of these, and I even began to look seriously at buying the s&w revolver. I finally realized my folly when I tested some loads through another friend's chronograph and realized that the 10mm would never be more than a good .357 mag.

The 10mm will never become a 41 mag as promised by all the gun writers, including Colonel Cooper. And then I had to face the truth that the $700 I spent on that ridiculous Colt Delta Elite was lost money. (What a piece of junk!)

Now the 1006 was a good pistol but I lost any desire for the 10 and went back to the "King of the Streets", the .357 mag. I sold my 1006 and all the reloading stuff at fair value but the Delta Elite I traded off to gun dealer at a loss (then) for an excellent model 65 which has since gone up in value.

My conclusion: There is a reason why the 10mm has failed; that reason is the .357 mag

 

[336A]

Since I have a lot of respect for this forum, I rest my case and will not continue this sad excuse for a discussion.

Agreed so this is my last post on this thread so as not to send it off the rails, and we will have to agree to disagree.

Nope. The data is non-scientific or anecdotal. 1-shot stops statistics have nothing to do with real scientific study or proper statistical data. There is absolutely no proof that modern 158 or 180gr bullets are less effective than modern 125gr bullets in .357, actually, the evidence points to the contrary.

I didn't say one shot stops, I said effectiveness and if I'm wrong then all of the LEO's that used it must be wrong too, so tell that to the thousands of LEO that used it to great effect. The .357/125gr combo got the monkier "King of the Streets" for a reason because it worked with devastating effect again fact.

It's a very heavy bullet for this caliber. But hey, lets ignore case length and the available bullet range and treat .45 ACP like it's .45 Colt. The bullet is heavy for THIS SPECIFIC CALIBER,

Again NO it's not. The .45 ACP is a cartridge NOT a caliber, it is a .45 caliber handgun cartridge. The common bullet weights used in the .45 ACP are 185gr, 200gr, & 230gr which are at the light end of the caliber spectrum in .45 caliber, and a very narrow range of weights. A heavy for caliber bullet in .45 would be a 300gr bullet. Of course a 230gr bullet is heavy compared to say a 147gr 9mm bullet, could you imagine how silly and worthless a 147gr HP .45 caliber bullet would be? Which goes back to me saying when comparing different calibers and bullets you need to match up SD values as best as possible, then make your comparison.

Is this a joke? .38 Special is far behind 9mm in performance, no matter how you look at it, what's the point of using inferior ammunition? The idea is to use the most effective, not the least.

There is nothing in-effective about a 135gr Speer Gold Dot, 125gr Golden Saber, or the 158gr +(P) SWCHP .38 SPL. They perform every bit as good as 9mm cartridges in your gel tests when used in service sized revolvers.

Pretty good. Same could be achieved with a lot less "bang" though by using a heavier bullet

And it is every day in the form of the .40 S&W. Which is identicle to the old "FBI" 10mm lite, and has now become pretty much standard for the 10mm. This is really a shame as the 10mm with it's 200gr bullet at 1200fps was a really good cartridge. Now the only way to get that level of performance is either to reload or buy from Boutique ammo companies.

 

[MrBorland]

The OP asked about Clement's GP100 conversion to 10mm and whether anyone's got personal experience. Unless I missed it, no one here has. Instead, the thread's largely been a cartridge debate, so while some good .357mag/10mm comparative info's been presented, these debates never seem to resolve and it's off-topic to boot.