Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Caliber Corner' started by vandros, Jan 26, 2013.
Thats exactly why I'm a big believer in heavier rounds.
Same here. 165 is the lightest I prefer in 10mm and 140 in 357mag - aside from 100% copper bullets which are longer for weight and tough. They allow for decent accuracy and penetration with lighter bullets, especially in a sub 3" revolver.
No way a 125 gr. 10mm Barnes HP that is as long as a standard 180 gr. JHP will get 1600+ FPS like is often claimed. Case capacity does'nt change and the main benefit IMO is similar performance as a heavier bullet with less recoil.
The 357mag would have had an equally impressive track record with bonded 140's as it did with the crappy 125 JHP's of 30 years ago. IMO, of course. Obviously no way to ever know for sure.
They both are good rounds, will just about kill anything in the USA.
Both rounds can work, when put on target.
Ammo supply depends on your ability to buy factory rounds and handload your own - 357 Magnum is "easier" to find in general.
If this thread involves defense, then putting rounds on target will definitely include the platform. Platform is very important.
If Glock 10MM;s work then great.
Otherwise, a single stack 10MM auto or a five to eight round revolver, or a Coonan 357Magnum autoloader, might be the best choice.
Revolvers have MUCH better choices of grips - to fit your hands.
Before anyone complains about how much a steel frame handgun weighs, after a long hard day, I step on the bathroom scale. The five plus pounds I need to lose will more than make up for the few extra ounces of a steel frame.
Now, someday, who knows? Back problems, or other medical issues may demand I give up steel.
Guess I'll through my two cents in as well...
They are both perfectly adequate for self-defense and *SOME* hunting applications. There just isn't enough of a difference in top end loads to lose any sleep over.
If you prefer semi-autos and like the high capacity advantage, go with the 10mm.
If you're content with wheelies, go 357 mag ( I know the 610 S&W is a 10mm revolver...good luck finding one...LOL! ).
In short, I like em' both.
SHOULDER HOLSTER! Don't give up the steel.
On the belt, weight does matter when it's all in one place. A thick belt with some padding and a double mag pouch 180* over helps. G20 is a great compromise... with a double mag pouch to even it out.
It depends on what you shoot the best .
This is a good examination.
I generally try to steer clear of caliber debates, but I cannot let this one go.
You talk about the need for same length barrels. I agree.
You talk about the need for both to be either vented or non-vented. I agree there, too.
Take it a step beyond that, though. They both need to be the same platform. Seeing as how there are very few semi-auto 357 magnums out there....how about let's compare:
1) An S&W 686 357 Mag with a 4" tube
2) An S&W 610 10mm with a 4" tube
3) An S&W 657 41 Mag with 4" tube
All revolvers, all same length barrels.
I can tell you two things:
1) There is absolutely no way that with similar weight bullets and with top end loads that the 10mm will out perform the 357 Mag by anywhere NEAR what the numbers in your post suggest.
2) With similar weight bullets and with top end loads, the 10mm will fall significantly short of what a 41 Magnum can do.
The 686 and 610 would give very similar performance. The 657 would be in a totally different league.
Agreed, & in a Ruger Single Action the gloves really come off with the Magnums.
<~~~~Smith and Wesson 5 inch barrel 7 shot .357, would be my pick.
The 10mm will hang with 357 up to about a 6" tube. I think full-house 10mm would beat full-house 357 from a 4" tube.
Another debate about which medium-bore handgun cartridge is "better", .357 Magnum or 10mm?
The 10mm is not a .41 Magnum.
"Energy Dump"? Is this Retro Week?
Yes, the more intelligent know this, however many who don't reload and are weaned on boutique ammo (as well as are intoxicated on the 10mm Kool-Aid) fail to grasp this simple point and it seems monthly the wheel gets "reinvented" here.
I recently visited this issue, being a fan of BOTH calibers. Current EDC is a G-20. Posted elsewhere:
I got busy with the scale to make some comparisons between my regular EDC, and the Security Six
Caviat: right off the bat i need to state the obvious. The auto carried more rounds on board, reloads more rounds, and MIGHT be more compact overall( more on that).
28.35 oz, empty. Loaded with 15+1JHP= 41.30
1, 20 round magazine=16.25 oz. @ loaded 20 round magazines ( my usual load) = 32.5 oz.
6 rounds of 10mm=3.7 oz
total weight of Gun, 1 loaded 15 round mag, 2 20 round mags, and one round= 73.8 oz for a total of 56 rounds.
RUGER SECURITY SIX
39.15 oz, empty loaded with 6 rounds 158 gr lead 38's = 42.40
1 speed loader and 6 rounds= 4 oz, even
for the same 32 oz of the 10mm reloads, i can have 8 speed loaders ( or the equivalent) totaling 48 rounds, and 8 reloads.
Total package is 74.4 oz for gun and 54 rounds.
Pros for the auto: a bit more powerful round, in an easy to shoot package. faster/more copious reloads. VERY familiar platform, for me anyway. easy disassembly without tools,
Cons for the auto: thicker in some sections that the revolver, BRASS RECOVERY, plastic in construction,
Pros for the revolver: Ammo versatility without the necessity of spare barrels, option of using DA for for general use, SA fire for long shots or precision, greater sight radius, expectations of 100% brass recovery not unrealistic if prepared for, steel construction, modular construction, better DA trigger with a little tweeking, better ablity to alter grips to fit user
Cons for the revolver: greater weight for less capacity, less copious reload that must be performed more often in prolonged shooting, more bulky through cylinder, a little less overall efficiency.
Overall, the weights surprised me a little, as i though that the revolver would not compare as well ( might be because the last revolver i toted was a 44 redhawk, heavier ammo).
In comparing guns, The SS seems a little bigger, but really is not, the glock is thinner, BUT maintains that thickness throughout its area, the SS has a thicker cylinder, but in most paces is quite a bit thinner than the Glock. Loaded weights are pretty close.
between 10mm and 357: not a fair comparison for me, as i have loaded my own 10mm for a while, but have only loaded token amounts of 357, and have not tried to tweek it for my needs as i have with the 10mm. 10mm can push a 200 gr bullet a bit easier than the 357, at least that is what i have gathered so far. i may be wrong.
next is to to a side by side shoot with comparable rounds. This will also be biased, as i have had the glock far longer.
i DO expect the SS to have an edge with longer range shooting, however, as the SA pull on the Ruger is far better. And its does not fling brass into the tall grass.
I curretly run a 10mm, but will set up a GP-100 as my "plan B" gun in 357, as I like them. With some work and tweeking, they can run neck and neck in most uses.
With the revolver you have more GUN weight. With the Auto, more AMMO weight. OVERALL- pretty close.
Obviously the 41 mag will spank both. Just because the 10mm is close in CALIBER means crap. The 10mm Magnum is close to 41 mag. 44 mag will spank 41 mag - and 357 mag, 10mm mag, 10mm and even 38 and 44 special (joke). BFD! 10mm and 357 mag should'nt be pitted day in and out anyway. Apples and oranges. 45Super vs. 10mm is the closest comparison. 357, 41 and 44 mags are different. They are all the same but different calibers. Want more penetration? Go for the 357. Bigger holes? 44. 41mag has what, three or so HP options? It is almost a non-contender whether you reload or not. If you cast your own HC bullets, 41 mag MAY be the best. Depends what you want to do with it and the distance you do it at.
I'm not even sure I would go that far personally. I think the closest comparison, and it's not even mentioned, is the 10mm and the .40 S&W. With the .45 Super you get a larger caliber bullet, a heavier bullet and still have more than adequate velocity. With the 10mm vs .357, the 10mm has the bigger diameter, similar bullet weights (there are 230gr .357's...) and velocity is fairly close between them.
Whereas with the 10mm vs. 40, the bullet is the exact same caliber, they can shoot the exact same bullets, and the only advantage is a little extra velocity. The .41 Mag offers a slightly bigger bullet, heavier bullets and higher velocity than the 10mm. Another way to put it is, the 10mm and .40 have more in common than 10mm vs .357 Mag or .45 Super and certainly the .41 Mag.
Monkey Magnum mentality.
10mm is essentially a 357 clone for a pistols (vs a revolver). Great round but not what many try to turn it into by using over pressure ammo. The original Norma 200gr ammo at 1200fps was over pressure.
Just how are you defining "Over Pressure" ??