The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

View Poll Results: 10mm vs .357
10mm with 220 gr Double Tap HC's 57 45.24%
.357 with 180 gr Buffalo Bore HC's 69 54.76%
Voters: 126. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 14, 2012, 04:28 PM   #76
9mm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 9, 2011
Location: Land of the Free
Posts: 2,711
I was stuck between a bear gun myself and was tried of caliber wars. I went with this. Because "it's a pistol" I got 1 10x magazine will stay on the gun and 2x 20 rounders.

Ammo is cheap, I don't have to find odd ball 10mm rounds, for $40 a box of 50.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSC01403 - Copy.JPG (116.5 KB, 44 views)
__________________
See user title
9mm is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 04:35 PM   #77
CCCLVII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2012
Location: Idaho
Posts: 303
I thought I posted here a bit ago but I cant find it now. Any way I have yet to see a 10mm pull off 900 FPE like the Coonan Classic does (there is a review on this web page with buffalo bore ammo and the Coonan)

I like the 10mm but with out a cylinder gap the 357 really comes alive.
__________________
Always looking for a good hunt!
CCCLVII is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 06:00 PM   #78
Strafer Gott
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,126
Come along now!

I have a "B" model Coonan with a stock 5"barrel, and I must say it seems stouter built than a Glock, but some of these FPE numbers would have me worrying about grenading either of them. Call it prudence (yellow), but if I want or need energy levels this high, I'm carrying a bigger gun! Rifle powder in pistol cases is fine for rifles, and a model 28 will stand them, but they are difficult to extract 6 at a time. 10 mm has a nice long case with good capacity, but why batter the pistol. I like to treat my guns like good friends, so they stick around awhile. If I want to fire 6,000 proof loads, I'll go looking for a 10mm USP.
Strafer Gott is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 03:02 AM   #79
Redhawk5.5+P+
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2012
Location: NV
Posts: 743
COSteve

Who makes that LS for your G20? Looks different than my latest G20LS from Lone Wolf. My racking groves are finer.
Redhawk5.5+P+ is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 01:24 PM   #80
Viper1357
Member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 86
I'm in for either. Like many have mentioned, a stout load, and a well placed shot or shots, and a damned lot of luck is your only hope with .357 or 10mm and a bear..

For me I'd use either my 10mm SA OMEGA, or my .357 Mag COONAN. Both are extremely accurate, reliable, and handle stout loads pushing some incredible ballistics numbers.

I figure if I were faced with a charging bear, with either pistol I'd shoot'em in the eye (maybe both eyes if I'm lucky) at 30 paces or so.. lol








"
__________________
"
“I never lie to any man because I don’t fear anyone. The only time you lie is when you are afraid”
Viper1357 is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 02:29 PM   #81
Strafer Gott
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,126
Action!

Nice Coonan in recoil shot, Viper. What was the load?
Strafer Gott is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 03:07 PM   #82
Viper1357
Member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 86
That was in the late 80's with a 35mm camera as no digital back then, and it does look cool with the recoil ghosting image.

Also, those were the days when Federal Cartridge made their rounds loaded right. Not the lame standard factory loads we get today. The load in the pic was a Fed 125 grn JHP, we called them "fire-breathers" as they were nice hot loads. Boy those were the days!

"
__________________
"
“I never lie to any man because I don’t fear anyone. The only time you lie is when you are afraid”

Last edited by Viper1357; November 15, 2012 at 03:26 PM.
Viper1357 is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 01:10 PM   #83
Ticonderoga
Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Posts: 48
10mm is superior to .357

Nanuk wrote:

"Pick your poison, they are very close. If using similar construction at similar velocity I am sure that .041 of an inch (or less than 1mm) is going to make a tremendous difference in "Stopping Power"."

I'm glad you wrote this because it highlights a fact that I often see missed - and missed here.*

The 10mm*isn't just .04" "wider" than the .357

It would if we were shooting staples and only measured their width then it would be a fair comparison.*

While the .40 call is only 14% "wider" than the .357, its frontal area is 44% larger. Think back to school days; 1/2 diameter squared times Pi.*

The 357 in 180 & the 10 in 220 - when loaded to Double Tap specs (loaded as God intended), they have similar penetration and SD (I show the 10mm with a higher SD - not sure how my math jibes with the others here).*

So, you'll get a hole about 40"+ deep with either hard cast. But the 10mm hole will be 44% BIGGER. An earlier poster here commented that the 10mm is a superior round for hunting, it is, cause it makes a bigger hole and weighs more. He was chastised for his methodology (too few cases to get a sound average). Perhaps his method is young, but it is correct and time will prove him right.*

I see again and again "energy" used to describe handgun power. At handgun velocities, energy is moot. All that matters is penetration x the size of the hole.

A parallel example: I often see the argument that a 9mm round that expands to .70 caliber is just as good as a .45 that expands to .98". Sure, its only .28" wider - no, it's not. In this example, the .45 has more than twice the frontal surface area. That means a 200%+ bigger hole - the ENTIRE LENGTH of the wound cavity.*

The +P crowd loves the pics of the temporary wound cavity - but in handgun velocities, the tissue is elastic and slaps back into place. The width of the bullet is what does the damage.*

To put it another way, a dime is .705" wide and a quarter is .95" wide. Assuming penetration of your chest, would you rather be pierced by a .7" piece of rebar or a .95" iron rod. There is a big big difference.*

LKilkenney succinctly points out that if you hit a bear in the noggin with eiher round, he's going down. But what about a spinal near miss? The wider bullet might clip a spinal bone that a narrower bullet misses, sending bone fragments into the spinal cord *Remember,were talking about a 44% wider bullet - I'll take a 44% better chance for a one shot stop on a spine/brain shot any day.

And what about arteries and hearts and organs - a near miss for a 357 could be a hit for the wider bullet. Not in most cases, but in some. Enough to where the 10 has the edge.*

Penetration being equal, in handgun velocities, wider is better than fast, heavier is better than fast.

There is no way I would ever choose a 357 revolver over a 10mm auto for 4 legged defense.
__________________
Around the World and Back
Ticonderoga is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 02:03 PM   #84
jmortimer
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
"The 357 in 180 & the 10 in 220 - when loaded to Double Tap specs (loaded as God intended), they have similar penetration and SD (I show the 10mm with a higher SD - not sure how my math jibes with the others here).*"
Well, your math is wrong, sorry. You are failing to properly calculate the SD. Simple math. Double Tap exaggerates their performance data so I would pick the opposite of your concept as who intends what. Double Tap specs are a joke, do a search. Buffalo Bore and Underwood are clearly the best choices if someone want to spend top dollar for their ammunition. Buffalo Bore and Underwood publish accurate data, and Buffalo Bore has approximately four specific chronograph data results from four different firearms for most every product. I would go with Cor-Bon ahead of Double Kr@p.
.357, better SD (180 grain .357 vs. 220 grain 10mm), better penetration, and more energy from factory firearms. They are close and either would work fine.

Last edited by jmortimer; November 17, 2012 at 02:12 PM.
jmortimer is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 03:29 PM   #85
481
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 469
All of this "guess-work" and reliance on the math involved in KE, SD, etc. (I am not picking on anyone here- just a general observation ) makes me wonder why folks don't just use the Schwartz or MacPherson bullet penetration model (of both) and be done with it.

Either model will predict with a reasonable degree of precision and accuracy (+/- 1 cm), the penetration depth of a non-expanding projectile (Heck, you don't even have to do a test for non-expanding stuff like FMJs, HCSWCs, etc.) in calibrated ordnance gelatin or soft tissue.
__________________
My favorite "gun" book -

QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION
481 is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 03:35 PM   #86
jmortimer
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
I think the Linebaugh Seminar Box Box testing makes sense.
jmortimer is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 03:40 PM   #87
481
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 469
What is your impression of the Fackler Box, J?
__________________
My favorite "gun" book -

QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION
481 is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 03:45 PM   #88
jmortimer
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
From what I have seen, water will open up most any bullet that may or may not expand in the real world. But I do like water testing in general, but not as an acid test for expanding bullets. It is interesting to see how far any given bullet will penetrate in water. Brass Fetcher Testing with bone simulant is interesting as most bullets will not expand in gelatin behind the bone simulant. Their articles discussing human anatomy and bullets are interesting.
jmortimer is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 03:56 PM   #89
481
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 469
Yeah, I get it.

I have always viewed water's slightly greater ability to make bullets open up as a discriminatory mechanism. That is, if it won't won't expand in water, it probably won't do any better in gelatin and it is not worth messing with. I s'pose that is the opposite of an "acid test".

I just wish BF hadn't gone over to using 20% gelatin for his tests.
__________________
My favorite "gun" book -

QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION
481 is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 06:50 PM   #90
FairWarning
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 9, 2008
Location: GA
Posts: 814
.357 Mag if you don't mind the rather large grips required for it to be used in a semi-auto. Than again, any 10mm will have a rather large grip also.

But your .357 stockpile can also be used to feed a variety of other firearms, including many classic revolvers and lever guns.
__________________
Mauser Werke, Schmidt-Rubin, Remington, Colt, H&K, Weatherby, Browning, Ruger, Marlin, Mossberg, Saiga, S&W, Sig Sauer....a few friends of mine
FairWarning is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 11:06 PM   #91
Deja vu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 14, 2010
Location: Border of Idaho & Montana
Posts: 2,132
Quote:
.357 Mag if you don't mind the rather large grips required for it to be used in a semi-auto. Than again, any 10mm will have a rather large grip also.

But your .357 stockpile can also be used to feed a variety of other firearms, including many classic revolvers and lever guns.
very true and I love my 357 magnums (one of my primary rounds) but there are 10mm revolvers and carbines as well.

The 357 magnum and the 10mm are both great rounds. I think that any one that argues one is better than the other is just voting for there tastes.
__________________
Shot placement is everything! I would rather take a round of 50BMG to the foot than a 22short to the base of the skull.

all 25 of my guns are 45/70 govt, 357 mag, 22 or 12 ga... I believe in keeping it simple
Deja vu is offline  
Old November 18, 2012, 02:35 AM   #92
Redhawk5.5+P+
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2012
Location: NV
Posts: 743
What about Mr Dillon?

I can shoot a 125g at over 1700fps at around 849lbs (yes 849) out of my G20.

School's out!
Redhawk5.5+P+ is offline  
Old November 18, 2012, 02:08 PM   #93
K4THRYN
Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2012
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9mm
I was stuck between a bear gun myself and was tried of caliber wars. I went with this. Because "it's a pistol" I got 1 10x magazine will stay on the gun and 2x 20 rounders.

Ammo is cheap, I don't have to find odd ball 10mm rounds, for $40 a box of 50.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSC01403 - Copy.JPG (116.5 KB, 25 views)
very nice!
very cost effective.
very powerful (probably the most powerful thing mentioned in the thread (shy of the larger/heavier 12ga. i brought up)
awesome penetration.
very accurate.

I'm pitching my tent next to yours in bear country.
K4THRYN is offline  
Old November 18, 2012, 03:05 PM   #94
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 1,691
Quote:
While the .40 call is only 14% "wider" than the .357, its frontal area is 44% larger. Think back to school days; 1/2 diameter squared times Pi.*

I see again and again "energy" used to describe handgun power. At handgun velocities, energy is moot. All that matters is penetration x the size of the hole.

A parallel example: I often see the argument that a 9mm round that expands to .70 caliber is just as good as a .45 that expands to .98". Sure, its only .28" wider - no, it's not. In this example, the .45 has more than twice the frontal surface area. That means a 200%+ bigger hole - the ENTIRE LENGTH of the wound cavity.*
With all due respect, I do believe you are smoking crack.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old November 18, 2012, 04:08 PM   #95
K4THRYN
Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2012
Posts: 31
nah, he's correct that the area of a circle (which is the general shape a bullet projects through the body) is based on the formula (pi)r^2, and that it adds up to a lot more difference than you'd think. I think he's exaggerating a bit though.

So if you have a circle with a diameter of 9mm, that's 4.5mm, squared, times pi... 63.5 square millimeters of frontal area.

a 10mm is 5mm squared, times pi: 78.5 sq. mm of frontal area.

that's if you were shooting ball ammo basically.

the thing is, 9mm (36), .40 S&W, and .45 all seem to open up to more similar diameters than you'd think. I believe they actually range from around .65 for the 9mm to around .75 for the 45acp.

The reason why the rounds' opened diameter is (by percentage) more similar than their starting diameter, is because the 9mm rounds which open up that wide have similar amounts of kinetic energy to work with (compared tot he .40/.45 loads). So they all open up by about .30 caliber further than they started. Which makes them more similar in final result.

a 9mm opened up to .65 (16.25mm) comes out to 207 sq. mm of frontal area.
a .45 opened up to .75 (18.75mm) comes out to 276 sq. mm of frontal area.
which really is a pretty good comparison of their potential lethality, assuming you made borderline-lethal shots with both guns.

of course, shot placement is infinitely more important than making a hole a couple millimeters wider... and that's where the lethality differences fall apart somewhat. You can be killed with a .22LR, and knowing that the hole in your heart is smaller than what you consider to be effective, won't make you less dead. As a result, once you reach calibers where penetrating through ribs/bone is not a problem, and you have bullets which expand reliably to make a bonus-sized wound cavity, then you start to get really solid one-shot-stop numbers. Is 96% better than 92%? Sure. It's not what you'd call a highly significant statistical difference though.

In statistical analysis, there's a dramatic shift in the effectiveness of variables when you are working towards a 'hard-cap'. In terms of shooting people, the target dying is a hard-cap on the effectiveness of your bullets. So when you go up in caliber to the point at which bones offer no defense, and rounds open reliably to make more lethal/violent wound channels... then the total wound displacement (which yes, .45 has substantially more than 9mm) becomes only a marginal difference. Because there's the issue where once you have "enough" reliable wound channel creation to reach the hard cap with a high probability (to frequently kill the target), then any additional hypothetical bullet potency will suffer from extremely high diminishing returns.

which is fancytalk esplain'n why 207mm of frontal area pushed through a body gets 92% effictiveness, while 276mm (33% more) of frontal area pushed through a body only gets 4% more effectiveness vs. the hard cap (death/incapacitation). Diminishing returns.

Which is also why, 44 magnum doesn't do any better than .357 or .45. Diminishing returns. You're basically maxed out. The only way to get above that 97% effectiveness range is with a bazooka. And even then you'd be looking at a 99.X%

But, that's all way off topic for .357 vs. 10mm to stop bear... except perhaps, insomuch as the hard cap for lethality vs. humans is much MUCH lower than the hard cap for lethal effectiveness vs. a 500lb bear. So while .40/.45/.357 may be 97%-ish vs. humans, even 44magnum is no where remotely near 97% 1-shot-stopper vs. a 500lb blackbear (at least in a charging situation). It's not even close to the hard cap, leaving plenty of room for more potency without wasting it on diminishing returns.

Which is why I'd go with more firepower than 10mm or .357 if possible.
10mm/.357 are both 'good' but shooting a bear with them is about on par with shooting a human with a .32acp... it may or may not penetrate bones adequately, it can get the job done, but shot placement is at a premium, it's a lot better than nothing, but it's potency vs. the target isn't overtly comforting.

Mind you my ccw is still a .32, so maybe i shouldn't talk.
K4THRYN is offline  
Old November 25, 2012, 11:15 PM   #96
Irish B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 10, 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 359
Youll all be happy to know i've gleaned a great deal of information from this thread and have decided to load my 10mm for HD and my .357 for bear. The .357 is always my backup gun anyways. I use a tactical 870 loaded with 7+1 of Black Magic 3" Grizzly Slugs as my primary defender. . . . that is if the rubber buckshot doesnt work first

I love that Coonan by the way! And a .40 is not an option. I bought a 10mm because I wanted the whole bullet. Not just the tip. Same reason I own a .357 and not a .38
__________________
If a man hasn't found something worth dying for, he isn't fit to live
Irish B is offline  
Reply

Tags
.357 , 10mm , bear , doubletap , hornady

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13673 seconds with 11 queries