[TruthTellers]

OP, you bring up some good points, but the 10mm comeback is a slow, but steady one. 6 years ago when I was getting into guns and watching youtube, 10mm was talked about occasionally, but in the past few years, everyone is talking about it.

For many, many years since the advent of the .40 in the late 80s/early 90s, your only options for 10mm were a Colt Delta Elite or a Glock. The concept of a revolver or even a carbine in 10mm was out of the question. Decades later, with a lot of thanks to the increase in gun owners due to various and sundry reasons, gun companies are looking to grab as much market share as they can, so 10mm, given its power, was something companies wanted to offer to get market share, problem is that they mostly put 10mm in heavy, expensive 1911's because it was cheap enough for the manufacturers to do, and not polymer pistols most people want.

The issue with 10mm is that companies are hesitant to make a full size pistol that's not in one of the big three calibers of 9mm, .40 (because they share frames with 9mm), and .45. Glock uses the same frame for their .45 and 10mm, so why others can't do the same doesn't make sense to me. I would have expected by now that Ruger, S&W, even Beretta and Taurus would be offering some polymer 10mm's, but they're not.

The issue is it's a circle of self fulfilling prophecy. The manufacturer's are hesitant to make a full size semi auto in 10mm because they're not as popular as 9/40/45 and 10mm's aren't as popular as 9/40/45 because the ammo isn't as cheap as 9/40/45 and the ammo makers won't make 10mm ammo in quantities as large as 9/40/45 to lower costs because 10mm isn't as popular as 9/40/45 because there aren't many guns in 10mm to choose from outside of Glock, 1911's, and Springfield.

IMO, there's no reason 10mm, if made in equal quantities as .40, should cost more than .40 does. It's the same bullets, powders, primers, and generally, machines that make it.

The thing about the factory ammo tho is, as you said, companies like Federal load 10mm to not much above that of .40 S&W levels. The ammo companies do this because they're using .40 S&W JHP bullets meant to expand at slower .40 velocities; crank up the velocity to 10mm power and they fall apart in soft tissue, reduce penetration, and low penetration is not good for self defense.

So why don't the ammo companies use properly made 10mm JHP bullets? It goes back to 10mm not being as popular as 9/40/45. I see that Federal recently came out with a 9mm that is polymer coated and is fragmenting, Syntech Defense I think it's called. It's amazing the number of funky new ammo that comes out in 9mm, but the reason it's in 9mm is because 9mm is the most popular pistol caliber in the world. The companies making the ammo see more potential profit in their investment than they do in doing anything with 10mm.

Of course, that's just doing a disservice to the gun community, but companies are in business to make money, not provide some altruistic service for the gun community.

All that being as it may, there are still things 10mm does better than the 9/40/45 or has various reasons for being a better choice than those calibers. More power than all three, higher capacities than .45, able to shoot .40 in some pistols without any modifications are the big three I can think of.

Personally, I'm planning on getting a 10mm Glock soon, probably December. My intent is to handload for it as factory ammo doesn't do 10mm justice and isn't cheap either. I have a bunch of .40 pistols and ammo, so a 10mm that shoots .40 too is nice if I just want to bring it to the range to shoot and not have to spend a couple hours making a box of 10mm.