You alleged the reason that the average 10mm loading was 8% hotter than the average .357Mag loading was that the low end of the .357Mag loadings were "considerably milder" than the 10mm loads. I showed that they were not using actual numbers instead of just handwaving.Who in their right mind cares what the average of "the lowest 25% of commercial loadings."
It wasn't something that I was particularly interested in--based on your earlier post, it appears that you are the person who cares about comparing "Low-end .357 Magnum rounds to "low-end 10mm rounds". If you want to suggest another specific method of comparison, I can post the results of that.
You are correct that the lightest .357Mag commercial loading available is lower than the lightest 10mm commercial loading. However, given the wide variance in loading practices across the worldwide ammunition industry, comparing a single loading from one company with a single loading from another company doesn't provide much information for comparison unless those two particular loadings are all that interest you.
I believe I said that in so many words and quantified the very small average differences in the two calibers to prove it.The bottom line is the .357 Magnum and 10mm are for all practical purposes ballistic twins.
The reason I compiled these numbers is because there was a lot of incorrect and misleading information being posted on various forums. I thought people might benefit if I posted hard data providing comprehensive comparisons of certain calibers instead of just making sweeping generalizations or comparing one or two specific loadings or manufacturers.Somebody really needs to get a life.
Maybe you don't like what the numbers say, but that doesn't make it useless or a waste of time.
Last edited: