10mm equals .41 Mag....NO!
- Thread starter samsmix
- Start date
I have revolvers in both 10mm, 6.5" barrel, and 41 mag, 5.5" barrel. If you want to see the bigger kinetic energy numbers it is the 41 magnum. That said the best loads (most accurate I found in these revolvers) have KE numbers not that far apart. The best load from the 10mm is a 208 cast gas check bullet @ 1388 fps for 890 ft/lbs. The best load in the 41 mag is a 240 gas check cast bullet @ 1310 fps for 915 ft/lbs. Both of these loads will consistently group under 2" @ 25 yards. If you want more paper ballistics from the 10mm, just go with a lighter bullet at a much higher speed and you will see the KE number go up. If you want to see bigger numbers in the 41 you can get it over 1000 ft/lbs and more but I don't know of any practical application that the 41 mag can do that the 10mm can't but as I like them both and plan on keeping them, to me it is just an academic argument. YMMV
It's all a matter of perspective - in time!
"With a muzzle velocity of 1,275 fps, the new 180-grain ... shoots flat and packs a powerful punch... the load gives hunters the power to take down deer, bears or hogs."
http://www.federalpremium.com/news/news_releases.aspx?id=511&brand=5&year=2014
You can be forgiven if you mistook this for an 1881 advertising circular touting the, (then), new 180 grain 38WCF load when paired with the ground breaking Winchester 1873 Rifle!
Isn't it amazing that here in the 21st century we can holster a light weight semi-automatic handgun that is the ballistic equal of a 19th century deer rifle!
"With a muzzle velocity of 1,275 fps, the new 180-grain ... shoots flat and packs a powerful punch... the load gives hunters the power to take down deer, bears or hogs."
http://www.federalpremium.com/news/news_releases.aspx?id=511&brand=5&year=2014
You can be forgiven if you mistook this for an 1881 advertising circular touting the, (then), new 180 grain 38WCF load when paired with the ground breaking Winchester 1873 Rifle!
Isn't it amazing that here in the 21st century we can holster a light weight semi-automatic handgun that is the ballistic equal of a 19th century deer rifle!
Last edited:
There really isn't a comparison between the two. Given the same bullet weight, it's simple, the bigger powder capacity and heavier loads of the .41 magnum are always going to be faster and more powerful. The same will be true of the .40. People believe what they need to believe to get themselves through life and changing their beliefs (note that I avoided fact or knowledge) is just not worth trying most of the time.
I read an article about the 9mm federal that declared that it approaches the power of the .357 magnum.
Sure, it does. Every time I go out west, I'm "approaching" that god awful huge line of mountains, and it takes five hours before I reach the mountain.
Things are relative and people love to take advantage of the "relatives". A ford pickup is a bit bigger than a pinto, if you are putting them both relative to a peterbilt.
The truck is a bit bigger, the peterbilt is a LOT bigger.
I read an article about the 9mm federal that declared that it approaches the power of the .357 magnum.
Sure, it does. Every time I go out west, I'm "approaching" that god awful huge line of mountains, and it takes five hours before I reach the mountain.
Things are relative and people love to take advantage of the "relatives". A ford pickup is a bit bigger than a pinto, if you are putting them both relative to a peterbilt.
The truck is a bit bigger, the peterbilt is a LOT bigger.
I owned, shot, and loaded for 10MM and .41 Magnum for years. I admit to being a fan of both cartridges. But still, the 10MM is not a .41 Magnum class round, any more than .40 S&W is equivalent to the 10MM cartridge. Certainly, some factory and published handloading data overlap, but ultimately, the .41 Magnum is ballistically superior.....ymmv
buck460XVR
New member
^^^This. Heck, iffin it wasn't for caliber wars, forums like this would only have about two thirds of the active threads that they do. Take out "what gun for bear?" threads, and you would probably only hear crickets chirping.
Folks repeat misinformation they glean from the interweb. Folks have a caliber that works for them and believe it is the holy grail. Other's just like to stir the pot. Nature of the beast. No need to feed the fires.
Mike Irwin
Staff
Nothing ever equals something else, especially in handguns.
They are, however, in the same class.
They are, however, in the same class.
My bud bought a 10mm about a year ago to wear while fishing in Colorado and needing bear protection. He has never been chased by a bear. He has never seen a bear while fishing. He has a Ruger Redhawk 44 mag he has never worn while fishing but he felt the need for a gun for bear protection. I strongly suspect he just wanted a new gun. No problem with that.
I have owned 3 41 mag revolvers so am familiar with them and the power they put out. I shot a mag full of 10mm and was not over whelmed with what I felt for power. But I understood right then why people like them.
It is a powerful handgun. It has a good usable capacity. It is lighter in weight than a revolver. While not quite as powerful as a 41 mag it is still a step up over the 357 I like so much. It is a gun I have under consideration if a new gun is wanted. I liked it.
I have owned 3 41 mag revolvers so am familiar with them and the power they put out. I shot a mag full of 10mm and was not over whelmed with what I felt for power. But I understood right then why people like them.
It is a powerful handgun. It has a good usable capacity. It is lighter in weight than a revolver. While not quite as powerful as a 41 mag it is still a step up over the 357 I like so much. It is a gun I have under consideration if a new gun is wanted. I liked it.
I get it, but without this stuff we would have precious darn little "gun stuff" to talk about. Name a purpose, and I'll get we all have our favorite caliber/gun/bullet for that job, and I'll bet they all work for us, mostly.
What shall we do, just close down the forum because it's all been said before? I pop in here now and again for the past 12 years to talk guns with gun people. I'm not sure where the harm is in spilling a little digital ink?
Getting back to the main topic, there seems to be a big difference in the two when we compare apples to apples, by which I mean high end loads to high end loads, and low end to low end. I like both calibers, but it doesn't seem to me that they are in the same class. One seems to be an upper end defensive cartridge, while the other is a true magnum hunting round.
I don't see this as the traditional "caliber war" where we discuss calibers and their use for certain things such as self defense or hunting.
The comparison of the 10MM to the .41 magnum is simply a poor comparison because when one compares them across their entire range the upper 10MM rounds only reach into the lower .41 round territory. When you compare the top end of each load the 10MM does not equate to the .41 in any manner.
Its a simple formula. The 10MM, when comparing loads that sit equivalently in their own charts in regards to max. energy for the cartridge, does not compare to the .41
Its like saying a Fiesta compares to a Ferrari in speed because you once saw two of them driving side by side on the highway at the same speed.
My favorite round is the 10MM. I don't own a .41 nor do I intend to.
The comparison of the 10MM to the .41 magnum is simply a poor comparison because when one compares them across their entire range the upper 10MM rounds only reach into the lower .41 round territory. When you compare the top end of each load the 10MM does not equate to the .41 in any manner.
Its a simple formula. The 10MM, when comparing loads that sit equivalently in their own charts in regards to max. energy for the cartridge, does not compare to the .41
Its like saying a Fiesta compares to a Ferrari in speed because you once saw two of them driving side by side on the highway at the same speed.
My favorite round is the 10MM. I don't own a .41 nor do I intend to.
There was good article on the S&W Model 58 in Firearms News, a few months ago.
They rehashed the issues with the dual nature of the .41 Mag cartridge, the resulting size/weight of the .41 Military & Police, then they tested the gun with three types of ammo, all within the normal range for 10mm.
The 58 was intended as a service revolver, just as the Bren Ten was intended as a service pistol.
The "magnum" rounds for both were part of the guns' lack of success.
They rehashed the issues with the dual nature of the .41 Mag cartridge, the resulting size/weight of the .41 Military & Police, then they tested the gun with three types of ammo, all within the normal range for 10mm.
The 58 was intended as a service revolver, just as the Bren Ten was intended as a service pistol.
The "magnum" rounds for both were part of the guns' lack of success.
