10MM for Woods Gun?
- Thread starter jaughtman
- Start date
"Too much" ... what? Too effective?
The 10mm AUTO was designed from the git-go as a combat cartridge, for personal defense and, if Jeff Cooper had gotten his way, military use instead of the 9mm.
The 10mm was intended to be a "better" .45acp - as accurate as the .45, but a flatter shooter with more power, pushing a relatively heavy 200gn slug with better sectional density for penetration against intermediate barriers, and allowing for a bit higher magazine capacity.
If the victim of a criminal attack, fearing for his life, used his pistol in justifiable self-defense under the law, the caliber won't matter ... unless you happen to live in an anti-gun/pro-thug jurisdiction where the legal system and its rules value the rights and life of the criminal over the victim's.
Like in that recent incident involving ex-CNN anchor Lynn Russell & her hubby, where the bad guy tried to rob and kill them in their motel room ... Hubby shot the dirtbag, and if he'd used a 10mm Glock to do it, I'm sure neither the police nor the local D.A. would be asking: ... "Really, dude? Did you really feel so threatened that you had to resort to shooting him with a handcannon and its 'overkill' of a cartridge?"
Last edited:
22-rimfire
New member
I agree with that. My suspicion on use of force is when you shoot many rounds into a otherwise dead person with a 22LR to "make sure" versus one or two shots from a center fire handgun. Looks bad, but that wouldn't stop me if I felt I had to.
Bears and such.....
Since we have drifted into bear attack territory, I thought I too, would clarify what I meant be woods gun. Here in Alabama, the dangerous critters in the woods are feral dogs (packs of them) and hogs. Obviously no Grizzlies, and never seen a black bear. So my uses for it would be protection from man, dogs, hogs....and perhaps shoot a deer if it is the season and I am not carrying my rifle (walking our farm, tracking one, etc.). If it were only man and dogs I was worried about, my standard full size carry - a BHP - would be just fine. Of course, the other reason is that it is just a fantasy niche which allows me to justify buying another gun (but we don 't allow ourselves to admit that). LOL.
J
Since we have drifted into bear attack territory, I thought I too, would clarify what I meant be woods gun. Here in Alabama, the dangerous critters in the woods are feral dogs (packs of them) and hogs. Obviously no Grizzlies, and never seen a black bear. So my uses for it would be protection from man, dogs, hogs....and perhaps shoot a deer if it is the season and I am not carrying my rifle (walking our farm, tracking one, etc.). If it were only man and dogs I was worried about, my standard full size carry - a BHP - would be just fine. Of course, the other reason is that it is just a fantasy niche which allows me to justify buying another gun (but we don 't allow ourselves to admit that). LOL.
J
Pond James Pond
New member
That definition of a woods gun and the role it might fill seems to cement the choice of a 10mm, IMHO....
Makes a lot of sense.
Makes a lot of sense.
HighValleyRanch
New member
So I guess we shouldn't carry a .45 because it's "BIGGER" than a 10mm!
There is zero doubt in my mind that, were I forced into a corner and had to use my Glock 20 to defend family, life and property, that the opposing counsel would question why I needed a hand-cannon. I live in the Bay Area in California. Go ahead and laugh. 
This is a risk like any other risk. It is weighed against the opposing risks.
Sure, all else being equal, a 9mm probably would have been fine. However, since when is has all else ever been equal?
1) Until recently, I did not even own a 9mm, so it would have been a moot point. My overwhelming reason from day one for owning a handgun was for woods carry.
2) Now that I do, I would not use my 9mm Beretta for home defense unless I had practiced the bejeezus out of it, since the action is totally different. Even then, I would feel more comfortable keeping the same platform for both uses: woods & home. Just changing out the 200grn hardcast for lighter HPs of course (which, by the way, are illegal to buy or sell in San Francisco, but I digress).
So they are going to argue that I was irresponsible for not also owning a Glock 17 too?
You have to know going into things that the opposing side will use anything and everything they can to make you look evil, no matter that it was either going to be your life or the criminal's. Like Metallica? Evil. Hunt? Killer. So, don't put skull decals on your guns. Otherwise, be responsible and think things through so that there's a rationale in your decisions, and understand that every life-and-death situation is also a legal risk in addition, for better or for worse.
This is a risk like any other risk. It is weighed against the opposing risks.
Sure, all else being equal, a 9mm probably would have been fine. However, since when is has all else ever been equal?
1) Until recently, I did not even own a 9mm, so it would have been a moot point. My overwhelming reason from day one for owning a handgun was for woods carry.
2) Now that I do, I would not use my 9mm Beretta for home defense unless I had practiced the bejeezus out of it, since the action is totally different. Even then, I would feel more comfortable keeping the same platform for both uses: woods & home. Just changing out the 200grn hardcast for lighter HPs of course (which, by the way, are illegal to buy or sell in San Francisco, but I digress).
So they are going to argue that I was irresponsible for not also owning a Glock 17 too?
You have to know going into things that the opposing side will use anything and everything they can to make you look evil, no matter that it was either going to be your life or the criminal's. Like Metallica? Evil. Hunt? Killer. So, don't put skull decals on your guns. Otherwise, be responsible and think things through so that there's a rationale in your decisions, and understand that every life-and-death situation is also a legal risk in addition, for better or for worse.
.. and I am hereby humbly shamed.
After some time perusing a reloading manual, I realize now that it really is case volume that's limiting the performance of any semi-auto round. Anybody feel free to correct me of course...
It's easiest to see this by comparing .40 to 10mm. Virtually identical except one has a longer case.
As noted before, handgun cartridges are normally not filled all the way with powder. Not by a long shot. So why does case volume matter?
Not so you can carry more powder, but so that initial spike in pressure during "ignition time" (before the bullet has moved) isn't as high as it otherwise would be.
So it turns out that 10mm, while quite nice, really isn't as powerful as .41 mag after all. Sigh.
Still a pretty nice round though....
Mike_Fontenot
New member
"Not so you can carry more powder, but so that initial spike in pressure during "ignition time" (before the bullet has moved) isn't as high as it otherwise would be."
Interesting observation ... you may well be right. My impression of the Federal Hi-Shok 158gr mid-range .357 rounds that I carry in my ultralight S&W360sc (and which I discovered used only a very small portion of the case volume for the powder), was that the powder burned so fast that most or all of it was done before the bullet even got out of the case.
"So it turns out that 10mm, while quite nice, really isn't as powerful as .41 mag after all. Sigh.
Still a pretty nice round though.... "
I certainly agree with that last thought ... best semi-auto caliber by far, I believe.
Interesting observation ... you may well be right. My impression of the Federal Hi-Shok 158gr mid-range .357 rounds that I carry in my ultralight S&W360sc (and which I discovered used only a very small portion of the case volume for the powder), was that the powder burned so fast that most or all of it was done before the bullet even got out of the case.
"So it turns out that 10mm, while quite nice, really isn't as powerful as .41 mag after all. Sigh.
Still a pretty nice round though.... "
I certainly agree with that last thought ... best semi-auto caliber by far, I believe.
Big4Freedom
New member
Mike_Fontenot
New member
The .44mag PMC at ~900 ft-lbs isn't full spec ... Underwood and DoubleTap .44mag are supposedly around 1200 ft-lbs.
silvermane_1
New member
Mike Fontenot posted"
"Does Glock make a gun in 10mm magnum? "
There IS no 10mm magnum. 10mm is essentially a .40 magnum.
^ yes, there is such a cal., it's the 10mm IAI Magnum that was one of the chamberings in the IAI/AMT Automag IV, the other was 45 Win mag.
"Does Glock make a gun in 10mm magnum? "
There IS no 10mm magnum. 10mm is essentially a .40 magnum.
^ yes, there is such a cal., it's the 10mm IAI Magnum that was one of the chamberings in the IAI/AMT Automag IV, the other was 45 Win mag.
Not a lot of info on it, but there was a cartridge called the "10mm magnum." The magnum case itself was roughly the same length as the loaded COAL of the 10mm AUTO (appro. 1.242" v. 1.260")
Some years back, I read a piece detailing "conversions" being done on the cylinders of S&W 610 revolvers by Hamilton Bowen. His shop would ream out the chambers of the cylinder to accept the longer 10mm magnum cartridge and, being an N-frame anyway, these conversion apparently ran fine.
You thus ended up with a 3-flavor wheelgun - using moon clips, you could shoot the magnum cartridge or the 10mm or the .40S&W.
Reportedly, accuracy was good with the magnum or standard 10mm, but there was some degradation when shooting .40S&W ammo due to the longer bullet jump created after the cylinder was reamed.
If you're loading your own ammunition, it's a RPITA finding spent brass in woods or fields...I much prefer a revolver when woods loafing where any significant amt of shooting is anticipated. My daily walks here in KY allow me to thin the thistle top population with what ever I'm carrying. A bit of a breeze adds to the fun. But chasing spent .45 hulls all over hellshalfacre when the chiggers are marching up my pants legs is not! HTH's Rod
For those of us who shoot 44 Magnums and above, this is an amusing thread. A couple of comments -
Calling 10mm a "hand cannon" is really funny. You should try shooting a 44Mag, 45Colt with Ruger Only Loads, 454, 460 S&W, 480 Ruger, or 500 S&W. Those are hand cannons. 10mm is a nice, hot semi-auto load. It's not a hand cannon.
That picture is funny. 200 grains at 1275fps is easily achieved in a 357 with a 4 inch barrel. Buffalobore sells a 180 grain hardcast that was chrono'd at 1302 fps out of a 3 inch J frame and 1375 out of a 4 inch Mountain Gun. 200 grains at 1275 fps is not a big deal to people who shoot real "hand cannons".
Shooting a bear off of you once it's on you is a real concern. The semiauto guys love to think that this is where their "hand cannon" will really shine. They conveniently ignore the fact that semiautos can go out of battery pretty easily when pressed against something. If a bear chomps down on my revolver barrel, I'm still going to pull the trigger and put up to 6 rounds through it's head. There was a case reported many years ago of a guy who carried a single action revolver (I think it was a Blackhawk) who shot a bear off him. He had trouble cocking the hammer for each shot but managed to do it and killed the bear. He was injured badly but survived. That was the only case I've read about someone "shooting a bear off them". Sorry, but I don't have a link to that anymore. Wish I did.
10mm is ok anywhere a 357 is ok. That covers most of the USA. But in Alaska, Montana, or anywhere the big bears live it's not enough.
And just because someone's second cousin Bubba carried a 10mm, 9mm, 45acp, 38special or whatever out West and didn't "feel undergunned" or didn't get eaten by a bear, doesn't really prove anything.
I realize that some people really love their Glocks and think that revolvers are antiques that belong in a museum. I'm not trying to convert anyone. Carry whatever you want. The most important thing is to make the first shot count.
But some of the stuff being written here is really, really funny.
And that picture is pretty funny too.
Calling 10mm a "hand cannon" is really funny. You should try shooting a 44Mag, 45Colt with Ruger Only Loads, 454, 460 S&W, 480 Ruger, or 500 S&W. Those are hand cannons. 10mm is a nice, hot semi-auto load. It's not a hand cannon.
That picture is funny. 200 grains at 1275fps is easily achieved in a 357 with a 4 inch barrel. Buffalobore sells a 180 grain hardcast that was chrono'd at 1302 fps out of a 3 inch J frame and 1375 out of a 4 inch Mountain Gun. 200 grains at 1275 fps is not a big deal to people who shoot real "hand cannons".
This is somewhat true for fast burning pistol powders. It's not true for slow burning magnum powders like AA9, 2400 or H-110. I reload for my magnums (357, 44, 45 Redhawk) and I routinely stuff as much powder in there as is possible while still seating the bullet.
Please give us an example of this. I've never heard of one case where someone ran a revolver dry during a bear attack. Greg Brush stopped a 10 foot grizzly in Alaska with 2-3 shots from a 454 Ruger Alaskan. That's documented. Look it up. Other than that, there are very few documented cases which we can learn from. I've never heard of a single case where someone used a 10mm to stop a bear attack.
Shooting a bear off of you once it's on you is a real concern. The semiauto guys love to think that this is where their "hand cannon" will really shine. They conveniently ignore the fact that semiautos can go out of battery pretty easily when pressed against something. If a bear chomps down on my revolver barrel, I'm still going to pull the trigger and put up to 6 rounds through it's head. There was a case reported many years ago of a guy who carried a single action revolver (I think it was a Blackhawk) who shot a bear off him. He had trouble cocking the hammer for each shot but managed to do it and killed the bear. He was injured badly but survived. That was the only case I've read about someone "shooting a bear off them". Sorry, but I don't have a link to that anymore. Wish I did.
10mm is ok anywhere a 357 is ok. That covers most of the USA. But in Alaska, Montana, or anywhere the big bears live it's not enough.
And just because someone's second cousin Bubba carried a 10mm, 9mm, 45acp, 38special or whatever out West and didn't "feel undergunned" or didn't get eaten by a bear, doesn't really prove anything.
I realize that some people really love their Glocks and think that revolvers are antiques that belong in a museum. I'm not trying to convert anyone. Carry whatever you want. The most important thing is to make the first shot count.
But some of the stuff being written here is really, really funny.
And that picture is pretty funny too.
Last edited:
Yes, I own a 454 too.
In my book, my 10mm is a hand cannon. My 454 is an even bigger hand cannon.Big hand cannons are heavy and thus less than handy for multi-day hikes in the wilderness when you are covering 10-15mi a day with an 80lb pack. Something you might do with a "woods gun."
Now that we've covered bears, what about sharks? 50BMG revolver?
Last edited: