10MM for Woods Gun?

1) a revolver will work at contact distance, an auto will likely suffer an out of battery click.
Click to expand...

This can happen but remember that revolvers still generally need clearance space for the hammer and the cylinder has to be able to freely rotate. It's arguably much less of a concern but it exists.

2) a revolver doesn't depend on a magazine staying put. I've had CCW autos bump their mag release buttons before, turning the pistol into a single shot until discovered later. Accidentally bumping the mag release in the woods could be a heck of a lot more inconvenient if the mag flies away during a climb, scramble, fall, etc.
Click to expand...

A magazine release button seems much easier to "bump" than a cylinder release and is much more disastrous. It seems to me that the paddle release system on some Walthers and HKs are less prone to this semi-auto problem. However, I don't know if these models are available in anything bigger than .45acp.
 
This thread is truly amusing and sounds full of car campers whose main need for a handgun stem from the trail head, not the deep woods.

Though the term "woods gun" as regards a sidearm is ambiguous, there are solid reasons that until very recently that handgun was never considered to be an auto, and the G20 doesn't change anything about that.

1) a revolver will work at contact distance, an auto will likely suffer an out of battery click.

2) a revolver doesn't depend on a magazine staying put. I've had CCW autos bump their mag release buttons before, turning the pistol into a single shot until discovered later. Accidentally bumping the mag release in the woods could be a heck of a lot more inconvenient if the mag flies away during a climb, scramble, fall, etc.

3) a revolver isn't using bullets that are required by design to give a nod to feed ramp requirements. Any 10mm shooter who doesn't reload is going to have to carry FMJ or JHP. No hard cast. No wad cutters. No "overweight" bullets. No mouse loads. Even in commercial loads check out the difference in JHP designs. A .357 Mag 158 gr. JHP is "pre-expanded" when compared to its 10mm counterpart.
Click to expand...

Where did you dream up this nonsense? How does being close result in out of battery?

An idiot with a gun who would release the magazine isn't going to be any safer with a revolver.

My 10mm shoots 220 grain hardcast Underwoods just fine.
 
2) * * * I've had CCW autos bump their mag release buttons before, turning the pistol into a single shot until discovered later. Accidentally bumping the mag release in the woods could be a heck of a lot more inconvenient if the mag flies away during a climb, scramble, fall, etc.
Click to expand...

You get the big red B.S. flag for way overstating this issue. :rolleyes:

A quality holster, properly fit for the particular pistol, eliminates the risk of a "button bump" on the mag-release. If it ever does happen, you've either got an incompatible holster or a super-weak mag-release spring as the cause.

I've hiked quite a bit with several of my autos and "bumping the mag release" has never been an issue.

Ruling on the field is: 15-yds, loss of down, plus a game-misconduct for flagrant trolling. :cool:
 
fun thread, sort of....

most people would be well served with a 357 revolver. in todays world it is sad to say people are most likely the biggest threat to your safety. western US, yes bigger maybe worth the effort. a real concern is how much your gear weighs. I have been told ounces add up to pounds. I know more people that talk about spending time in the woods than actually get out in the field.
 
"Which load would that be? One I missed? Because I'm seeing Underwood's .357 top energy load at 802, while their 10mm top energy load is at 806."

Yeah, you're right. The Underwood 10mm 155gr JHP's I bought a couple of years ago were specked at 1500 ft/sec and 774 ft-lbs, instead of the currently advertized 1530 ft/sec and 806 ft-lbs. I guess Underwood was able to increase it a bit. But my original statement:

"It is also true that the larger cross-sectional area of the 10mm bullet, combined with its slightly higher max allowed pressure, SHOULD allow substantially more energy for the 10mm over the .357mag, but for some reason, that doesn't show up on the top commercial loads."

is still true: comparing max pressures, and cross-sectional areas, 10mm SHOULD be MUCH more energetic than .357mag, but for some reason, it's not. 10mm, as great as it is, is not closer to a .41mag than to .357mag, as many people continue to believe ... top loads of 10mm and .357mag are actually close to the same in energy, but top loads of .41mag and .44mag are much more energetic than 10mm.
 
Last edited:
Those big bears again.....

Thanks all, but we keep getting on the big bears again and posters asking "what is a woods gun for". So, to repeat, I MIGHT have to shoot a feral pig, dogs, or person in defense - or shoot a deer or hog as a target of opportunity. So, to me, it does come down to a .357 or 10MM. When I win that dream trip out west or to Alaska I will start another thread on a big bear woods gun. LOL.

J
 
So, to repeat, I MIGHT have to shoot a feral pig, dogs, or person in defense - or shoot a deer or hog as a target of opportunity. So, to me, it does come down to a .357 or 10MM.
Click to expand...

Based on your earlier clarification along the same lines I still say 10mm is a great choice, not least because feral dogs/other canines as well as pigs can be in groups rather than one. One would hope that a single shot would be enough to disperse the group, but who knows. It is not often I find myself self saying that capacity is an issue for a woods gun, but in your case, I think that a legitimate argument in favour of a semi.

However, given the "target audience" you've listed, is 10mm perhaps more than is needed? Would something like .40 or .357Sig not work also?

I have no idea, but apart from the hogs, none are particularly thick-skinned beasts, are they?

Looking at Glock's specs pages, they gain nothing in capacity but do weigh less and are presumably cheaper to feed: you will need to practice whichever you buy...
 
Getting back to your original question a 10mm should be fine. If by some chance snakes might also be a concern then maybe a 40S&W or 45CAP Glock with some CCI Snake Shot would give you this option also.
 
A quality holster, properly fit for the particular pistol, eliminates the risk of a "button bump" on the mag-release. If it ever does happen, you've either got an incompatible holster or a super-weak mag-release spring as the cause.
Click to expand...
Yes, and I said goodbye to a Taurus Millennium for this very reason. It wasn't very accurate, either, but the mag release bordered on stupid. Accidental releases were the norm for many of us. The Glock 26 that replaced it completely outclassed it, and I've never had an accidental release with any other handgun.

The Underwood 10mm 155gr JHP's I bought a couple of years ago were specked at 1500 ft/sec and 774 ft-lbs, instead of the currently advertized 1530 ft/sec and 806 ft-lbs. I guess Underwood was able to increase it a bit. But my original statement:

"It is also true that the larger cross-sectional area of the 10mm bullet, combined with its slightly higher max allowed pressure, SHOULD allow substantially more energy for the 10mm over the .357mag, but for some reason, that doesn't show up on the top commercial loads."
Click to expand...
Yes, commercial loads, but that is of course the company staying within keeping itself out of the courts as much as possible. They likely could increase it by a lot more. I leave you with this quote from COSteve:
Over the years I've developed some decently hot (but safe) loads for it; my 165grn Speer Gold Dots at 1,589fps and 926ft/lbs of muzzle energy and my 180grn Speer Gold Dots at 1,479fps and 874ft/lbs of muzzle energy.
Click to expand...
Actually I've said many times in the past, that due to .357 mag's case size, it should offer a substantial increase over 10mm, which it clearly does not. But I haven't seen volume specs, either.
 
Last edited:
G20....

I know you don't like them but the older ones are more durable and reliable in a gritty outdoors environment. I would suggest a stainless LONEWOLF Barrel for hardcast lead. Hickok45 did a great vid on that. 15 rounds of 10mm will make any foolish beast think twice...if it can still breathe, that is!!
 
Colt DE and RIA.....

In reviewing the offering from RIA, it promotes a "fully supported barrel" for shooting the 10MM. Does the Colt DE not have that?

J
 
In reviewing the offering from RIA, it promotes a "fully supported barrel" for shooting the 10MM. Does the Colt DE not have that?

J
Click to expand...
I think what they mean is fully supported cartridge in the chamber. This is one of the "tricky" aspects of using full-power loads in a 10. I have a variety of barrels for my G20--often they come with tight chamber tolerances requiring chamber polishing. Essentially what it boils down to is you should be able to drop your cartridge into the chamber so it freely seats in such a way that you have no exposed--unsupported--case at the head and base area of the cartridge. If it doesn't--all kinds of bad things can ensue.
 
In reviewing the offering from RIA, it promotes a "fully supported barrel" for shooting the 10MM. Does the Colt DE not have that?
Click to expand...

The Colt doesn't have a barrel-mounted feed ram, and that exposes more of the bottom-rear of the case barrel than with barrels having a feed ramp. Underwood recommends against using their full-spec 10mm loads in the Colt ... they make a special down-loaded round for the Colt.
 
Last edited:
The RIA should be good to go with full-power loads. If I didn't already cobble my G20 together for one--that's what I'd get. I may still anyways.
 
Double Tapp ammo makes a hardcast woods load thats slightly more energy than Underwoods hottest..... but is safe in an "unsupported" barrel like the Colt Delta
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top