Help Me Understand the Comeback of 10mm

K

Kvon2

New member
I promise I am not trying to spark a caliber war, I know its been done.

It seems 10mm is the caliber of shot show this year and people are really excited about it. Having no experience with 10mm, I have to admit, I'm confused.

The .40sw seems to be on a decline in favor of the 9mm for reasons of cost, easier recoil, faster follow up shots, capacity, etc...

So people don't like the .40sw because of the reasons I listed above, yet 10mm is now the craze?

For those with 10mm experience, how does the recoil compare to that of a 40sw? If it is more of a push and less of a snap(how I would compare a 45 to a 40) then I guess I understand some of the praise.

Thoughts?
 
Perhaps the craze is driven by the manufacturers to have something new at a highly profitable price point. There are plenty of available options in 9mm in multiple sizes that have good reviews, and work well, but are in the budget price range.

My guess is that reliable 10mm options are at a much higher price point. And that market hasn't been flooded by quality, budget priced pistols. Just a guess.
 
There is a lot of "me too" in the gun business, with manufacturers seeming to be more interested in a small piece of a big pie, than in making a pie of their own.
Once it became apparent that Colt, and Kimber, and Glock, and Wilson Combat, and Nighthawk could all make money selling tens, at every price point between $600-$6000, everyone wanted to get in on the action, rather than, say, being the only manufacturer of a gun chambered in 9x23 WIN?

The problem with .40 is that it was always a bureaucrat's cartridge, designed to allow proponents of big bullets to make nice with proponents of lots of little bullets.
It didn't really offer anything ballistically that couldn't already be done; and with advances in bullet design, there's not much, or enough, difference in performance between 9 and .40 to give up capacity and more docile handling for the former.

10mm, on the other hand, offers ballistics that are about all that normal, service-sized handguns can handle.
You can go dramatically bigger, both gun and cartridge, with a Desert Eagle, but that's not something you are going to carry on your hip.

Comparing 155 grains at 1150fps to 200 grains at 1200 fps, there is going to be a lot more recoil energy in the latter, but it's the difference in ballistics, and not subjective appraisals of the recoil that drive the popularity of 10mm.

That said, 10mm is extremely versatile for handloaders; I've loaded light-bullet rounds that mimic 9mm, heavier loads that are similar to .45 +P, and full-power rounds that . . . are really loud and have lots of muzzle blast and recoil.

If I were limited to a single, service-sized pistol, and I was not limited in my ammo selection, I'd go with a 10mm.
 
I traded off my .45 1911 Commander for a Witness in 10mm. I find the recoil is more pleasant with 10mm than I did for .45 in the Commander I had or my friend’s Gov model.

Felt recoil is a personal thing, we all feel it differently. Due to the differences in grip and size, I feel more recoil from 1911s. The Witness spreads the the recoil across more of the palm and it feels less sharp. I don’t find 10mms to feel snappy, but I also don’t describe 45s as just besif a push. So I’m probably the oddball on that topic.

As to why I’m a 10mm fan, I like the power. It’s fun. You won’t get much more power in a reasonably sized semi-auto platform than what a 10mm can give. I find it more enjoyable to shoot and more fun than 9mm or 45. The cost of the enjoyment is higher though.

10mm has always had a following, it’s becoming more popular again and may or may not maintain that status. If the current crop of products can avoid any problems leading to overblown stories of guns self destructing (Witnesses/DE stories come to mind) from the 10mm, it may become relatively mainstream.
 
.40S&W seems to be on a decline because the FBI quit using it.
The 10 mm never really caught on. Partly because it's one of Cooper's daft ideas. It doesn't do anything a .45 ACP or 9mm won't.
There is nothing comparable on Hawk's recoil table. No like bullet weights between a .45 and a 10mm.
Anyway, being "the caliber of shot show" is entirely due to the assorted marketing departments. All those 10 mm chambered pistols could be discontinued tomorrow.
 
I find the 10mm more snappy than .40S&W ( and the .40 S&W is snappy too ) ....but if you shoot it in a heavy gun ( like an all stainless, 5" 1911 / or a Sig Sauer 220 Hunter model all stainless...)....its not that big a deal. I have shot both in models by Wilson Combat...( but I sold the Wilson I had in .40 S&W / and kept the Wilsons in 9mm and .45 acp ...buddies have the 10mm Wilsons, but I never bought one ).

I think the 10mm is a fad.../ kind of like the .40S&W has become as well now.

I don't think you need a 10mm for Defense / in fact I have gone to a 5" 1911 in 9mm as my carry gun.
 
Full-power 10 has always been a bad defense round, unless you're defending against four-legged critters.
People seem to forget, or never knew, that 10mm was intended to replace .45 as a duty cartridge, 200 grains at 1000fps, and it became a "magnum" due to confusion and misunderstanding during the development process.
"10mm light" loads are great for defense, but are probably also not much, if any better than modern, more highly developed 9mm.
 
The 200 grain bullet at about 1000 fps was the original Cooper idea that he stole from Elmer Keith which was the original idea for the 41 Magnum.

The same mistake was made with the 10mm as was with the 41 which is that it was "Magnumised" to sell guns.

Elmer would have loved the 40 S&W. And so would a lot of other old timers who advocated for just such a cartridge.

40 is an excellent round and won't be going anywhere anytime soon.

Now, where is this 10mm craze at SHOT that you speak of?
 
RickB said:
The problem with .40 is that it was always a bureaucrat's cartridge, designed to allow proponents of big bullets to make nice with proponents of lots of little bullets.
It didn't really offer anything ballistically that couldn't already be done; and with advances in bullet design, there's not much, or enough, difference in performance between 9 and .40 to give up capacity and more docile handling for the former.
Click to expand...

And people forget that .40 S&W has improvements on the cartridge like 9mm has had done to it, therefore keeping the distance between the two rounds.

Unless you do your homework on the manufactures a 9mm can get close to a .40 round in performance. You just have to know who has the better perfoming ammo.

Testing has been done, and unless you do your homework on specific manufactures of the 10mm rounds, they don't provide much ahead of the .40

Yes, the 10mm can perform better ballistically, but like I said, you have to know which rounds to buy from a specific company to get the more bang for your buck with upgrading to a 10mm.
 
Is anyone going to continue to improve .4" bullets?
I'd be interested to know if any .4" bullets today, other than 200-grainers, were designed for anything but .40 S&W velocities?
Anyone ever test a 155gr or 165gr bullet driven at 1350fps?
 
The 10mm delivers more power than the 40 and comes into its own with heavier bullets plus it has a higher operating pressure at 37.5K compared to the 40 at 35K which takes even greater advantage of the case size difference. The 9mm is able to have more rounds in the same size pistol than a 40. Nothing wrong with a 40 S&W but it has no functional advantage over the 9mm in a service pistol.
 
Kvon2 said:
I promise I am not trying to spark a caliber war, I know its been done.

It seems 10mm is the caliber of shot show this year and people are really excited about it. Having no experience with 10mm, I have to admit, I'm confused.

The .40sw seems to be on a decline in favor of the 9mm for reasons of cost, easier recoil, faster follow up shots, capacity, etc...

So people don't like the .40sw because of the reasons I listed above, yet 10mm is now the craze?

For those with 10mm experience, how does the recoil compare to that of a 40sw? If it is more of a push and less of a snap(how I would compare a 45 to a 40) then I guess I understand some of the praise.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Different niches, different groups of Internet influenced enthusiasts picking up one of the other. Or both, for different reasons.

You don't see self defence or gun gamer people buying small carry guns in 10mm. (Usually. I haven't forgotten the Glock 29.)
 
Comparing 155 grains at 1150fps to 200 grains at 1200 fps, there is going to be a lot more recoil energy in the latter, but it's the difference in ballistics, and not subjective appraisals of the recoil that drive the popularity of 10mm.
Click to expand...
I've never fired a 10mm that I didn't like, or find completely comfortable and controllable with full power load (such as handloads or the "Norma load").
I have, however, only ever fired one .40 S&W that I actually liked. And I have fired multiple .45s that I didn't care for at all.

Recoil is a matter of individual perception more than numbers on paper.
And heavier bullets do not always mean the bite will be as mean as the bark - especially at handgun velocities. Just ask any of the guys that load up 300 or 310 gr bullets for .44 Mag, prepare for punishment, and discover that they're nicer to shoot than max-velocity 240s. ...Or pretty much anyone that shoots 147 gr stuff in their 9mms.
 
I find this discussion very interesting as I am still learning. Hope to learn and understand more.

We just bought our first 45acp for my wife, a XD Mod2, and hope to acquire another 45 for myself accept I have also been looking at the 40cal. Witness instead of the 45acp. At this point I am still undecided.
 
I don't know Kvon. That being said, I admit that I've been a fan of the 10 since the very early days. Perhaps part of the draw is, as RickB mentioned, the 10 might be about all that can be accommodated in a service sized pistol. Ballistics of some 10MM factory ammo now days seems not much different than .40 S&W though. And bullet technology R&D lavished on the 9MM, .40, .45, etc. is lacking on the 10MM. Given those considerations, I can see many shooters thinking, "Why bother with 10MM?" Obviously though, 10MM potential exceeds .40 S&W. Perhaps renewed interest in 10MM will spark more load development by major ammunition manufacturers to better utilize the ballistics safely achievable with the 10?

FWIW, I went up to Gunsite one time with Tom Dornaus, Michael Dixon, and some other folks. I recall Col. Cooper shooting a Bren Ten and commenting that the 10 knocked down the steel targets at 50 yards better than the .45, but didn't know that really mattered in a combat pistol. I do enjoy the fact that the 10 shoots flatter, and is definitely easier for me to hit with out at a hundred yards or so. Does the 10MM's greater energy and flatter trajectory at distance really matter? Probably not. But then I'm one of those misguided souls who enjoyed shooting and loading the .41 Magnum for years;)
 
Most people like 10MM because it's the most powerful of the common auto-loader rounds. The people buying 10MM aren't concerned whether the recoil is more of a push or a shove. The Glock model 40 is arguably the most powerful handgun when you combine number of rounds with the power of the round.

If you want something cheap and easy to shoot 10MM isn't the round for you. If your an experienced pistol shooter and want something powerful but don't want to dive into boutique rounds the 10MM is a great option.

Another reason people like 10MM is because it's a versatile round with some loads only slightly more powerful than 40 S&W while some of the ammo out there is substantially more powerful
 
I have been a 10mm fan since the days of the Bren. And yes I am guilty as a 41 mag. fan as well. What I really like with the 10mm is versatility. I can thump whitetail deer with my Glock 20 and if I want use the same gun for CC. No its not cheap to shoot but worth the effort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top