How does 10mm compare to .41 magnum?

I have yet to see anyone disprove the data published by Buffalo Bore. Underwoods provides no information regarding the barrel length or gun used so it is meaningless in relation to your argument. Buffalo Bore publishes specific data from specific guns. You cannot do any better than that.
Here from the beloved Double Tap - a favorite of 10mm lovers
Caliber : 10mm

Bullet : 180gr. Nosler JHP

Ballistics : 180gr. @ 1305fps/ 681 ft/lbs- Glock 20 (4.6" barrel)
1120fps / 501 ft lbs 100yds Glock 20
Glock 29 - 1240fps (3 7/8" barrel closest to the GP100)

Caliber: 357 Magnum

Bullet: 180gr. Wide Flat Nose Gas Check Hardcast

Velocity: 1300fps / 4" Ruger GP-100
1420fps / 6"bbl S&W 686

Facts are hard things if you want to pretend that the 10mm is more gun than a .357 - Sorry
 
Last edited:
10mm and .357Mag are ballistically very similar regardless of whether you choose to measure their performance with momentum/power factor or energy. The 10mm seems to have a tiny edge over the .357Mag in momentum/power factor and the .357Mag takes the lead by a little over the 10mm when it comes to energy.

Neither one of them comes close to the .41Mag regardless of which performance measure you choose to examine.

The idea that the 10mm is similar to the .41Mag in performance was, as far as I can tell nearly exclusively the result of Winchester's decision to load the 10mm STHP near the top of the 10mm performance level and the .41Mag STHP very lightly. Many people have looked at those two loadings and mistakenly gotten the impression that the two calibers are much closer in performance than they really are.

These charts are a little dated, but they represent a cross section of the loadings of 5 calibers. A few years back, I took the time to gather data on any factory ammunition which had published ballistic information on the internet in those 5 calibers. I'm not claiming that it tells the whole story, but it should provide a pretty good idea of the relative performance potential of the 5 calibers in question.

It should be clear that the .41Mag is in a completely different performance class than the other 4 calibers.

attachment.php

attachment.php
 
10vs41

I have one of each,Have carried both hunting.My Glock is lighter than my Smith.
The Smith has better sights.The big advantage to the semi auto is round count.
That advantage is moot while hunting in MI.Mag capacity is limited and your mag must be modified.MTCW.
Fluffi
 
Not to cause a stir but rather than loading a 10mm (or to a lesser extent the .41mag) to it's higher limits, have you considered loading down a .44mag instead? The more abundant supply of less expensive both reloading supplies and definitely factory ammuntion might make a good option. Just a thought.
 
Once again, you are comparing a cast .357 to a jacketed 10, but I guess you already knew that. The charts by John indeed show that the 10 shades the .357 in most instances, which is what I said. Yes, you can cherry pick a small handful of loads to show that in special circumstances the .357 has essentially the same energy and velocity, but on average, I STILL stand by my generalization that a top loaded 10 shades a top loaded .357 by a bit. The difference is not substantial, but it is there. In addition, the bore diameter of the 10 is larger.

In typical ammo loaded by the major factories (fed, win, rp, etc) the .357 wins, no doubt. FWIW, I have and use 10's, .357's and .44's, and they will all do the job. In my opinion, the 10 is such a great round because it essentially duplicates and (in most instances) exceeds the .357, but does it in an auto pistol. How this thread turned into a 10 vs .357, I don't know. The OP wanted a 10 vs .41 magnum thread.

I am not sure why the 10 engenders such animosity. The rabid 10 fans claim it is equal to a .41, when it is not. The .357 fans get their feelings hurt when an auto round ever so slightly shades their favorite round. For crying out loud, it is just a tool. For the sake of civility, I will end my participation in the cherry picking contest here.
 
The reason this devolved into a .357 versus 10mm is that the .41 mag is very close to a .44 mag so there is no point in comparing .41 mag with 10mm. Since Glock is somewhat incompatable with hard cast bullets there are few cast loads to compare, but the rifling in the Glock does help even-up the score with jacketed bullets. I agree, no point to continue to argue over an inconsequential difference in 4" barrels. I think a 10mm Glock is fantastic. I want one too. if I were hunting I would use a Ruger Blackhawk .45 Colt, but for walking around, the Glock makes much more sense.
 
OK

You guys smoothed that over nicely, well done. I'm not going to touch the power/cartridge issue.

I only saw one small reference to ease of carry, so I'll bounce on that for a while. I do not own a .41 mag, of any type, but I do have a 4" M28/357 and a .44 /629 Mtn. So I have a feel for toting big bore revolvers. I also have a G20/10mm.

I've got a variety of holsters for each, and have spent considerable amount of time afield with all 3. I can say w/o any reservation that the Glock is the hands down winner for ease of carry and toughness. So much so that the two revolvers rarely go out roughing it these days. (no they are not for sale)

The g20 is flat and compact, the sights are durable and non obtrusive. There are no sharp edges. If I dunk or gunk it, I can field strip w/o tools and effect a pretty good clean up on the spot. If I loose it (hope not) I can get another pretty easy. I can carry 15 additional rds in a mag, compactly stored, in a mag pouch and take no more space than large folding knife. None of that applies to the revolvers.

If you don't need the extra punch a .41 or .44 offers, and are content with mid range power, the 10mm auto is a good choice.
 
Back to packing a handgun. I actually have a 329pd (the TI/SC ultralight S&W .44 mag) and a G20sf. I bought the G20 a year after the 329, due to dissatisfaction with packing an N frame. Although the 329 is lighter than the G20, I found it much harder to conceal. I also had some reliability issues with the 329 that needed to be ironed out, and it was hard for me to shoot due to the recoil.

Most of my recreational time is camping in semi developed areas. Yes, wildlife is out there, but my biggest concern is general personal defense, with wildlife second. Most of the time, concealment is very important as I am not in true wilderness and would prefer to be discrete. The G20 works better for me than the 329. I still like the 329, and the .44 blows the doors off of a 10mm, but it does little good if you leave it in a pack or truck because it is hard to hide.

For hunting of whitetail deer and smaller, I have used a .44 and I would use a 10mm and a .357. If I were to seek and elk or a bear, I would not use a 10 or a .357, but would go .44 at a minimum.
 
My 4.6" Glock 20 chronographs 1315 fps with Double Tap 200 gr ammo.
That is a bit below 41 mag and I've never seen a 357 revolver with a 4" barrel equal it. Most semi's come pretty close to published velocities, but actual revolver velocities tend to vary widely. I have no doubt that with the best loads a 357 can equal or beat 10mm, but you're going to need a pretty long barrel to do it. As good as the 10mm is, it is not a 41 or 44 mag, but is closer than a lot want to give it credit for.

If were buying a handgun specifically for hunting I'd take the longer barreled revolver in any of the three main magnum rounds, 357, 41 or 44. Their longer barrels and slighty velocity gains from the long barrels make for a more accurate long range gun and a bit more energy on target.

For a multi- purpose gun that needs to serve the role of SD from both 2 and 4 legged predators and could be pressed into use for hunting deer, black bear, or similar game at close range a Glock 10 mm is a darn good choice.
 
Most of my handguns are primarily for perforating soda cans. Yes, they might serve some lesser role like self defense or hunting; but if theres one thing I will not abide it's a can with only one orifice.
 
From post #13:

"So lets compare a 180 bullet out of a longer 4.6" Glock 10mm to a S&W 4" (shorter barrel) .357"

One is a semi-auto and the other is a revolver, does anyone else see the folly in this comparison?
 
The hotest 357 magnum ammo seems to be at the same level as the hotest 10mm ammo. The hotest 41 ammo is much hotter than the hotest 10mm ammo. I went to buffalo bore for these speeds. These are cut and paste

on the 41 and the 10mm I took the load with the highest energy


357 magnum
1. 3 inch S&W J frame

a. Item 19A/20-180gr. Hard cast LFN = 1302 fps
b. Item 19B/20-170gr. JHC (jacketed hollow cavity) = 1299 fps
c. Item 19C/20-158gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1398 fps
d. Item 19D/20-125gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1476 fps

2. 4 inch S&W L frame Mt. Gun

a. Item 19A/20-180gr. Hard cast LFN = 1375 fps
b. Item 19B/20-170gr JHC = 1411 fps
c. Item 19C/20-158gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1485 fps
d. Item 19D/20-125gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1603 fps

3. 5 inch S&W model 27

a. Item 19A/20-180gr. Hard Cast =1398 fps
b. Item 19B/20-170gr. JHC = 1380 fps
c. Item 19C/20-158gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1457 fps
d. Item 19D/20-125gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1543 fps

4. 6 inch Ruger GP 100

a. Item 19D/20-125gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1707 fps

5. 18.5 inch Marlin 1894

a. Item 19A/20-180gr. Hard Cast = 1851 fps
b. Item 19B/20-170gr. JHC = 1860 fps
c. Item 19C/20-158gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 2153 fps---- Can you believe this?!!!
d. Item 19D/20-125gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 2298 fps---- Or this?!!!


41 magnum


Heavy .41 Magnum Ammo - 265 gr. L.W.N. (1,350 fps/M.E. 1,072 ft. lbs.) - 50 Round Box

Check these velocities taken from real guns.

1. 6.5" Ruger

a. Item #16A - 1379 fps
b. Item #16B - 1459 fps
c. Item #16C - 1640 fps

2. 4" S&W Mountain Gun

a. Item #16A - 1310 fps
b. Item #16B - 1370 fps
c. Item #16C - 1551 fps




10MM


Heavy 10mm Ammo - 180 gr. Jacketed Hollow Point (1,350fps/M.E. 728 ft. lbs.)

Please note below, my personal velocities taken from real pistols.
1. 1311 fps - Glock model 20 4.6 inch barrel
2. 1337 fps - Colt Delta Elite 5 inch barrel
3. 1351 fps - Para Ordinance 1911 with Nowlin 5 inch barrel
 
K1500 said:
"In anything resembling equal sized guns, a full powered 10mm has it over a full powered .357"

"That's very dependent upon the load, and the gun, don't you think?"

No and No. Fortunately, we have Buffalo Bore and their "real world" data to answer this question. So lets compare a 180 bullet out of a longer 4.6" Glock 10mm to a S&W 4" (shorter barrel) .357 right off their web site:

Glock model 20 4.6 inch barrel - Heavy 10mm Ammo - 180 gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1311 fps

4 inch S&W L frame Mt. Gun
Item 19A/20-180gr. Hard cast LFN = 1375 fps

Uh...o.k. In the real world, that's essentially a cherry picked tie based on fps/fpe, using a jacketed round for the 10 and a CAST round for the .357. For the sake of argument, Underwoods lists jacketed 10mm 155gr at 1500 fps and jacketed .357 158gr at 1300 fps. Clearly NOT a tie (I can cherry pick too). Bore diameter also counts too, and .400 is bigger than .357

Besides, the 4 inch mtn. gun is larger in every way and heavier than the 4.5 inch 10, not to mention it holds 1/3 the number of rounds. Capacity is not part of the power argument, but it doesn't hurt to have.

Without getting into the typical 10mm ******* contest, I will say there is absolutely nothing wrong with the .357 (I own more than 1), but I stand by my statement that most top loaded 10's shade the .357 a bit, based on the "real world" chrono results I have seen. Besides, even if it is equal to a .357 in fpe, what's wrong with that?
Click to expand...

+1 10mm tops .357mag
 
If you are an auto guy get 10mm and get a Glock or one of the huge number of 1911 clones in 10mm from an equally large number of quality 1911 makers. You also have the option of making your own 1911 in 10mm.

If you are a revolver guy, get the .41. I really feel like it is that simple. The .41 beats the 10mm but not by enough to transition to a different system. Experienced handgunners take Elk here in Idaho with .45ACP +P loads so I feel like either round will do it for you and the real difference will be in what you can operate better, a revolver or an auto.
 
When comparing semiauto to revolver barrel lengths, remember that a semiauto barrel measurement includes the chamber, but a revolver barrel does not include the cylinder. The OAL for a round of 155 gr. XTP is about 1 1/4"

A fair ballistic comparison between 10mm vs 41 mag would have the semiauto barrel at least 1" more than the revolver.

Regardless, no contest for me, I prefer a Glock 10mm over a revolver; it's easier to carry, quicker follow up shots, and greater capacity.
 
In the end you can't compare the high-end ballastics of the .41 mag with over 1,000 ft lbs of energy to 10 mm with 750 ft lbs of energy, similar to .357 mag in shorter barrels.
 
its a platform thing. In my experience a 9mm automatic will shoot faster than a 9mm revolver with the same barrel length. A 5 inch barrel Coonan will shoot faster than a 5 inch revolver.

as far as which is better I submit this to you. Both the hottest 180 grain bullets I can find. Both 5 inch barrels. Taken from Buffalo Bore.

5 inch S&W model 27 (357)
a. Item 19A/20-180gr. Hard Cast =1398 fps


Colt Delta Elite 5 inch barrel (10mm)

1337 fps -


To me they look really close.
p.s. this is of course comparing cast to jacketed bullets.
 
Last edited:
The semi-auto proponents have rightly pointed out the fact that we need to compare a 4" revolver with a 5" semi-auto so we will go with the 4" S&W
4 inch S&W L frame Mt. Gun
a. Item 19A/20-180gr. Hard cast LFN = 1375 fps
The difference cannot be entirely due to the cast v jacketed bullet factor. It is fair to say that the 10mm and .357 are in the same class with, as as noted above, the .357 having an advantage in "energy."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top