Performance: .44 Mag 4" vs 10mm Auto 4.6" (Glock 20)?

P

Para Bellum

New member
Hi Folks,

I am looking for a sidearm to accompany my .30-06 while hunting wild boar. The candidates are in the title, 6" barreled revolvers would be to big (5'10 / 172#).

What would be the difference in performance between the best factory loads in
a) 44 Mag from a 4" barrel and
b) 10mm Auto from 4.6" barrel (Glock 20)?

Thanks and have a good weekend,
PB
 
Many people go hunting with just a 30/06 and find a handgun superfluous.
a 10 at best will get around 1200fps with a 200gr bullet. winchester white box will better that velocity from a 4" tube and thats a 240gr bullet.

IMHO either gun would do.
 
Perhaps I'm alone in this, but the 4X4 (4" .44 Mag), S&W is one of the Coolest looking guns out there. That big old N frame just feels better in the hand, and in the woods.
I guess I just read too much Elmer Keith as a child...LOL!!!!!
 
I own both guns. For hunting I'd take the 44 simply because when fired single action they are a going to be more accurate at distance. The 44 will always win on power, but either are adequate for what you want to use it for.

My Glock is my hiking/camping gun. Much lighter for packing and I shoot it more accurately for close range combat type shooting. I'm really more concerned about two legged predators and the 16 rounds is comforting. In the rare case I might have to be concerned about a black bear 16 rounds of 200gr hardcast bullets at 1300 fps are comforting as well.
 
options

The .44 wins hands down power wise. But N frames are not easy to holster or carry, they are just plain big revolvers.

I'm about where JMr40 is with the Glock, it's high cap is comforting, and I consider it a GP heavy woods gun for SD. It carries considerably easier than my 4" M29 also (for me and my rigs anyhow) and I believe w/o a doubt it is overall much more durable and resistant to abuse.

If your insistent on "backing" a rifle, I'd go w/ the G20. If I were to brace a hog w/ a handgun only, I'd want the .44.
 
Well, you'd not likely resort to a "hand gun" in a desperate situation if a .30-06 rifle is in your hands!

However, carrying a sidearm while hunting with a rifle is a comfortable thing to do and really most reasonable for many of us who sort of have to bring one along....

The hunting scenario speaks REVOLVER to me, in .357 or .41 or .44 Magnum. It only seems fitting!
 
While I agree that the 44 mag wins power wise (a hot 10mm is equal to a 357mag), the thing you'll notice most is the size and weight difference between them on your hip. A 4.6" G20 loaded with 15 rds weighs 39.1 oz while a 4" S&W 629 weighs 45.2 oz with only 6 rds. In addition, the S&W is huge compared to a G20. Another consideration is cost. A new S&W 629 is 1.5 times the cost of a G20.
 
No comparison in terms of power

As others have written you can't really compare the 44m to the 10mm in terms of power, they are in entirely different classes. E.g., considering heavy or hunting factory loads, such as from Buffalo Bore, the 44m with a 340 gr bullet reports muzzle vel of almost 1,500 fps and ME of 1,650 ft-lbs, while a heavy 10mm/220 gr from B.B. produces an excellent 1,200 fps but a modest 700 ft-lbs because of the light bullet weight. If you like the TKO approach, those rounds produce (at the muzzle to simply the calcs) 31 and 15, respectively.

If I were worried about encountering something large, like a bore or bear, I'd definitely be carrying my S&W Mountain Gun in 44m (and that's not always enough for brown bear....which is why I also own a Ruger Alaskan in 454c). I mean this as no slight to the 10mm - my S&W 610 with 4" barrel is a joy to shoot and possibly the most accurate revolver made (well, not in my hands!!) (and fast to reload with moon clips). Interestingly, the 610 is also a few ounces heavier than the Mtn Gun! The Alaskan has another few ounces. All three are completely carry-able in a hiking or hunting environment and if you have a good holster I don't think the few extra ounces is going to make much difference. If, on the other hand, you're worried about felonious humans, the 10mm is an excellent choice and will effectively stop any assailant. And on an auto platform is a lighter choice.
 
While I agree that the 44 mag wins power wise (a hot 10mm is equal to a 357mag), the thing you'll notice most is the size and weight difference between them on your hip. A 4.6" G20 loaded with 15 rds weighs 39.1 oz while a 4" S&W 629 weighs 45.2 oz with only 6 rds. In addition, the S&W is huge compared to a G20. Another consideration is cost. A new S&W 629 is 1.5 times the cost of a G20.
__________________
Click to expand...

This is too complicated about weight. Ounces and ammunition in a magazine.
You won't have time to empty a 10mm or 9mm magazine into a charging bear.
You only have a revolver in .41 or .44 magnum or above to stop the thing.
 
Are we still here arguing about what to do?
.41 or .44 Magnum REVOLVER.
Who else wants to entry the fray?
I will take you on! Boar can be tough. Or didn't you ever hunt them?
I hunted boar in Germany.
Not the little Arizona rat boars.
 
You may only have time for 2-3 shots with either before a bear may be on top of you. But I don't plan to stop shooting just because a bear is eating my leg. I also consider 2 legged predators to be far more likely and would rather prepare for the most likely scenario.
 
There's not a thing wrong with the way a S&W Mountain Gun 'carries' and it's significantly handier than the 4" Model 29-2 I packed around for years.
 
If your considering the 10mm for an auto. Then I would consider the .357 for a revolver. A .357 revolver will be lighter smaller and cheaper to shoot than a .44 mag. But it should still be a great gun for "finishing" a hog. It is on par, if not a little more powerful than a 10mm. Obviously the .44 mag will provide the most punch and devastation of the bunch, so if thats really what your looking for, then there is no substitute.

I'm having a hard time deciding which of the 3 I would prefer to carry. Right now, I'm tempted to say the Glock, just because I dont have one. :)

However, if you can shoot the .44 well, you will be rewarded with noticeably more damage to the target. Obviously, shot placement will have the greatest effect. So if you you find the .44 to be more than you feel you can handle under pressure, a .357 or 10mm might be best.
 
If it's just a sidearm to use for "finishing" shots, both are more than adequate. (Provided you load the 10 with something appropriate in the 180-200gr range and not a 135gr flying dime.)

If I was going to use the pistol to actually hunt the piggie, I'd probably stick with the .44 Mag. The hunting cabin I stayed in down in Georgia had the head of a pig that had been smacked in the shoulder at fairly close range with a .35 Whelen, whereupon it had turned around and started trotting the other way until it was shot again, in the other shoulder, with another round of .35 Whelen...
 
+1 on the recommendation for a .357 magnum revolver. Looking at the role the sidearm will fill, I think either a .44 magnum or a 10mm automatic would be overkill. A .357 is lighter, cheaper, and easier to carry than a .44, and you just won't need 16 rounds of 10mm during a hunt. With a .357 loaded with 180-200 gr hardcasts, you'd get performance about the same as the automatic's with (possibly) a less chance of misfire.

Performance-wise, a typical .44 magnum hunting load will blow a 10mm load out of the water, even at 4". Glancing at Buffalo Bore's offerings, it looks like their .44 out of a 4" barrel kicks out over 1,000 ft-lbs while 10mm's is just over 700, about the same as a good .357.

If you go with a .44, you might look at S&W's 629 Mountain Gun. I think Cabela's sells them new. There's also the model 329, but it's ridiculously light & expensive.
 
Last edited:
A top-end 10mm load can launch a 180grn bullet at 1350fps for 728 ft. lbs. while a 4" barrel .44 Magnum can pretty easily match that velocity with a 240grn bullet for 971 ft. lbs.
 
If you really like the auto platform get a Desert Eagle in .44 magnum. Nine rounds of .44 magnum at you finger tips. Full house loads fire as smooth as .357 magnum loadings. a heavy pistol to carry on a long hike, but out hunting I find it not a problem ... maybe because with the Desert Eagle I leave the rifle at home. Thus the Desert Eagle turns out to be a few pounds lighter overall. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top