Woodchuck
Regular Member
imported post
Gordie wrote:
And that's why us 10mm guys call 40 s&w the 40 short and weak.
Same bullet, shorter casing and weaker load.
Gordie wrote:
PrayingForWar wrote:10 mm was considered to have to heavy of recoil. Reduce the load and shorten the case, you get .40 S&W.Agent19 wrote:PrayingForWar wrote:You are mistaken.I think 10mm will eventually be phased out because .40S&W is basically the same (ballistically speaking) if I'm not mistaken.
People have been saying that nonsense since 1989.
While all the none 10mm shooters have to search far and wide for ammo I haven't had that problem with 10mm.
Can you name one 40S&W loading that can reach 700 ft/lbs of energy from a standard sized (<5" barreled) SA.
I can name several 10mm loads that exceed 750 ft/lbs.
http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/index.php?cPath=21_25
I have a hand load that propels a 10mm 135gr JHP to 1800fps from a 6" SA that isn't over pressured.
Can you do that with a .40SW without blowing up you and your gun??:lol:
[line]
As for the OP's observations regarding caliber I don't agree with them.
All handgun calibers have preformed perfectly and miserably at one time or another.
One man's cannon is another mans water pistols and vice versa.
Carry what makes you feel comfortable and what you can shoot well.
Thanks for setting me straight. I never looked into it myself, just took other people's word for it. I suppose since the fed's switched to .40 it made sense. So if 10mm is superior, why did anyone switch? Why don't more people use it?
From my own experience, I rarely see 10mm period, let alone training ammo, but the again, I don't use it, so I never really look for it. Thanks for the info though, perhaps I'll look into a new caliber.
And that's why us 10mm guys call 40 s&w the 40 short and weak.
Same bullet, shorter casing and weaker load.