40 super easily pushes the big heavy hard cast .401 bullets everbody loves to higher velocity than the 10mm can do, and what about 45 super when it comes to hard cast rounds as well?
I doubt a 4 legged furry creature is going to notice the diffetence between a 10mm 200gr hardcast at 1250fps or a 255gr hardcast going 1075fps. Obviously the 10mm would he flatter but throw 460 rowland in and you are moving that 255gr approx 1300 fps. All 3 calibers can be shot out of a glock 21 and only the 460 requires more than a spring change or barrel.
Yea, those other cartridges can produce some good ballistics, but their development basicly exceeds the original chamber pressures of their designed platforms. Whereas the 10mm fits its original chamber pressures in its designed platform.
I have thought about getting a conversion barrel for mt G-30, but being a short 3.78" barrel I don't think I get much improvements over a 10mm. Being a handloader it would be an easy transition from a conversion. ::)
I am still collecting data for the cartridges of the 45Super, 460 Rowland and the 40Super.
The 10mm definitely has a place but Im trying to fit carrying one into the artificially limited california framework. I can only put 3 guns on my permit due to county restrictions and california law that requires every gun and caliber to be listed.
Switching to a glock 21 would let me carry what I feel is superior for personal defense the 230gr 45acp +p Federal HST and then put a stronger spring, 6" barrel, in and run the 45 super Underwood hardcast for the rare occasion that im in the backcountry.
The 10mm has a lot of untapped potential, IMO. The only major manufacturer backed expanding round is the federal trophy bonded jsp 180gr. What if federal came out with a 200gr version!!??
Id count the critical duty 10mm but it really started out as a 40 cal.
WRONG - the 40 started out as a weak substitute for the 10mm for thoes who couldn't handle the 10mm. Get your facts straight.
Doug
I never thought I'd be exclaiming the cost and availability of 10mm ammo as a benefit, but in comparison to those chamberings, the advantage is real..
Greg
Interesting question. I know nothing about the velocities of 40 Super and only a little of 45 Super. I have been impressed with the 460 Rowland conversion on a 1911, but it requires the use of a comp. The polymer/striker fired pistols rely on slide weight for control of recoil, or so I've read. Not to discount the strength of the recoil spring. Not sure how the Rowland cartridge works out in a Glock conversion but as you mentioned the velocity isn't that much more than a 45 Super. Depends on if you feel the need for that 'extra'.....glad I don't have to suffer from your state's gun laws. ;D
The 40 Super (not a 40S&W so do not be confused) .45 Winchester Magnum necked down to .400"
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/40_Super_Case_Dimensions.jpg/500px-40_Super_Case_Dimensions.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b5/40_Super_Ballistics.jpg/400px-40_Super_Ballistics.jpg)
Wow. Pretty sporty. ;D I looked at the Wiki page........I saw the "Big Brother to the 357 SIG" comment....I do like that cartridge.
Quote from: ShadeTreeVTX on June 24 2014 07:26:20 PM MDT
WRONG - the 40 started out as a weak substitute for the 10mm for thoes who couldn't handle the 10mm. Get your facts straight.
Doug
Misunderstanding. I know the cartridge history. In this case Hornady, developed their critical duty 40 s&w round and then stuffed it into a 10mm case and called it good. Im referring to a lack of development in hollowpoints designed for 10mm velocity.
As a comparison to what people think about the 10mm look at this 460Rowland Youtube to learn more about the conversion and the ballistics.
I guess it comes down to availability of ammo, production choices of firearms, and personal needs.
For me, the 10mm has plenty of choices when it comes to ammo availability. Brass is readily found with little hardship. I can buy factory or reload with general ease. There are also many factory guns available to choose from. I don't need a custom gun or extra parts to make 10mm work. And the 10mm does anything I need it to in a semi auto. I feel safe carrying it anywhere, under any circumstance. It's small enough to conceal, and it's powerful enough that I trust it for bear defense. I would not feel safe carrying any other mass production semi-auto in the woods for bear defense (.50 AE is the exception, but too big to carry while hiking).
I guess I answer this question quite simply. No.
That is not to say there aren't more powerful auto-loader rounds out there. Heck, I could build a 308 AR pistol. I think that would definitely overshadow the 10mm in the delivered energy realm. Or course, I have engaged in the logical fallacy of ab absurdo, extending the argument to absurd lengths.
However, since this illustrates that at some point the pursuit of power results in absurd compromises elsewhere, this argument also perfectly illustrates why I so simply say "No".
But, in order to "overshadow" the 10mm, a round has to do more than just be more powerful. I my mind if must accomplish the following:
Firearms must be available from several major factory vendors in the caliber.
Said firearms must cover the general range of ergonomic and practical needs to the typical user/buyer
The cartridge must be supported by major ammunition vendors
And [the cartridge must be] available for purchase retail at reasonably well stocked ammunition outlets in most major markets.
I don't think another cartridge meets these criteria and exceeds the 10mm in power. You could argue the Desert Eagle guns do so in 44 Magnum, but the size of those guns precludes reasonable ergonomic and practical needs of typical users. I don't see myself tucking a DE 44 Mag in an inside the waste band holster and having it disappear under a t-shirt at the family reunion.
The fact of having to put a comp on the barrel makes it difficult to justify quick swap outs in the .45 cal, where the 10mm is merely just a barrel swap, the springs I use work for 10mm, 40S&W, 357Sig and 9x25Dillon without a comp!
Therefore like most I'm pretty well committed to 10mm platform and only have the one .45Cal G-30 at the moment. Money being tighter these days I don't see me getting into the 460Rowland or 40Super any time soon. :-[
Oh I just checked my Mega Lottery ticket...No Go! ::)
"Switching to a glock 21 would let me carry what I feel is superior for personal defense the 230gr 45acp +p Federal HST and then put a stronger spring, 6" barrel, in and run the 45 super Underwood hardcast for the rare occasion that im in the backcountry."
Looking at mag 360's statement I think it makes sense for his purposes and restrictions by law in the state in which he lives. 'Store bought ammo' I see very rarely in this area for 10mm either. By his criteria 460 Rowland, 40 & 45 Super are only for woods carry, not personal defense. Local laws can narrow choices. Just my opinion.....
Maybe I have a tendency to over think things, but it's who I am I guess. I like the concept of the .40 Super, I just think it's too much of a good thing. I'm not convinced that faster is better when the bullets used are being pushed beyond their design limit (at least with JHPs), and I think that's the problem with the .40 Super, and really even the 10mm to a point. I think the .40 Super would be a better option if it were a .410-.411" like the .41 Mag (called the .41 Super?), at least that way the bullets would be designed for those higher velocities.
In theory if I had a G21 (I have one but prefer the .45 Super as my serious choice) with a .40 Super barrel in it and I was pushing a 200gr WFN hardcast to 1,500 fps, one could argue that it's "better" than the same 200gr WFN doing 1300 fps from a G20. If by better you mean faster then yes it would be better, but the thing is, both will kill deer and hog dead, so I'm wondering if the extra speed is worthwhile. Neither are "high powered" compared to long guns, but both would work well so that's why I don't really see the advantage of the .40 Super over the 10mm.
To take that issue one step further, if I take a .40 SW and run the same 200gr WFN to 1200 from a G22, wouldn't I get the same results ultimately? Sure I would, but I could have it from a thinner, lighter weight platform, this is why the .40, to me and my way of thinking, is the best .400" option. All three would work, and all three would punch a hole (with hardcasts) through pretty much any deer or hog, and that's all you need.
I load the .45 Super from my Gen4 21, and using a threaded and comped KKM barrel (5") I can run 300gr hardcasts to over 1150 fps, or 275gr hardcasts over 1200 fps. The 250/255gr class can hit and slightly exceed 1300 fps, which means the .45 Super can match the performance of the 460 Rowland without having to use a special barrel (although you need one with good case support and a comp), and through the same setup, .45 ACP feels like shooting a light 9mm load.
New cartridge! 41 super!
I want it! If the manufacturers wont make .401 high velocity jhp we'll just move up to magnum bullets!
Quote from: 45BBH on June 26 2014 08:57:12 AM MDT........
In theory if I had a G21 (I have one but prefer the .45 Super as my serious choice) with a .40 Super barrel in it and I was pushing a 200gr WFN hardcast to 1,500 fps, one could argue that it's "better" than the same 200gr WFN doing 1300 fps from a G20. If by better you mean faster then yes it would be better, but the thing is, both will kill deer and hog dead, so I'm wondering if the extra speed is worthwhile. Neither are "high powered" compared to long guns, but both would work well so that's why I don't really see the advantage of the .40 Super over the 10mm.
I don't disagree with your analysis....if the bottom line is to kill a deer/hog, it boils down to personal preference. This reminds me of the 270 vs 30-06 debate. Depending on what the individual wants to accomplish, both are great. Both will drop most wild game in the US.
Quote from: 45BBH on June 26 2014 08:57:12 AM MDT.....
To take that issue one step further, if I take a .40 SW and run the same 200gr WFN to 1200 from a G22, wouldn't I get the same results ultimately? Sure I would, but I could have it from a thinner, lighter weight platform, this is why the .40, to me and my way of thinking, is the best .400" option. All three would work, and all three would punch a hole (with hardcasts) through pretty much any deer or hog, and that's all you need.
Punching a hole through a deer/hog...yep they all will work. However, I have a question regarding the underlined above. I know you mention the G22 a best option for the .400; however, I guess my question is the structural integrity of that smaller frame running those high end loads through that smaller frame. Why did they make the 10mm in the larger frame if it was ok to run those hot loads through the smaller platform? That frame may take several rounds at that loading; but in the longevity of the frame, could it go 500 rounds, 1000, 2500?
Just thinking out loud.
Presume basic premise focuses on semi-auto hand gun design.
I keep getting tangled in what the real problem these "wildcat" calibers are striving to address...
If we're talking about plinking, defense against two legged predators and/or woods
defense in the lower 48; many fine commercially available semi-auto options available
on the shelf.
One guys opinion:
Situations not reasonably resolved by .22 through 10mm semi-automatics likely
to lend themselves into crossing into magnum revolver or greater territory.
Quote from: sqlbullet on June 25 2014 12:45:37 PM MDT
I guess I answer this question quite simply. No.
This what's known as a simple correct answer :D
is it even possible to get 1200 fps from a 200gr out of a G22 with a 4.5" or even 6" extended barrel?
I own 3 pistol calibers I have duplicate same caliber guns. I have 2 22's, 2 .45's. and 3 10mm.
I have 3 10mm pistols because it's my favorite handgun caliber.
Think that pretty much explains my position.
Now rifles I have SIXTEEN Mosin Nagants alone. And a Winchester 95 also chambered in 7.62X54R. 5 Mauser 8mm's., 3 Steyr 8X56R's. 2M1 Garands and a Savage in 30.06........