https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Skj6k9vSbR0&t=95s

Which one I would prefer as a trail round

Good video Mr. Revolverguy,
I agree with your assessment.  I have a Ruger 4" 357 magnum that I feel very comfortable toting into the sticks (although I don't have 10mm revolver) but far more often select the 10mm which in my case is a G20 cause I still favor the power, control & capacity. 

Thanks for sharing your video.

I have carried .45ACP into the woods for years. My first .45 was a S&W M1917.  I loaded it with full moon clips and it was my "trail" gun for several years. I replaced it with a 1911. Recently,  I got the itch for something a little more powerful. I tried changing springs and small parts in my Colt 1991Z and shooting .45 Super. What a disaster. It beat me up, beat the gun up, and mean time between failures was probably ten rounds!

I realized the only proper thing to do was to purchase another pistol. I love the 1911 platform. So I looked at many options, including the Coonan in .357 Mag. --- http://www.coonaninc.com/product/357-magnum-classic/ 

I had never paid attention to the 10mm up to this point. But once I "discovered" the 10mm I started looking at all sorts of things about it. I focused on my requirements and compared the options. I wanted more - more bullet diameter, more bullet mass, and more bullet momentum. More than the .357 would provide. In the end, it came down to a decision between a 10mm 1911 and a .45 auto that could handle .45 Super with no changes, right out of the box.  I decided on a 6" barreled (for a little more!) 10mm and I'm glad I did.

Someday I may pick up a .357 Magnum Coonan auto so I can have even MORE fun. But the 10mm will still be my "trail" gun.

The 10mm can be equal or better than the 357....

Alone for the 15 rounds in a G20 , I would pick it between the two.

Yep, the 357 is fun as well an effective rd, but with the ability to shoot 16 rd's from the G20 before reloading, gosh, that's lot of firepower : )

Many moons ago when the 357 was still a magnum, I loaded the Speer half jacket 146gr HP with 8.6 grs of Hercules Unique. That put velocity at a hair over 1400'ps out of a 6" Python. The load was rifle accurate out of the Python and kills were like a Peterbilt fell from the sky on coyote sized animals. Finished off a few deer that city hunters wounded with the gun too. Kills were near instant. Now, the 357 is just a large cased 38 Special and nothing like it once was. The design pressure of the gun was 47,500CUPs. That's down to somewhere around 35-37,000CUPs. Most of it is due to cheap crap import pistols that couldn't stand up to the pressure. You can also add Smith & Wesson to the list of pistols too weak to accept a full diet of magnum loads. But life goes on. Wish I could find a bunch of those 146gr Half Jackets. They were the pinnacle for a 357 mag. And no, the 140gr bullets aren't the same, not even close.

The 10mm will get you a lot closer to having an old 357 mag with a 150gr bullet that you can get up to 1450'ps. The obvious advantage of the 10mm is the option to go a lot heavier on bullet weight IF you need the penetration a heavier bullet brings to the game. Depending on the game you expect to encounter, I'd suggest taking a look at the 135gr Nosler at 1500'ps. If the gun will shoot the load accurately, it's a pretty darn good bullet. Think of it as a 9mm Extra Magnum.

Quote from: Trapper6L on August 11 2018 04:05:54 PM MDT
Many moons ago when the 357 was still a magnum, I loaded the Speer half jacket 146gr HP with 8.6 grs of Hercules Unique. That put velocity at a hair over 1400'ps out of a 6" Python. The load was rifle accurate out of the Python and kills were like a Peterbilt fell from the sky on coyote sized animals. Finished off a few deer that city hunters wounded with the gun too. Kills were near instant. Now, the 357 is just a large cased 38 Special and nothing like it once was. The design pressure of the gun was 47,500CUPs. That's down to somewhere around 35-37,000CUPs. Most of it is due to cheap crap import pistols that couldn't stand up to the pressure. You can also add Smith & Wesson to the list of pistols too weak to accept a full diet of magnum loads. But life goes on. Wish I could find a bunch of those 146gr Half Jackets. They were the pinnacle for a 357 mag. And no, the 140gr bullets aren't the same, not even close.

The 10mm will get you a lot closer to having an old 357 mag with a 150gr bullet that you can get up to 1450'ps. The obvious advantage of the 10mm is the option to go a lot heavier on bullet weight IF you need the penetration a heavier bullet brings to the game. Depending on the game you expect to encounter, I'd suggest taking a look at the 135gr Nosler at 1500'ps. If the gun will shoot the load accurately, it's a pretty darn good bullet. Think of it as a 9mm Extra Magnum.

That's pretty hot but Underwood Ammo & Buffalo Bore still load at or above the levels your looking for.   

I couldn't make up my mind so I got both. With the correct bullet they both get the job done.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I love both rounds and have numerous .357 S&Ws, but EDC a G29 (with G20 mag). I used to woods carry a 3 7/8" 610-2, but it has been replaced by a 627-5. Bobcats and coyotes are the only threats around here, 8 rounds of .357 will do just fine. No need to buy another holster either.

To do an absolute fair comparison you need to use bullets of the same sectional density. Look for the heaviest Underwood load of each that has the same sectional density bullet, the 158gr .357 will have the same SD as the 200gr bullet in a 10mm. Now do the test and you will be very surprised, with Underwood, the .357 will actually beat the 10. I love my 10mms, but to be scientifically correct, bullets of the same sectional densities must be used. Especially for a trail gun, penetration will be an important factor due to the numerous situations, and shot angles one might run into, sectional density plays an extremely important role in how the bullet penetrates and performs.
In a revolver, either will do the job. Because of platforms such as Glock and Tangfolio, the 10mm would get my nod due to round count and with the 200gr bullet(you can never have enough ammunition in a life and death situation; yes you shouldn't miss on your first shot, but anyone who's been there knows how much human physiology and psyche play into this).
A well done video.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Todd is spot on about comparing bullet of the same SD.

But it doesn't stop there.  Most ammo makers post velocity numbers based on SAAMI spec barrels.  For 357 Mag there are two specs.  A "vented" barrel, by which they mean a revolver that has a cylinder gap, and a non-vented barrel, like in a semi-auto or a contender.  The vented barrel spec length is 4" of barrel + the cylinder for a total of 5.63".  Non-vented barrel length is 10".

I don't know what barrel length Underwood uses to test, but event a 4" barrel 357 Mag has a some serious length advantage on a Glock 20, about an inch or about 50 fps.

So, you have to check test barrel length and normalize those velocities.  And a Glock 20 4.6" barrel is more like a 3" barrel 357 Mag.

Finally muzzle energy has to factor into this as well as velocity.

One last thing to remember is that an auto loader is usually a fair bit more compact than a revolver.  A S&W 686 with a 4" barrel is the same overall length as a Glock 40.  While not a ballistics advantage per se, how easy to carry is a significant factor.  Ultimate we are concerned with the firepower in the package.

The Glock 40 offers a 200 grain bullet moving an honest 1300+ fps and 16 rounds on tap with lightening fast reloads.  That is a lot of advantage over a S&W 686 with a 4" barrel.

With a 6.5" barreled S&W Model 610, you have the equivalent of a 7" long slide self-loader. I doubt that you would have any trouble killing deer effectively at ranges up to 100 yards with most 200-grain JHP or 150-grain Underwood running out of the S&W 610's longer barrel at about 1500 fps yielding 750 foot-pounds at the muzzle.

The Lehigh "Extreme Hunter" bullet penetrates well and disrupts tissue better than most Jacketed Hollow Point ammunition. No expansion is needed to achieve the desired goals.

Quote from: sqlbullet on August 12 2018 07:38:09 PM MDT
One last thing to remember is that an auto loader is usually a fair bit more compact than a revolver.  A S&W 686 with a 4" barrel is the same overall length as a Glock 40.  While not a ballistics advantage per se, how easy to carry is a significant factor.  Ultimate we are concerned with the firepower in the package.

As a package, the G40 imho trounces the 4" 357 revolvers. Better aftermarket sights and mini red dot mounting option built it.

I betcha a WML attached to the G40 would be pretty close in weight to 686.

Quote from: sqlbullet on August 12 2018 07:38:09 PM MDT

One last thing to remember is that an auto loader is usually a fair bit more compact than a revolver.  A S&W 686 with a 4" barrel is the same overall length as a Glock 40.  While not a ballistics advantage per se, how easy to carry is a significant factor.  Ultimate we are concerned with the firepower in the package.

The Glock 40 offers a 200 grain bullet moving an honest 1300+ fps and 16 rounds on tap with lightening fast reloads.  That is a lot of advantage over a S&W 686 with a 4" barrel.

As for carrying, here are some size comparison pics of my EDC G29 (G20 mags), and S&W N-frame (this one is .45, a 627 snub's 8-shot .357 cylinder is a touch wider).
Regardless of ammo brand, weight, performance, etc....16 rounds of 10mm vs. 8 rounds of .357?...not hard for me to decide.

BTW, the two most accurate handguns i own are the G40, and a Performance Center 686-4 "Light hunter" (.357, 6" barrel).


[attachment deleted by admin]

Quote from: Rojo27 on August 10 2018 09:06:13 PM MDT(although I don't have 10mm revolver)

I do!