10mm Auto Rim anyone???

[woods_walker]

rognp,
The hoped-for point of my analogy was the concept of  believing you can do more or get more by changing the appearance of something.

The prior "discussion" offered up the idea of putting a rim on a 10mm case with no other changes, stuffing it in a smaller revolver than the .38 Special class, and believing one would somehow get more performance out of it.

On the other hand...

You can have everything you want - 10mm bore, Super Redhawk, 10mm case having more capacity and more horsepower, 1500 fps with a 180 grain- by reaming the 10mm Super Redhawk to 10mm Magnum. My Automag IV runs 180 gr. Hornady XTP's at over 1600 fps. My 10" Contender will run them scary fast. And every bit of the accuracy you would expect from the 10mm is still there in the 10 Mag. But you can't get there with the standard 10mm case because it doesn't have the powder volume.

The 10mm Magnum is the cartridge everybody wants when they say they want a 10mm to perform like a .41 Magnum. The problem is, there ARE big heavy bullets made for the .41, and the magnum case (and the guns) shoot them quite well. There is nothing in the .400" diameter that compares unless going to rifle bullets. Do that and it's yet another issue with overall length and barrel twist. 

You REALLY owe it to yourself to look into the 10mm Magnum. I'm baffled as to why so many 10mm Auto fans have never heard of it.

[sqlbullet]

I get what spudmeister is saying.

Taking the 41 magnum as a case in point.  It is slightly smaller 44 magnum, which was a slightly longer 44 special.  The case capacity of the 44 Special was determined based on the needed case size for smokeless powder circa 1907. However, the technology of smokeless powder at that time was much lower energy density than we have today. It is no small coincidence that the case length was the same as the 38 Special (1898).  This allowed tooling to be standardized on a cylinder length.

What is my point?  Revolver cylinder length standards were driven based on state of the art energy density 1898.  There have been more than a few advancements in that regard since that time.

Putting a 10mm in a revolver with a cylinder frame sized for a 1.60" length cartridge is a recipe for waste.  The bullets are jumping nearly half an inch of freebore to reach rifling, which is not great for accuracy or velocity.  And the guns are not only 1/2" longer than they need to be, but are disproportionately heavier than needed because you are carrying the extra weight times six for each cylinder (probably close to 3 oz of weight).

A scandium frame "310PD" built from the ground up around a 10mm Auto length cartridge could weight under 10 oz and be less than 6" overall length, while delivering 5 shots of full power 10mm defense.  That sounds like a pocker revolver I could get excited about.

Now, how much a 10mm auto-rim would contribute to this reality I don't know.  But it wouldn't hurt.

Another thing that bugs me....

Back in 1898 when the 38 Special came out, prototyping and bringing to production was hard, labor intensive work.  Today, the costs to bring a new cartridge to market is much lower.  Yet the evaluation is based percentage of market capture, not number of end users.  This expands profit margins at the expense of product diversity in a large market.  The cost to introduce and produce limited runs of a 10mm Auto-Rim would be a fraction of the costs of the 45 Auto Rim, especially since it can be derived from 30-30.  But, the profit margins would not be huge, so no one does it.

[The_Shadow]

One thing that has recently happened in the bullet market is the Solid Copper and Solid Brass projectiles with same for HP and break apart designs.  While these bullets tend to be somewhat longer that lead core copper jackets stuff they could prove to be better suited as true hunting performance projectiles.  We have seen many copper plated, lead core copper cup jacketed bullets perform poorly when driven at excessive speeds.  Jacket separations, loss of accuracy are but a few.

Therefore with such bullets from Cutting Edge, Barnes, Lehigh I see the potential of using such projectiles for the 10mm magnum in the field for the purpose.

However, its tough to beat the great performance of the 44 magnum which is only slightly larger in diameter.
To each their own and I know we all love the 10mm auto for what it brings to the table as a semi auto package for conceal ability, many pistol platforms to suit anyone and even longer hunting versions to provide longer sight radius and barrel lengths for long distance performance.

Long live the 10mm cartridge and firearms developments for us all to enjoy! 

[Jim Bridger]

I have a S&W 1955 Target revolver. If you plan to use clips in a revolver get  Moon and Demoon devises.
California Competion makes the Moon tools.. Dillon Precision stocks these. For me the Moon clips have tested
my patients.