a factory 10mm in a Semi-Auto compares to what Revolver caliber ?

Power wise? . . . The 10MM Auto cartridge compares to full power 357 Magnum and often slightly beyond

Accuracy wise? . . . The 10MM Auto cartridge is on par with the 41 Magnum which has similar aerodynamic characteristics

41 Magnum...

I have carried each, and shot critters with each of them. It is a little bit better than a .357, but it ain't no .41 magnum.

__________________
Eccentric old coot

Definitely not a 41 mag. Only thing that makes it better than a 357(maybe) is it has a 4 in the caliber.

Equal to 41mag.

__________________
Dave Ramsey Cultist

A stiff loaded .357 in a comparable barrel length!

__________________
14 S&W Revs none with locks!

Whenever this discussion pops up (I think it’s already been a couple months since the last .41mag vs. 10mm debate), I break out the popcorn. The fact is: 10mm will always fall short of .41 magnum. The hottest loaded 10mm may just approach mildly loaded .41 mag ballistics, but just barely. Factory .41 mag has at least a 200 ft/lb ME advantage over factory 10mm out of the same length barrel. Don’t believe me? Go over to ballistics by the inch and see for yourself.

__________________
USS Brewton FF1086
SWCA#3597

None really, but the closest would be the .41 Magnum..

Data shows .41 Mag 210gr at 1233 fps. and 10mm 200gr 1130. Close but not quite.

But when it showed up in a semi in the '80s, it got my attention..still does.

Much of the "like a 41 Magnum" chatter that goes on around the internet is a mis-quote from an article that John Taffin did on the 10MM Magnum cartridge about 20+ years ago. In that article he did say the 10MM was on par with the 41 Magnum. However he was not referring to the 10MM Auto, it was the 10MM Magnum. Folks have just ended up dropping that last part. . .thus an Internet Urban Legend is born

Yes it is possible to download the 41 Magnum to the level of the full power 10MM Auto, but I have never seen the need.

I agree with this as long as we can all agree that while this is totally accurate... it doesn't tell the entire story when the rubber meets the road.

The .41 Magnum from -ANY- firearm so chambered is always going to out-do the 10mm ballistically, no matter what 10mm ammo you come up with, and this is guaranteed by simple physics... pressure, allowable space for propellant, end of story.

However when it is time to start shooting, .41 Magnum handguns have six rounds in them. Not sure what the Desert Eagle in .41 holds... 7 perhaps? And even the smallest 10mm guns are packing more ammo and faster reloads and unless Jerry Miculek is in the race, the pistols are going to lay down multiple shots of 10mm in a faster, smoother manner.

Faster shooting, more hits on target, more ammo in the gun, faster reloading.

It definitely makes more sense to compare the 10mm to the .357 Magnum than to try and compare it to the .41 Magnum.

While it has long been common for sellers of 10 MM pistols who do not also sell .41 Magnums to claim they are equal, the politest thing to call that is a fib. In the 1980s Winchester introduced aluminum jacketed 10 MM and .41 Magnum Silver Tip cartridges with the same advertised bullet weight and velocity, 175 grains and 1,250 fps. Glock used those two cartridges to compare their Model 20 10 MM to .41 Magnums and the fib continues. Showing the fib for what it was, at the time those cartridges were introduced Remington was selling 170 grain .41 Magnum cartridges with an advertised velocity of 1,500 fps out of a 4" revolver. Since both 10 MM and .41 Magnum have enough power for most things at close range the better comparison is what they'll do at 100 yards. At 100 yards no 10 MM Auto loading comes close to a standard 210 grain .41 Magnum.

10 mm factory depends on which factory. The usual range ammo is 40SW
"+p".
For practical purposes 10 mm is equivalent to 357 magnum.
If 41 mag means the old "city load", a 210 gr bullet at about 1000 fps from a service length barrel, then the 10 mm can easily best that.

Attached Images

41-Remington-Magnum-1-ar15.com_-540x735.jpg (58.5 KB, 106 views)

That old school print ad is most excellent!

Exactly!

The only 10mm factory load that is anywhere close to where it should be is the "SIG" branded 10mm. Otherwise, roll your own or you really are getting a .40cal that is 65fps faster than .40cal factory ammo is loaded.

To answer the OP's question: The 10mm, hand loaded ammo is comparable to a very, very warm .357Magnum factory load. I'd say even the 10mm is a hair or two more potent even.

The poster that points to the thump/knock down power at 100 yards between the .41Mag and a 10mm brings up a darn good point! The .41Mag is going to have much more kinetic energy at 100+Yards than 10mm can for sure!

That said, .44Special/.44Magnum is my favorite handgun load. I've seen people on this very forum compare the 10mm as equal to the good ol' .44Magnum; which is a total joke! I like 10mm and all but it's certainly NO .44Magnum no matter how you slice it!

$96 for a Model 58! Sounds so cheap! But that would be almost $800.00 in today’s money. Still a great deal, because you won’t touch a new in box never fired Model 58 for less than twice that much probably.

__________________
USS Brewton FF1086
SWCA#3597

These are my woods guns. 44 magnum 3” and 454 Casull. I carry one or the other.


I do prefer a 454 Casull because of the power.


I do love my revolvers, but I reload for all of the Magnums.



10 mm is one caliber I never acquired. I stock or reload all major calibers from 22 LR/WMR to 380 ACP up to the 500 magnum in handguns.

My most powerful semiautomatic pistols are the 357 magnum Coonan “1911” and 44 Magnum Desert Eagle.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

I think the most judicious comparison between 10mm and 41 Magnum was that they were going to both be the theoretical perfect "sweet spot" calibers for police and security work in autoloaders and revolvers, respectively. Theoriticiains, experts, men in the field, all set down and thought that a high power cartridge inbetween 9mm and 45 in pistols and 38 Special and 44 Magnum/Special in revolvers would be the perfect, ideal load that would combine the advantages of power and bullet size from the larger bore over the 9mm/38 and better penetration from smaller bullet diameter over 44/45, even using lighter bullets than the bigger calibers for lower recoil.

No, power wise they aren't the same, although they can overlap if you want lighter service grade 41 ammunition. Yes, they are close enough in caliber for some comparison. But I always consider them very related in the fact they were both the later 20th century Prophesised Rounds of Ascended Perfection that were going to learn from the popular service rounds that came before them and correct their flaws, take their strengths, and move onward to a better future in performance. Both ended up becoming obsolescent and now are considered truly boutique by many, their old rivals still maintain to this day their success and popularity.

Today we speak of their excellent performance and admire the cartridges they are. Despite their great qualities, they are now also mostly footnotes in service history terms. The 9mm and 45 ACP still carry on, the 357 Magnum and 44 Special are still carried in backup revolvers even if the full size service revolver is all but extinct in the US. The 10mm and 41 Magnum will always be the "rounds that were to be Kings" of 70's and 80's lore and theory, if never all that much practice.

Funny thing, but they both failed because they were too powerful, with factory loads, for the intended user (law enforcement).

The 10mm got downloaded to the 40 S&W. The 41 Magnum never got the 41 Special, or reduced factory loads, that LE wanted.

While a 10mm auto benefits from a lack of a barrel-cylinder gap it's 4-1/2" barrel is actually a 3-1/4" barrel which probably offsets the revolver's 4" barrel & it's B-C gap.

The 10mm has a higher SAAMI max pressure (37.5K psi) than the 41 Mag (36K psi). Comparing case capacity it's no match. The 41 mag holds 33.8 grs/H²O to the 10mm's 24.1 grs/H²O, or 40% more volume.

For the 10mm, with a 200gr bullet, a max load would be about 13.0gr/2400. For the 41 Mag, with a 210gr bullet, a max load would be about 19.0gr/2400. Again, no comparison.

I have both, & like both, but I don't compare them that way.

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

THIS MAY ANGER SOME, BECAUSE THE .41 MAG HAS A CULT LIKE FOLLOWING---BUT I CONSIDER THE .41 MAG TO BE THE ANSWER TO A PROBLEM THAT DOESN'T EXIST. IT MAY BE A FAVORITE OF THE HANDLOADERS AND TINKERERS, BUT I DO NOT RELOAD.....

IMHO---THERE IS NOTHING THAT THE .41 MAG CAN DO, THAT CAN'T BE DONE WITH THE APPROPRIATE LOAD OF FACTORY AMMO IN EITHER .357 MAG OR .44 MAG, PICKED UP RIGHT OFF THE SHELF OF A LGS, OR ON-LINE FROM A BOUTIQUE MANUFACTURER.....

__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.

I've always thought the 10mm falls inbetween the .357 Magnum and .41 Magnum. I love 10mm, but it requires custom brands or handloads to reach its full potential. On the other hand, .357 Magnum, .40 S&W, and .44 Magnum full house factory ammo can be found pretty easily. I say it is still hard to beat the Remington .357 125 grain SJHP at 1450 fps for most handgun puproses.

While I'm primarily a revolver guy, the only reason that I would buy a 10mm revolver is if I used either a 10mm auto or a 40S&W. With 38s/357s, 44s and 45 revolvers already at hand I don't see a use that isn't already covered. Now if I was advising a guy who loved his Glock in 40 who wanted a revolver and didn't want to stock more types of ammo than necessary a 10mm revolver would be the ticket since they also fire 40S&W using moon clips. If I was running a police force w the authorized cartridge being a 40, I'd authorize 10mm revolvers for guys who wanted a revolver rather than a semi.

Of course having something bc you want it is ok but it doesn't float my boat.

Finally it isn't a 41Mag on its best day. Note I didn't mention having a 41 either. If I need more than a 357, I'll jump up to a 44. Nothing wrong w a 41 but I stock / reload for enough different cartridges already. I don't own a semi in 40 either my needs being covered by 32, 9mm or 45ACP in semis.

Solid post BlueDot! As to the emboldened... I've always wondered why for semi-auto's they count the chamber as part of the barrel's over all length... So for a 5" 1911 Gov't model the rifled part of that "barrel" is 4 inches or less. Yet we all know it as the venerable 5" Gov't model. I guess the powers to be knew it would be too confusing to the layman and included the chamber in the semi-auto barrels over all length. However, going by the semi-auto measurement standards if applied to a 3" barreled M29... it's over all barrel length would be well over 4 inches if it's chamber/cylinder was included in the measurement. But, hey, it is the way it is and we all understand the different measurements in regards to Revo's and Semi-Auto's. You brought up a great comparison in those regards to explaining the cylinder gap and true barrel length of the 41Mag and the semi-auto 10mm's "True" barrel length... which includes the chamber!

The above thoughts can be said of a lot of calibers that have been invented(or re-invented). The 41 and 10 mm didn't necessarily "fail" because of too much power. The 41 was on the cusp of the semi auto taking over the police business...the perception of the 10mm just seemed to lose out to the larger mag capacity of other rounds. I actually do not and will not own a 40 S&W...yeah..it is a worthwhile round but I'm not a cop. and to be honest I don't have much use for plastic firearms which many of the wonder guns are made from. Just a personal preference. I am a revolver person. Yep my carry pieces are mostly semi autos.... first a pair of 3 inch J frames(36 and 60) but usually a Kimber Micro 9 and a full size Wilson in the winter. I have 357s 41s and of course 44s. I carry a M-57 or 58 because it works for me and I have always shot the 57 especially well. The heavy 357 loads in smaller revolvers are just a bear to shoot well. As are the 44 mag loads in most all revolvers...except my ol 3 screw RSBH and I really can't say full heavy loads in it are "fun"

As Skeet 028 points out, we can say the exact same thing about the 44 Magnum.

There is nothing that a 44 Magnum can do that can not be done by a 41 Magnum or a 460 Magnum with Factory ammunition picked right up off the shelf of a LGS or on-line from a Boutique manufacturer.

So what? If you like 44 Magnums, that is fine

We have Fords, Dodges and Chevys there is noting wrong with folks that like any one of them and there is no need for them to be in a Cult to enjoy their favorite

I think that the 40 S&W is proof of your statement for the 10mm, but I honestly don't think power was the real, final issue with 41 Magnum. 10mm/40 S&W is of different enough caliber to make a difference between its to largest competitors, .35 and .45, to justify the choice of caliber because it will have different enough properties. After 10mm did indeed fail commercially, it did bring about a child cartridge that has seen success, even if it too may be on the wane at some point. 41 Magnum could have easily seen 41 Special brought about, just trim the case.

I think the final nail in the 41 coffin was the fact that its closest bigger competitor was only .429, and 41 is a .41 . While 40 S&W is different enough from 45 ACP to make claims at its average power across the board, 41 Magnum's close caliber to the 44 meant its gains were very small, almost theoretical, and all the of advantages of the caliber lie in high power, magnum loads. The entire theory of its being and supposed combat superiority, even as a hunting revolver, lie in its supposed advantages at high power high velocity over the 44 MAGNUM, if we really want to get serious and honest there is nothing the 41 Special would have offered us that would have been any better than 44 Special.

If you are going to choose a high power magnum for service duty, choosing a smaller one makes sense to reduce recoil and maximize barrier penetration. But, if you are going low power the case for the big bore is far stronger. Thus the Magnum lover might choose the 357 over the 44 AND the 41 for recoil control, but also the Special shooter might choose the 44 over the 38 AND the 41 because if you are going to go big, you might as well go full bore. 38 held its own for people who liked to shoot light and cheap, 357 Magnum held its own by those who liked magnums but not too much magnum, 44 Special held its own by lower power big bore shooters. The 41 Magnum could not displace the 357 Magnum, nor could the 41 Special ever displace or offer advantage over, the 44 Special. It was doomed from day one wither they offered lower power ammunition or not.

If we forced competent men in a hypothetical situation to go back to service revolvers for regular duty, i would guess most would choose 8 shot N frame 357 Magnums, or 7 shot L frame, and if we asked the 6 shot big bore boys what they want some might still take the 44 Magnum. But, for those low power big bore shooters you would get probable answers for 45 ACP revolver, even maybe Model 25's in 45 Colt, and 44 Special. I think by the end of the theory you would not find hardly one who would seek out a 41 Special if it was introduced and offered to them.

As the ad posted above indicates, while it was thought the .41 Magnum would be an ideal police round in between the .357 Magnum and the .44 Magnum, it was often loaded down significantly in police loads to make it possible for the average police officer to shoot it acceptably well. Elmer Keith himself planned it as a hunting round using 210 gr JSPs at 1300-1400 fps and also in a lower powered police load with a 200 gr SWC at only 900 fps.

The 10mm Auto followed suit as well with the load being reduced by the FBI to make the recoil more manageable, with a 180 gr bullet around 950 fps. That in fact is what led to the development of the .40 S&W, it was "Short and Wimpy" by design.

In the end, the .40 S&W, the neutered 10mm Auto FBI load and .41 Magnum police loads all launched bullets at roughly similar weights and velocities that were well under the potential of the .41 mag and 10mm Mag.

The irony is that these all gave about the same performance as the .38-40 introduced in 1874, which got the job done just fine back then.

The .357 magnum launches a lighter 158 gr bullet a couple hundred feet per second faster, or an even lighter 125 gr bullet about 400 fps faster, but does basically the same job.

In terms of actual results in LEO involved shootings, nothing really performs significantly better than the .357 Magnum or .357 Sig. You might see small improvements here and there, but they all work about as well as the other.

The 10mm Auto is fully the equivalent of or very slightly exceeding the muzzle energy of the .357 Magnum, but with a bullet that is slightly larger in diameter. The 10mm Auto is not and cannot match the energy of the .41 Magnum and remain within SAAMI pressure limits.

The 357 Magnum revolvers of the day were largely medium frame guns. The N-frame 41 Mag weighed more than a N-frame 44 Mag with the same barrel length.

Had the shorter 41 Special been introduced it would have benefited most by being matched to a medium frame revolver.

The 44 Special, being from the black powder era, is restricted to & relegated to just a 15.5K psi (SAAMI) max factory load.

The "retroactively" created 41 Special wouldn't have had any ties to older weaker cartridges/guns, & it could have easily had a modern smokeless powder SAAMI pressure limit in the mid to upper 20K psi range, over shadowing the 44 Special's limit, but maintain itself in a sub-magnum category.

But in reality none of it would have mattered since the market was slowly turning towards semi-autos. And today nobody is going the take the time & money to SAAMI certify the 41 Special.

From a "factory only load" perspective, a L-frame 41 Special would have been an interesting SD revolver though.

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

44 Russian was a blackpowder cartridge, but 44 Special was pure smokeless. Its lower pressure standard is for pre World War I gun steel and chinsy cheap junko revolvers, 13k pressures are unsafe for blackpowder even. The same way that 44 Magnum was made longer to keep it from being chambered in 44 Special guns, the 44 Special itself was long enough so that the new smokeless round would not chamber in a 44 Russian blackpowder chamber. The longer cases weren't just for better performance, but also act as safety measures.

44 Special was being loaded up past the modern SAAMI standard in strong frame revolvers too. Skeeter Skelton and all that, Keith worked his way up on post WWI steel N frames with the 44 Special to lead the way to 44 Magnum. All one has to do with 44 Special is get SAAMI to create a 44 Special +p for an old cartridge to let folks know which ones should or should not. 41 Special was not going to offer much more than what a different pressure loading for the 44 Special could have done, and WAS done by Skeeter et al.

I guess I am one of those angered by those who dismiss the .41 Mag.
I carried one for 13 years as a LEO. That 41 Mag. and I were in some serious social encounters, two of them fatal. We're still here.
When my agency issued 357 Magmuns and required they be carried, I quit and went back to ranching.
During the 20 years on the ranch, I carried either a Govt model or CCO model 10mm on my hip.
When I moved back to town, I backed down to a 45 ACP. I feel the 10mm has too much horsepower for CCW in a city environment.

__________________
Eccentric old coot

When I go to the city, I see cars with 4-5 gangster types cruising around. I carry a 10mm with 14 round mags. To much power? Nah.. a 45acp is fine with no obstructions(car doors, etc..) I'd rather to much power than not enough..

Well the cowboys and their 4X4s still outnumber the gangs here and my tri-weekly trips to the "Wrinkle Ranch" coffee meeting at Mickey D's don't expose me to many gangs.


If I was goin' to bigger city, I'd wipe off the 10mm's and drop them in a holster too.

__________________
Eccentric old coot

I'm still waiting for someone to introduce a .375" pistol cartridge, so it can be marketed as the best thing since pre-sliced bread.

From Handloader #241 article by Mike Venturino:

"...in Hatcher’s Notebook, the author comments that the .44 Special was made longer than the .44 Russian to accommodate smokeless powders but then goes on to list it as being loaded with 26 grains of black powder.

In fact I poo-pooed the idea that black-powder .44 Special factory loads had ever been made until Dave Scovill told me he had seen very early catalog listings of such."
.

From Handloader #289 article by Brian Pearce:

"Records indicate that early (44 Special) ammunition was assembled with 26.0 grains of black powder and propelled a 246 gr. roundnose lead bullet around 780 fps, while a smokeless load, appearing at approximately the same time, propelled the same bullet around 750 fps.".

.

Which is exactly why we have the 44 Magnum, so the wrong power ammo doesn't incorrectly get into the wrong strength gun. Maybe that's why 38 Special (+P) isn't loaded to near 357 Magnum power?

.

Time to give this back to the OP's original question.

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

Most of the 210 grain .41 Magnum ammo that I have chronographed from a 4" barrel has been in the 1250+- fps range. From a standard 5" Government length 1911, 200 to 220 grain hardcast rounds run in the high 1100s to 1200 fps.

The sectional density of a 210 grain .41 bullet is the same as a 200 grain 10mm bullet and a 220 grain 10mm bullet has the same SD as a 230 grain .41 bullet. So if both are traveling within 50 fps of each other, the .41 is going to have more energy but with bullets of equal construction is the object hit with the bullet going to know the difference?

I like and use both calibers. Anything I would shoot with one I would have confidence shooting with the other....

Bob

Speaking of fibs try searching YouTube for tests of the original Norma 10mm ammo. Much of the 10's reputation for coming close to the 41 in power comes from the big numbers printed on the box of this ammo.

In the test at the 170 grain load that was advertised at 1400 ft/s came in at 1220.

About 20 minutes into the video at the 200 grain load advertised at 1200 ft/s came in around 1000.

I was a big fan of the 10mm back when it came out in the 80s and remember reading a lot of articles in the gun magazines back then showing better velocities much closer to the advertised velocities. Maybe they were using different batches of ammo or had longer barrels. But the simpler explanation is gun magazines back then never printed a negative article about any gun and always went the extra mile to show any new gun or cartridge in the best possible light.

As the most powerful cartridge available for conventional semiautos the 10mm is a good cartridge. There is no need to exaggerate its abilities.

I loaded my 10 mms with 180 Golden Saber bullets at about 1250. Never had to shoot anything twice.

__________________
Eccentric old coot

Sold My Delta Elite but I still have the Bren Ten. Don't shoot it very often. Took it to Gunsite just to play. Jeff Cooper liked the 10mm and once remarked that what the 45acp will do at 35 yards the 10mm will do at 75 yards.
I ran a Magnum handgun match at the gun club for 15 years using Pepper Poppers mounted to a base and canted(after much playing) forward at 7 degrees in order to prejiduce the calibers. Center for 44, top circle for 41, head shot for 357. Those who wanted to shoot the 10mm were invited to try. None went down with a magazine of hits. In My opinion the 10mm isn't in the same zip code as the 41.

[QUOTE=BLUEDOT37;140206055]From Handloader #241 article by Mike Venturino:

"...in Hatcher’s Notebook, the author comments that the .44 Special was made longer than the .44 Russian to accommodate smokeless powders but then goes on to list it as being loaded with 26 grains of black powder.

In fact I poo-pooed the idea that black-powder .44 Special factory loads had ever been made until Dave Scovill told me he had seen very early catalog listings of such."
.

From Handloader #289 article by Brian Pearce:

"Records indicate that early (44 Special) ammunition was assembled with 26.0 grains of black powder and propelled a 246 gr. roundnose lead bullet around 780 fps, while a smokeless load, appearing at approximately the same time, propelled the same bullet around 750 fps.".

The 44 Special, created in 1907, over a decade after the smokeless revolution, can you find me a single blackpowder only 44 Special, or has every single 44 Special ever produced been smokeless or "white powder" proofed, therefore making the REVOLVER ITSELF a smokeless gun? I can load blackpowder into a 300 Win Mag or a 44 Magnum case, it doesn't turn the cartridge into a traditional blackpowder, or blackpowder intended cartridge. Most of all, none of the guns chambered for those cartridges lose their "smokeless" moniker or become blackpowder only guns.

Your proof in literature that a blackpowder factory cartridge came early, or first, does nothing to change the fact the guns were built to be smokeless powder proofed and the SAAMI MAP guideline is purely based on smokeless loads, and has NOTHING to do with the early blackpowder factory loads that were offered. Unless you can show me a factory 44 Special revolver that was blackpowder only, your point is is still invalid.

.

This topic comes up from time to time. I don’t understand it.

I don’t hotrod handloads. With published data, my experience has been...
6” Model 57 - 220 Keith LSWC @ 1350 FPS
5” Delta Elite 10mm - 200 Hornady FMJ or XTP @ 1150 FPS

The difference seems pretty clear to me: about 200 FPS. Whether that’s a big deal is something that I guess could be argued, but it seems pretty substantial to me.

The 10mm lies somewhere between full-charge, long-barrel .357 Magnum and .41 Magnum. It’s a good round and a shame it is not more common, IMHO.