10mm & 40 cal Blackhawk?

[Huntolive]

Hello gentlemen
I've had Blackhawks and currently own a red hawk, as well as a 454 Casull Freedom Arms model 83 single action.

I have a Glock 20 and the Springfield XDM 10 mm with the longer Barrel.
I also have the target version Springfield XDM 40 cal and a Ruger Sr c 40 compact.

So I thought I might see what 10 mm and 40 cal can Really do.
Until today I wasn't even aware that these existed so I am looking for any experience anyone has in these relatively new Ruger 10 mm and 40 caliber stainless steel dual cylinder Blackhawks.

 

[Tallball]

I would love to have one of those! I shoot 40 S&W fairly often, so it would be very convenient. I would also like to have something in 10mm (the only semi-popular cartridge I'm lacking right now). Please keep us updated.

 

[mcb]

JMHO, but 40/10 in a side gate loading revolver negates the single biggest reason to chamber a revolver in a rimless cartridge and that is the use of thick robust moonclips for fast reloading.

The GP100 in 10mm is far more interesting.

 

[IlikeSA]

I agree with MCB, and would add that maybe a Super Redhawk in 10mm would do better for your experiments, if you really wanted to push the cartridge, than the Blackhawk.

 

[CraigC]

If they had been built on the mid frame instead of the large frame, I'd have one.

A rimless auto pistol cartridge in a single action makes a lot of sense. Just as with the .45ACP, you're running a shorter case at higher pressure. The result is the same performance with a stubby case that ejects more quickly and positively. So it does reload quicker, just not in the same way or for the same reason.

I agree with MCB, and would add that maybe a Super Redhawk in 10mm would do better for your experiments, if you really wanted to push the cartridge, than the Blackhawk.

For these cartridges, the SRH offers no performance advantage. Nor does the large frame Blackhawk.

 

[MaxP]

JMHO, but 40/10 in a side gate loading revolver negates the single biggest reason to chamber a revolver in a rimless cartridge and that is the use of thick robust moonclips for fast reloading.

The GP100 in 10mm is far more interesting.

There is more to life than fast reloading.

You don't get any style points (equally important) with the double-action platform...

 

[ShootMeStraight]

A Blackhawk with lengthened rimmed case with a 10mm projectile would be even better!

 

[SDGlock23]

I've had two, the 4 5/8" and 6.5" and both were good. I also had the GP100 10mm, each have their advantages but the Blackhawk is definitely the more robust of the two. I can't say anything bad about them, they're very cool guns.

 

[mavracer]

A Blackhawk with lengthened rimmed case with a 10mm projectile would be even better!

It's called a 38/40 or 38wcf and predates the others by almost 100 years.
In a Blackhawk it can be a screamer.

 

[Huntolive]

Thanks, if I sell something or get some extra money I think I'll pick up one of these Blackhawks they come with separate cylinders for 10 mm in 40 cal of course which is another Plus

 

[gotboostvr]

It's called a 38/40 or 38wcf and predates the others by almost 100 years.
In a Blackhawk it can be a screamer.

They actually did make a 38/40 &10mm convertible once upon a time.

 

[mcb]

In addition to the speedy reloads of the moonclips fed 10mm. If you feeling like you want more power you can ream your 10mm Auto to 10mm Magnum now you have a 3 cartridge revolver without the need for a cylinder change. You can do this on the 10mm Auto Ruger GP100, & Redhawk or S&W 610.

 

[mavracer]

They actually did make a 38/40 &10mm convertible once upon a time.

Yes Buckeye sports I have one and it's little brother 32/20 32 H&R

 

[GarrettJ]

This particular revolver seems to elicit some contraversy. From here we have seen comments such as “should be a double action for moon clips”, “too big”, “should be 10mm Mag”.

Search elsewhere and you will see the argument that “semi-auto cartridges shouldn’t go in revolvers”, and “.40 S&W is dead, so why bother”.

It’s kind of amusing to sit back and watch.

Having said that, I always kind of wanted one of those .38-40 / 10mm Blackhawk Convertibles. But not for the $1200+ I see them offered for (not that I ever see them sell at that price range). So when the .40/10mm came along I jumped on it.

I like it for what it is. .40s are inexpensive and really gentle to shoot. Since I reload, 10mm is equally inexpensive, and also fun to shoot. Having a steel grip frame, the gun is noticeably heavier than any of my other Blackhawks. Accuracy is very good.

Despite what some claim, the 10mm is not a .41 Mag. While I have found I can get some fairly impressive velocities from the 10mm in this platform, I would still just go to a larger cartridge if I needed more power.

Overall I’m happy with it and enjoy shooting it.

 

[CraigC]

Lots of folks don't understand the concept of auto cartridges in revolvers but most of them probably never tried it.

 

[WestKentucky]

Function is good or bad based solely upon the viewers criteria. If minuscule reloading times mattered then 40 would be preferred over 10 because of the shorter case. 10 would be preferred over 40 for performance on target. 41 mag would be the ultimate in performance in things similar, but it would likely be seen as inferior to some based upon recoil... so what is it that you actually want the gun to do again...

This is THR though so the obvious answer is to buy 7 of each.

 

[mavracer]

Having said that, I always kind of wanted one of those .38-40 / 10mm Blackhawk Convertibles. But not for the $1200+ I see them offered for (not that I ever see them sell at that price range). So when the .40/10mm came along I jumped on it.

Since I have a Buckeye it's tempting to get one and have the 40 cyl cut for 38/40

 

[GarrettJ]

Since I have a Buckeye it's tempting to get one and have the 40 cyl cut for 38/40

I’ve got a line on one of the Buckeyes now. I should have it on a week or so. But before that I was considering sending the .40/10 BH to Ruger to have another cylinder fit to it. Ideally, I could get them to do a .38-40 cylinder. Otherwise I’d just have them do another 10mm and have it reamed to .38-40.

But if I get the other gun, I may just keep them as-is. At least for the time being.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

Lots of folks don't understand the concept of auto cartridges in revolvers but most of them probably never tried it.

I figure aside from situations like the OP's where an *auto-cartridge* is his main shooting focus, the utility of moon-clip reloading is the real boon.

Nothing loads faster than a chamfered cylinder cut for moon clips and, they are an easier carry than the classic speed loader.

Great evidence for this is found in S&W building a *tactical* .357 that takes but does not need moon clips. A brilliant idea in my book.

Todd.

 

[Fyrstyk]

I figure aside from situations like the OP's where an *auto-cartridge* is his main shooting focus, the utility of moon-clip reloading is the real boon.

Nothing loads faster than a chamfered cylinder cut for moon clips and, they are an easier carry than the classic speed loader.

Great evidence for this is found in S&W building a *tactical* .357 that takes but does not need moon clips. A brilliant idea in my book.

Todd.

How do you use moon clips in a SA revolver? Do you have to take the cylinder off each time to load?

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

How do you use moon clips in a SA revolver? Do you have to take the cylinder off each time to load?

I'm only thinking DA and only within the confines of the quoted post stating revolvers.

SA would of course be a problem for clips unless the cylinder is cut for depth, popped and still, on SAa like my Italians, clips would load quicker than singles if one were so inclined and able.

Todd.

 

[TonyAngel]

The advantage that I see with the BH is that it comes with two cylinders. I guess they had to do that since the cartridge spaces on the case mouth and you can’t use moon clips.

I’ve known BHs to be tough and fun to shoot. If you’re a single action six gun guy, what’s not to like?

 

[mcb]

The advantage that I see with the BH is that it comes with two cylinders. I guess they had to do that since the cartridge spaces on the case mouth and you can’t use moon clips.

I’ve known BHs to be tough and fun to shoot. If you’re a single action six gun guy, what’s not to like?

But if you double action and can use moonclips you don't need the extra cylinder. 40S&W works just fine on moonclips in a S&W 610 (10mm Auto chambers) This should also work in a GP100 or Redhawk but I have heard this is not true for some reason, Ruger I am giving you the evil eye.

 

[CraigC]

I figure aside from situations like the OP's where an *auto-cartridge* is his main shooting focus, the utility of moon-clip reloading is the real boon.

Nothing loads faster than a chamfered cylinder cut for moon clips and, they are an easier carry than the classic speed loader.

Great evidence for this is found in S&W building a *tactical* .357 that takes but does not need moon clips. A brilliant idea in my book.

Todd.

They're pretty snappy in a single action as well.

 

[TTv2]

I'm a revolver guy (when they're made well) and a 10mm guy, but I'm not a 10mm revolver guy. IMO the 10mm, while equal to slightly more powerful than .357 Mag, is still weaker than larger calibers. Why buy a Blackhawk in 10mm when you could have one in .45 Colt and .45 ACP?

What would make a 10mm revolver better would be if the 10mm case was longer and had a rim on it, a 10mm Rimmed Magnum. Pretty much identical to the .41 Magnum, but it shoots .401 bullets, not .410, meaning you can still shoot .40 and 10mm Auto from it.