10mm vs. .357 Mag

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NELSONs02

Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2008
Messages
340
It's probably been discussed a couple times but I couldn't find any dedicated threads. I've searched on other forums and for some reason this subject brings out a plethora of misleading information. :banghead:

My conclusion is this: With barrels ~5" or less the 10mm wins out in the energy department but add on another two inches or so and the Magnum takes over. That is, a .357 mag out of a 6" barrel will supersede a 10mm out of a 6" barrel (provided the loads are to maximum pressure and the proper bullet weight is selected).

In my comparison I've exclusively looked at two rounds: The Buffalo Bore 125 Grain .357 and the Double Tap 135 grain. I imagine penetration would go to the .357 in any event but these two rounds are very close in terms of muzzle energy. Note: I'm aware that these two loadings wouldn't be the best option for max penetration.

So lets hear what you guys (and gals?) think about this.
 
To my way of thinking, there is more to consider than simple energy.

For a field/trail gun, I want a one that's fairly compact, concealable and capable of stopping a black bear. I want it to be rugged and easily cleaned out in a stream should it get dropped in the mud or whatever.

I want sufficient capacity since there is no ammo resupply. A quick reload is nice. The reload being compact is also an advantage.

This excludes most revolvers.
 
I think it more depends on what you like to carry and what you're going to do with it. I'm a revolver guy and outdoorsman/hunter. for me, there's nothing like 4" at 100 yards accuracy of my Blackhawk. No autoloader I have experience with in 10mm can match that accuracy. Oh, sure, you can spray and pray, has on business in the hunting fields, or anywhere else for that matter. My 180 grain XTP pushes 1400 fps from my Blackhawk. I've taken a few hogs and deer with it. Put a wadcutter in it, dial the sight back up, and go rabbit hunting with the same deadly accuracy for your camp meat.

In defensive guns, .357 revolvers are easier to carry than the few 10s out there, though the Glock 29, if you like Glocks, ain't bad for size. I'll take a 3" SP101 or K frame, myself, though, in the .357 caliber. It's as proven a fight stopper as there is on the street even today, and besides, I have dies and molds for it. :D
 
Well if you dies and molds then your opinion may be a little bias haha

I understand the practicality issues with weapons in these calibers and every sitiuation may be different. For example when deer hunting I shouldn't need 15 rounds of 10mm to get the job done. If that'd be the case I think i'd have other issues :rolleyes:

I might have to try out that software though and try to come up with a solid fact-based argument. I just get so upset when novice internet folk say "oh the 10mm is more powerful than the .357 hands down". I know it's like comparing apples to ah.......well apples I guess but it just gets me really fired up.

Those sort of comments are like someone telling me my grandpa sucked at skinning deer or my old truck is never gonna get me any anymore. It just doesn't sit right with me.
 
Ballistically, there isn't enough difference in these calibers to worry about. What I'm sayin' is, choose the autoloader if you like autos, the revolver if you like revolvers. That's the main difference. Of course, there is the Smith and Wsson 610 and the Coonan autoloader, but those are exceptions and I really never cared for either gun. I like revolvers in the field, and especially single actions. The Blackhawks are tough, tough handguns. I've never had the occasion to throw it in the mud, but I reckon it'd clean up as easy as any Glock. Push pin retainer, pull pin, drop cylinder, wash out. What's complicated about that? I'm not a trained ninja, though, don't go looking for mud holes to hide in, or mud banks like Rambo did. And, where I've done my hiking, there aren't any mud holes, atop the rather arid and rocky southern New Mexican mountains. That one just ain't a big concern of mine.
 
IMHO, I thought the 10mm was very comparable to the .357 mag. Just a quick look at 180 gr. JHP loading data in one of my books (in this case Lee's modern reloading) First on top of the list for .357 shows 12.5 grains of Alliant 2400 gives 1300 fps with 32700 psi. The 10mm top of the list shows 9.7 grains of IMR 800X gives 1320 fps with 34200 psi. They look pretty even to me. LM
 
I would agree with your conclusions. They are a lot more alike than different. For a strictly hunting handgun I would give the edge to the 357 revolver. Even with a shorter 4" or so barrel because when fired single action most revolvers will be much more accurate. Especially at longer ranges.

When hiking in an area where 2 or 4 legged predators are a possibility I prefer the higher capacity of my G-20 in 10mm. The auto will be more likely to hold up in a dirty environment than a revolver and it is much lighter and more compact. In rapid fire close range shooting I shoot an auto more accurate than a double action revolver.

In short both are very good and have their place.
 
MCgunner: I have a 7.5" Super Blackhawk. They are very rugged revolvers indeed. I understand what you're saying though. There isn't really a need for crunching numbers and going on about energy and what not, just as long as you have the gun that fits your needs. HOWEVER it's extremely tough for me to except people's bias opinions that are usually given without any certain conditions. THIS I think is what I'm struggling with here.

Lightning: The two rounds are almost identical with some loads I just wish the younger crowd (which I'm a part of) would give the .357 the respect it deserves and stop with this whole FBI story obsession.

Especially when they compare the 10mm to the .41 mag. :fire:
 
You're quite correct that the 10 doesn't come even close to the .41 magnum. One can handload the .41 to near .44 ballistics. It works at similar pressures, it is .410" vs .429, even nearly the same there! It is limited only in that it can't handle the big 300 grain .44 pills. But, then, I have a Blackhawk in .45 Colt, too, which I'm sure is not considered to be much with the younger set. Yet, I push a 300 grain XTP to 1200 fps with a .451" bullet.

See, that's why I like revolvers, my age, I'm old. I saw Dirty Harry in college at the theater. I never cared much for Miami Mice. I've got autos, but revolvers make the most logic to me outdoors for two reasons, power and versatility. You can shoot small game loads to bear loads from the same revolver with no jams, just usually a sight elevation change. And revolvers can defend you, too, just as they did for all those cops when Dirty Harry came out. .38 and .357 were in the holsters of nearly every LEO in the country back then. Now days, the ninjas have taken over. It's all about Glocks and M4s and mossberg 590s.
 
NELSONsO2, IMO comparing the 10mm to the 41 mag is like comparing the .357 sig to the .357 mag. There isn't any comparision. BTW I really respect the .357 mag. and like it a lot, I have five revolvers chambered for it. I once owned a S&W .41 mag & a Glock 10mm but have neither now.
 
most posts here are confusing a "woods" handgun with a "hunting" handgun.

Sometimes, they are the same, but more often they are not.
 
The .357 is "more gun" for a fact. It's not just more power, it's better SD as well. Nothing wrong with 10mm but the 10mm zombies think it is the be all end all and it's not even close. I'll take my "old fashioned" 11.5mm .45 Colt or even the .357 any day. For a pistol round the 10mm is good but really there are no "great" pistol rounds when it comes to dangerous game.
10mm was designed to kill people and that is where is is best suited, Nothing more.
 
The ballistic performance look pretty close to me.
Click to expand...
Of course it's possible to find loads that overlap between the 10mm and the 41 Mag, but the fact is, the top end for the 41 is way, way higher than the top end for the 10mm. The 41 can push a 270gr bullet from a 4" barrel faster than the 10 can push a 200gr bullet from a 4.5" barrel.

Between the 10mm and the .357 there's so little difference it's hardly worth considering. Every little advantage one has over the other is countered by somethng else. e.g the 10's larger diameter is offset by the .357's better SD.
 
Last edited:
I like all the good points you folks make concerning the .357. I have one and love the versatility of powderpuff .38's to max load 180's out of the same gun.

Glad to see my own conclusions validated by others. I like both and carry both as the mood suits me.

Besides, I like having the equal of 16 .357's in my hand..... :what:
 
10mm is a superb cartridge that never made it big. .357/.38 Revolvers are the definition of reliability and versatility. I bet there is at least one box of 357 or 38 ammo in every gun shop in America. 10mm can be hard to find.
 
Sounds like to me that it's the same old which is better controversy all over again...."the 9MM or the 45 ACP". I own both and enjoy both. One is a semiauto round(yea I know the S&W 610) and the other is a revolver round. Flip a coin and be done with it.
 
To me they are both about the same. Hot loads in one are about the same as hot loads in the other. On paper the 10mm can be shown to be better while with other stats the 357 mag is better.

I shoot both a lot so I don't see the advantages so much any more.

I moved to the 357 SuperMag (AKA 357 Maximum) for more power.
 
loadedround said:
Sounds like to me that it's the same old which is better controversy all over again...."the 9MM or the 45 ACP". I own both and enjoy both. One is a semiauto round(yea I know the S&W 610) and the other is a revolver round. Flip a coin and be done with it.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, I'm not trying to settle which one is better, that would be next to impossible for anyone to agree on. I'm trying to make a judgement on which one is more powerful. I understand the two rounds are almost identical but there is limitations to both cartridges.

I'd like to do some testing the only problem is, is that my .357 is gone (stupid decision on my part) and I don't have a 10mm. I'd like to get two 4" guns and two 6" guns in each caliber and see which ones I can safely produce more energy out of. If I had to go about doing this today that's probably what I'd do.
 
You will get more energy out the .357 but we are talking about less than 100 ft lbs. We have the information available. The .357 is going to be up to 800 ft lbs and the 10mm is going to be around 735 ft lbs. Out of five inch barrels we get the following:
10mm http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=114
.357 http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=100
The .357 is more gun - more power and better SD. If I had one shot at a black bear the
.357 will penetrate more and that is what you want. For people I'd take the 10mm generally. Both could work either way but both have strong suits.
 
What's always been particularly frustrating to me when trying to compare any type of different calibers is the different weights of all the different projectiles. True apples to apples comparisons would be much easier if you could say, ".357/125gr does this and 10mm/125gr does this and .41 mag does this. While a lot of folks say, "Well energy ain't everything." Maybe so but it's still the only equalizer for comparison available. Even still, outside the lab does 100fps velocity or 100ft/lbs energy really matter above some point?

I love 'em both. But I carry a 10mm because that 8" Colt .357 is really a pain to conceal.
 
Without straying much further into the "which one is better" zone, I agree about the versatility of the .357 and would add that what the .357 is to revolvers the 10mm is to semi autos.
 
From NELSONs02:

I'd like to do some testing the only problem is, is that my .357 is gone (stupid decision on my part) and I don't have a 10mm. I'd like to get two 4" guns and two 6" guns in each caliber and see which ones I can safely produce more energy out of. If I had to go about doing this today that's probably what I'd do.
Click to expand...

If you want to do this for your own purposes and for fun go on ahead and enjoy. Hand loading would be the best way to proceed and it would be enjoyable to spend a year or two experimenting with various loads for both. If you want to actually find out just the data though others have collected and published that data in both book format and on line so we can see it for ourselves.

I believe you will find that overall (with various bullet weights, types or bullets and powders and barrel lengths) that the .357 Magnum comes out ahead by a bit. It is hard to beat the versatility of the 38/357 from most handguns. As a popular round for decades now there are many bullet types and loads available as well as guns.

The 10mm is no slouch. The round from a 5" or 6" barrel in a tuned 1911 is useful for hunting and can equal or beat a revolver in accuracy. Colt, S&W, Dan Wesson (CZ), EAA Tanfoglio, Glock and others all make guns in 10mm.

For shooters who are more accurate with semis than wheelguns the 10mm can make a good hunting round for game up to black bear size.

The 10mm is less versatile a round than the 38/357 combo but for some shooters and some purposes it can be a better choice.

tipoc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

chopinbloc
  • Locked
10mm vs. .357 mag ballistic gelatin test
Replies
16
Views
5K
chopinbloc
chopinbloc
N
  • Locked
.357 compared to 10mm?
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
Jim March
J
N
  • Locked
10mm vs. .45 Super
2
Replies
29
Views
17K
Nightcrawler
N
5
  • Locked
Sig Sauer 10mm 180gr V-Crown in Clear Ballistics Gel
Replies
7
Views
759
Zaydok Allen
Zaydok Allen
K
  • Locked
.44 Mag. revolver vs. .357 Mag. carbine
Replies
20
Views
2K
MICHAEL T
M
Back
Top