agtman said:
Well, if we're comparing apples to apples, ... at least when choosing among the usual so-called "service cartridges" and the platform of an easy-to-pack autoloader (i.e., 9mm, .357Sig, .40S&W, 10mm or .45acp), it's not even close.
A 15+1 G20 (or 10+1 G29 for that matter) won't be that much weightier than another caliber of Glock (or, e.g., an M&P) when similarly loaded to max magazine capacity, e.g., a 15+1 .40 G22. But the 10mm Glock's payload will easily pack the most punch on delivery, if properly loaded for the task. The key on the G20's portability will be the mode in which its user chooses to carry it. The right belt/holster combo will make all the difference.
As far as "other cartridges" being loaded "hot & heavy," that's when these trail-gun discussions usually migrate into comparing something like a G20 to a magnum revolver. While the magnum wheelie advocates talk a good game, when you're actually out on the trail these guns quickly become 6-shot boat anchors and wind up being dumped into the bottom of the backpack where they're about as useful, when needed, as if they'd been left back at the cabin or camp site.
By the way, more and more trail guides and pilots in Alaska are packing an autoloader rather than a magnum revolver, and guess what? It's not a "Glock Fortay" ...
It's a 10mm G20, loaded up with one of the "hot-n-heavy" factory loads from DT, BB, Underwood, or the user's own hammerhead handload.
Well I can agree that the G20 fully loaded isn't WAY heavier, but it's definitely the heaviest Glock model and you can feel it in a side by side comparison, and I have proper carry equipment but there's no getting around the fact that the 20 is heavier and bulkier than the smaller framed .40's. It's heavier than the more powerful G21 as well.
I didn't intend to bring up revolvers, but yes I've heard the argument over and over about it's six shots vs sixteen, etc, etc. I can see the advantage of both, if I were hunting I'd rather have the more powerful revolver, but that's not to say a Glock couldn't work either, and visa versa for backup gun status. I know people carry the 10mm, but I also know that it's not giving anything the .40 or .45 cannot, moose in Alaska have been killed with a single shot from .40's, and I'm not saying that's the ideal choice, I'm just sayin...
I would say your comment on the the 10mm vs the .40/.45 as being "not even close", is incorrect. A .475 Linebaugh to a 9mm is not even close, but a .40 and a 10mm are close, much closer than the 10mm is to the .41 Magnum, an old myth that's just full of holes. I loaded for the 10mm for a long time, so yeah I know what the 10mm can do, but I know the .40 is no slouch and in equal length barrels is usually within 100 fps of the 10mm, which is why I say your comment is false.
Some of the logic I hear on the 'net is senseless and I'll tell you why. The 10mm and .40 shoot the exact same caliber bullets, exact same weight bullets and the 10mm has about a 100 fps advantage over the .40, give or take 25 fps (if you load them both warmly, not 125% 10mm vs 75% .40, etc). The .41 Mag shoots a bigger caliber bullet, it shoots heavier bullets and shoots them faster than the 10mm can by 300-400+ fps. Yet according to the 'net (or 10mm-ite fanatics) I'm supposed to believe the 10mm is like a .41 Mag and much better than a .40 when it clearly isn't? That's a pile of hooey.
agtman said:
Not sure what you mean by "heavy 40 ammo," but sticking with the .40S&W is your choice, of course.
Just be advised that certain people's recommendations about loading your G22 with some sort of "hot" 180gn ammo are, shall we say, ... ill-advised.
By "hot" .40 ammo, most people mean a 180gn load that attempts to "hot-rod" into 10mm territory. But that's merely a KABOOM! waiting to happen.
If you want real 10mm performance with a 180gn slug (or especially if you're even thinking about the heavier 200gn-220gn 10mm bullets), just sell your G22, buy a G20 (and, as funds permit, get a spare .40 barrel), and be done with it.
Trying to turn a .40S&W into a 10mm is just pulling the pin on a hand grenade.
Just sayin' ...
I realize this post isn't addressing me, but your argument about the safety of a "heavy" .40 is a little off. For one, the .40 case is structurally stronger than the 10mm, not by much, but it is stronger no doubt. The .40 case isn't any weaker or thinner than the 10mm case, so it's capable of at the very least, the same pressures as the 10mm auto, and because it's slightly stronger (on the order of 40K PSI like the 357 SIG), it can actually handle higher pressure MORE safely than a 10mm can.
Yes the 10mm holds more powder, but because it cannot top the case strength of the .40 and it cannot handle more pressure than the .40, that extra powder is going to give it approx 75-125 fps advantage over the .40. Just because BB/UW etc load their 10mm hotter than they do their .40 doesn't mean the .40 can't be loaded warmer, not everything they offer is loaded equally which is why such comparisons aren't accurate.
I handload for both (well no longer the 10mm), and I know that I've experienced more issues with 10mm brass than I ever have with .40 brass, because it's stronger. If you load both the same, using the same barrel length and same pressure, the 10mm shows surprisingly little improvement over the .40.
I get that you don't care for the .40, or maybe it's just that you're overly obsessed with the 10mm, but it might not hurt to do a little research on the matter before you go and tell people how dangerous the .40 is in your own mind. I know you don't have an issue with loading the 10mm way beyond what it was designed for, and I have a sneaking suspicion that you feel that it's perfectly okay to do so despite it being more dangerous than loading the .40 warm.
