Wondering how important is barrel length for 10mm?

[TTv2]

I will preface this by saying that I've had the Glock 40 on my list for too long and that before Double barrel Joe wins I have decided I need to get a 10mm now before it's too late. What's kept me from buying the Glock 40 is it's $700 and Glock 20's can be had for quite a bit less used.

What's kept me from buying the G20 is the shorter barrel. I feel that 10mm gets a significant boost from a 1.4" longer barrel, but I'm not sure that extra boost is really needed.

IDK, do you guys think the extra barrel length is worth it? Was going to load my own 10mm so I could get real 10mm velocities and not the weak stuff like Federal makes.

 

[Rock185]

My 10MM semi autos had 4 1/4" and 5" barrels. My 10MM revolvers 5" and 6 1/2" barrels. Unfortunately, I either neglected to chronograph loads in the 6 1/2" gun, or maybe just haven't come across the notes. Between the 4 1/4" and 5" semi autos, velocities generally varied from about 20-80 FPS; say maybe 50 FPS ball park. With the 10MM cartridge, I preferred the longer 5" barrel due to the velocity increase. I had a G20, and were I again in the market for a 10MM Glock, I would prefer the longer barreled G40. I would not be surprised to see gains of 100+ FPS with the higher pressure 10MM from the longer barrel. With lower pressure FBI type or .40 S&W level loads, I would expect the velocity advantage of the longer barrel to be less...

 

[ms6852]

I have no scientific proof to make claims so my thinking holds as much water as a screen door. If one is going to buy a 10mm, I truly believe that one should get the longer barrel , or just buy a regular 40 cal handgun., I am amazed at how much I read about people buying a certain caliber but want it to perform at a higher caliber, for example, why buy a .38 but want it to shoot like a .357, in my opinion one should just buy a .357. I feel the same way with the 10mm why not shoot it at its peak capacity with a longer barrel instead of wasting the powder on a huge fireball. I am so glad that I bought a 10mm with the long slide. The difference in weight between a full size 1911 and a long slide 1911 to me is quite discernible.

 

[TTv2]

I have no scientific proof to make claims so my thinking holds as much water as a screen door. If one is going to buy a 10mm, I truly believe that one should get the longer barrel , or just buy a regular 40 cal handgun., I am amazed at how much I read about people buying a certain caliber but want it to perform at a higher caliber, for example, why buy a .38 but want it to shoot like a .357, in my opinion one should just buy a .357. I feel the same way with the 10mm why not shoot it at its peak capacity with a longer barrel instead of wasting the powder on a huge fireball. I am so glad that I bought a 10mm with the long slide. The difference in weight between a full size 1911 and a long slide 1911 to me is quite discernible.

I feel the same in regards to the G29, it's such a short barrel that I cannot see much advantage to it over a .40 or .45 in the same barrel length. I've never had much interest in a short barrel 10mm and never will. A snub .44 Mag would be better for big game defense, while 9mm, .40, or .45 would be fine for all other defensive uses.

 

[TTv2]

http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/10mm.html

I'm well aware of that site, but this isn't so much a "by the numbers" question as it is a "does an extra 50-100 fps make that much difference" kind of question.

 

[jmr40]

I'm going to disagree on several points. For one thing If I'm carrying a handgun I want something compact. If I need a revolver with more than 4" of barrel to get the job done I'll carry a rifle. With a semiauto something with a 4.5 or 5" barrel is about the same overall length and is OK for me.

The more powder in the case the longer barrel you need. A typical 44 mag load is going to have 15-25 gr of powder and 8" barrels are used for published ballistics. A typical 10mm load is 7-12 gr of powder and test barrel lengths are 4.5-5". If you compare actual velocity of guns with the same overall length a standard G20 with a 4.5" barrel is about the same overall length as a 3" revolver in 44 mag. Because the 44 needs roughly twice as much powder, it needs a much longer barrel. The 10mm benefits much less from a longer barrel since it uses much less powder

Real world performance is about the same. I get 1150 fps with 240 gr loads from my 3" 44 mag, no where near published numbers. I get1300 fps with 200 gr 200 gr DoubleTap 10mm loads from my 4.5" G20. The G29 is 50 fps slower than the G20. Exactly at published numbers since this is the barrel length where the loads are tested. Now, if I were to compare 44 mag loads from a 6"-8" barrel it will leave the 10mm in its dust. The best 40 S&W loads are going to be 200 fps slower than my G29 BTW.

I don't have any idea how much speed you'll gain from the 6" G20, but it wouldn't be enough to offset having to lug around a bigger gun to me. IMO the longer sight radius might help some with accuracy and the 6" length makes it legal in a handful of places that require longer barrels for hunting.

And there is no guarantee the 1-2" longer barrel will be faster. It is quite common to see more than 50 fps between barrels of the same length between different guns. And it isn't unusual to see an individual barrel shoot faster than another longer barrel. It is only when you start comparing barrels that are 3-4" longer that you start to see any real difference in muzzle velocity.

A perfect example here. Note that the 6" Colt 357 mag was SLOWER with the same loads than several guns with 4" and 5" barrels. This is more common than a lot of guys realize.

http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

 

[Dan-O]

Forgive me if I’m wrong, been a while since I’ve been in the glock game. Doesn't the 40 have a milled slide for optics? If you run optics having a slide ready to accept them might be nice.

otherwise you can always just buy a longer barrel down the road.

 

[8strings8rounds]

My buddy had a Glock.. I'm not sure what model#, they make zero sense to me.. essentially the same size as the 40, but in 9mm. And I could shoot that as fast and as accurately as any other 6" gun. Compared to a glock 19, I was far more accurate with that added barrel length.
As far as velocity gains, and considering everything already stated above- I have seen a lot of variance in velocity studies that is most likely explained by slight differences in how each barrel was manufactured. You might have 2 identical pistols, and one might consistently shoot +/- 20fps different than the other simply because the rifling was cut at different times in the tooling life.
I own a 6" Tanfoglio Hunter in 10mm with the polygonal barrel, and though I'm curious, I've never actually checked to see how it compares to my other 10s, I just know that extra barrel length is nice for accuracy at greater distances. At least in my personal experience.

And really, if you're just going to keep eyeballing that G40, get the G40! And if you have a spouse who might get upset at the price, blame the guy in the forum.

 

[TTv2]

One thing I should add is that with the G40, were I to get it, there's a possibility that later on I would get a longer barrel for it, possibly threaded, which would make it a 6.5 or 7 inch barrel. With the G20 I wouldn't get a spare barrel.

The slide being milled for optics is nice with the G40 and originally I had no interest in that, but over time (and having put one on my CP33) I'm becoming more interested with a red dot on a pistol. One concern I have tho is if they'll hold zero with the max power 10mm tho. With downloaded 10mm or .40 S&W I have confidence the optics will hold zero.

Still, tough choice. Still leaning G40 as they're actually available online while the G20's are drying up.

 

[Dan-O]

You can get either one and then get a barrel and slide from lonewolf down the road. Either way I think it’s a win win.

 

[needmorecowbell]

One thing I should add is that with the G40, were I to get it, there's a possibility that later on I would get a longer barrel for it, possibly threaded, which would make it a 6.5 or 7 inch barrel. With the G20 I wouldn't get a spare barrel.

The slide being milled for optics is nice with the G40 and originally I had no interest in that, but over time (and having put one on my CP33) I'm becoming more interested with a red dot on a pistol. One concern I have tho is if they'll hold zero with the max power 10mm tho. With downloaded 10mm or .40 S&W I have confidence the optics will hold zero.

Still, tough choice. Still leaning G40 as they're actually available online while the G20's are drying up.

Supply and demand often is the best indicator. Most people think the G20 is a better overall option than the G40

 

[bangswitch]

http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/10mm.html

That's got some interesting data, but since they are comparing different bullet weights in different barrel lengths, they should also compare different powders, because the burn rates are different. In a given barrel length/bullet weight, a slower-burning powder may still be burning as the bullet exits the barrel, whereas a faster one won't be. This will affect the comparative differences in MV as barrel length increases (or decreases).

 

[TTv2]

Supply and demand often is the best indicator. Most people think the G20 is a better overall option than the G40

That's because people are obsessed with a pistols ease of carrying. The larger the handgun, the less interest they have in owning it. I have no issue with longer barrels, I prefer them for the slight benefits in added velocity and sight radius, but for the extra $150, I'm not sure if 50 fps is worth it.

 

[CraigC]

Don't overthink it. Velocity is overrated in handguns and if 50-100fps is going to make a difference, you need to completely reconsider your choices. In fact, it makes little if any difference. If you're going to hunt with it, get the longer barrel. If you're just going to carry it, get the G20.

That's got some interesting data, but since they are comparing different bullet weights in different barrel lengths, they should also compare different powders, because the burn rates are different. In a given barrel length/bullet weight, a slower-burning powder may still be burning as the bullet exits the barrel, whereas a faster one won't be. This will affect the comparative differences in MV as barrel length increases (or decreases).

This is a common misconception. The slowest powders appropriate to the cartridge are going to yield the highest velocities, regardless of barrel length. There are not different powders that will yield the highest numbers in 3" barrels versus 6" barrels. Powder is not burned all the way down the barrel, let alone after the bullet exits. The powder is consumed by the time the bullet leaves the case or shortly thereafter. What remains are rapidly expanding gases. Slower powders come in greater quantities and result in more expanding gases. Muzzle flash is what happens when those gases vent to the atmosphere. It's not powder still "burning".

Real world performance is about the same. I get 1150 fps with 240 gr loads from my 3" 44 mag, no where near published numbers. I get1300 fps with 200 gr 200 gr DoubleTap 10mm loads from my 4.5" G20.

You keep posting the same nonsense and it doesn't get any more true the more you repeat it. You're cherry-picking the mildest .44 load and the heaviest 10mm load to help justify your choice, which seems to be the MO of 10mm fans. When in fact, the .44 can sling a bullet over 100gr heavier at the velocity you're quoting.

 

[bangswitch]

. If you're going to hunt with it, get the longer barrel. If you're just going to carry it, get the G20.

He also mentioned the size of the gun, meaning barrel length. I'd say the size for carrying goes further than the length of the barrel. A G20 with a full mag is a bulky piece of hardware, and as heavy as a 1911.(I had a G20, and I have a 10mm 1911, so I know the comparative sizes). He ought to look for something other than a G20, IMO, or he'll get tired of carrying it (and trying to adequately conceal it). The compact G29 might be the better choice. It will surely be more snappy, due to lower weight and size, but that's the compromise. As far as concealability goes, I have less issue hiding the 1911 as I did my G20. Not trying to start a brand choice war here, it's partly the double stack mag that makes it bulkier. It's part of the reason I went from one to the other.

This is a common misconception. The slowest powders appropriate to the cartridge are going to yield the highest velocities, regardless of barrel length. There are not different powders that will yield the highest numbers in 3" barrels versus 6" barrels. Powder is not burned all the way down the barrel, let alone after the bullet exits. The powder is consumed by the time the bullet leaves the case or shortly thereafter. What remains are rapidly expanding gases. Slower powders come in greater quantities and result in more expanding gases. Muzzle flash is what happens when those gases vent to the atmosphere. It's not powder still "burning".
.

Makes sense. Thanks for the correction. As a reloader, I look for powder choices that give me the greater velocities for a given charge, to maximize MV for given bullet weights without having to max out charges.

 

[CraigC]

This may sound a bit hypocritical but if I went as small as the G29, I wouldn't choose the 10mm anyway. Its advantage over the .45ACP is velocity. If you're not going to get enough barrel length to take advantage of that, I'd go with the mass, diameter and lower pressure of the .45ACP. Same reason why my minimum barrel length for a magnum revolver is 4". For the 10mm, I want a full sized pistol like a 5-6" 1911 or my XDM.

 

[TTv2]

Craig, I don't disagree with that. When I decided I wanted a cheap snub revolver I went with .38 instead of a .357 and for whatever extra velocity the .357 Mag gets, it's not as much as if it were in a longer barrel, not too mention the increased cost turned me off as well. While I'm not a big fan of .45, I definitely see the advantage to it in a shorter barrel over .40 or 10mm.

 

[Trey Veston]

My G29 is the perfect woods carry pistol. I simply added a KKM G20 length barrel to maintain velocity.

 

[CraigC]

Coarse sights, heavy & spongy trigger, lackluster accuracy don't add up to a wilderness pistol, for me. But I plan on actually using mine, not just having something on my hip.

 

[Gary Gill]

I bought the Glock 40 MOS version and mounted a Holosun 507c optic. I carry it in a Hill People Gear chest pack. I considered the Glock 20, but I wanted the optic without having the slide milled. I handload the 10mm and plan to hunt deer with it this fall.

 

[Trey Veston]

Coarse sights, heavy & spongy trigger, lackluster accuracy don't add up to a wilderness pistol for me. But I plan on actually using mine, not just having something on my hip.

Not worth the education attempt...

 

[LoonWulf]

Not worth the education attempt...

For someone used to things like 1911s and others with good triggers and target sights, thats not really an unfair way to describe a stock glock.
They do tend to have pretty course sights, and mushy triggers in the 6-7lb range....unless your running a 12lb new york trigger.

They are also fairly easy to shoot well, have fantastic trigger reset, and are reliable.

For a field gun i think they are a poor choice stock. With upgrades as good as anything. As a short range defensive option i think they are a good choice.

Ive also only used gen1-3s and aftermarket builds.

and to be fair i dont shoot handguns a whole bunch, so take that as simply my opinion.

Personally I like big guns, If im carrying it in the field its on my belt in a holster. The 10mm is only one of two normal autoloading cartridges I CAN carry in hunting areas here unless i have a dog along.
Thus my 10mms a 6" rockisland 2011, with adjustable target rear and fiber optic front. Im very good (for me) with that gun.
The long sight radius is probably more important than what ever extra velocity i get, but for a field gun ill take both.

 

[Trey Veston]

For someone used to things like 1911s and others with good triggers and target sights, thats not really an unfair way to describe a stock glock.
They do tend to have pretty course sights, and mushy triggers in the 6-7lb range....unless your running a 12lb new york trigger.

They are also fairly easy to shoot well, have fantastic trigger reset, and are reliable.

For a field gun i think they are a poor choice stock. With upgrades as good as anything. As a short range defensive option i think they are a good choice.



But to be fair i dont shoot handguns a whole bunch, so take that as simply my opinion.

Personally I like big guns, If im carrying it in the field its on my belt in a holster. The 10mm is only one of two normal autoloading cartridges I CAN carry in hunting areas here unless i have a dog along.
Thus my 10mms a 6" rockisland 2011, with adjustable target rear and fiber optic front. Im very good (for me) with that gun.
The long sight radius is probably more important than what ever extra velocity i get, but for a field gun ill take both.

My Gen 4 G29 has a 5lb stock trigger with a polish job, Dawson fiber optic sights, holds 10 rounds of 200gr hard cast ammo, and will do 1" 5-shot groups at 25 yards. It is an excellent choice for a woods carry pistol for my area where there are no grizzlies, but plenty of wolves and cougars.

Anyone that mocks my choice is either ignorant or intentionally trolling.

 

[LoonWulf]

My Gen 4 G29 has a 5lb stock trigger with a polish job, Dawson fiber optic sights, holds 10 rounds of 200gr hard cast ammo, and will do 1" 5-shot groups at 25 yards. It is an excellent choice for a woods carry pistol for my area where there are no grizzlies, but plenty of wolves and cougars.

Anyone that mocks my choice is either ignorant or intentionally trolling.

I had to modify my post, i just realized i havent tried a g4 or 5.

The p80c i put together was mostly aftermarket parts, felt good and shot as well as any compactish gun ive ever run, but it also chewed on my hand. Stock glocks dont feel great to me, but i shoot them well enough after a polish and tune. They also dont chew my hand.

End of the day im not a glock guy, but a modified glock is a far different beast than a standard otc glock. I certainly wont fault a person for carrying what they want and are comfortable with

 

[CraigC]

Education attempt? I bought my first Glock in 1991. Years before my first 1911. I shot them for 15yrs and during that time, they were my only centerfire autos, so not ignorant or trolling. I kinda came by my opinion of them the old fashioned way. That goes for any other service auto, of which I have over a dozen. I still have more striker-fired guns than 1911's. Many with better sights and triggers than the Glock. As I said, for me, they do not have the sights, triggers or accuracy I require out of a wilderness sidearm.