Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns 10mm vs 41 mag or 44 sp for a 'carry gun in field'

Looking at Dan Wesson Bobtail model, and their 5" and Kimbers 5", possibly Colts, esp. later this year if a Gold Cup comes out, what is the opinion on brand .....quality differences?

I want something that shoots out the box, and will have it for shots of opportunity on deer and hogs. This is in lieu of perhaps a 4 5/8" 41 or 44 sp (240s/1200) in a Ruger, a S&W MG or a various 41 variant, or a FA 97 in 4.25 or 44sp in a short bbl.

Use would also double for a defense Concealed Carry and 'car gun.'

Thanks.

A Glock 20 10mm would meet those needs for a lightweight, hard hitting, weather resistant, reliable, accurate out of the box field gun.

On one hand, the Ruger SA's are never going to make as good a CCW as the flat 1911 and its clones you mention. On the other, none of the calibers mentioned will equal the power of the .41 Mag. The Special will come close, handloaded and the 10 comes close in some factory loadings.

The Rugers and Freedom Arms nearly always shoot "out of the box" whereas many 1911's don't. I wouldn't have a new Smith with the Nanny Lock. A good used 57 or even a 58 would be great but harder to conceal than the autos. The 1911's have gotten much better in the past couple of decades or so. A Gold Cup is always good. I have never read anything bad about a Kimber. A lot of people are very high on the Dan Wesson's. At best, the DW is kind of unproven. I am not knocking it, just saying. I would let the price be the deciding factor between the Gold Cup and an equivalent Kimber. If they are equal, I'd get the Colt.

Can't beat a Glock 20 for that. 16 rounds in case you have to bail out of the car without spares, easy to shoot and cheap to lose if stolen at a trailhead. I would gladly carry one in the lower 48.

1) on the Glocks, no disagreement, only problem, they don't fit my hand......So I thought I'd go another route, and yes they would be lighter. I will keep that in mind as the 20 was always on my 'radar' as things to get. Just cannot get past the lack of MY hand fitting them well.

2) power, I agree, have 2 657s, one is a classic hunter, both larger and heavier than I want, and yes, more power.

I do hear the 10mm is fine for deer/hogs to 100 yds if the shooter is up to doing their part.

Seen glowing test report on the Kimber 'Gold Cup look alike, all bells and whistles', any thoughts on the 4.25 vs 5"? Reason the bobtail, the DW has the best feel to my hand, which is why I was looking that route. Seem to recall long ago a few 1911 fans Loved the old 38 supers for it's performance, even in a Commander.

All equal, yes, agreed, a Colt it should be...but I have heard strong testimony's on DW and Kimbers so hard not to consider them. I'd imagine many companies are chasing Colt's former customers/market.

Good points by all to consider, others feel free to contribute, thanks all.

5 inch guns run better, recoil lighter and have better sight radii and velocity. I don't use 1911s shorter than 5 inches. Kimber Series I guns are good, I wouldn't get another Series II.

The 20 doesn't fit me either but Robar helped. With a straight cut backstrap it handles a lot like a 1911.

If you want more power, it's gotta be a .44 mag.

Ryan, thanks, heard the slide is good part of recoil momentum and had believe the heavier slides would give MORE felt recoil.

I like the power I get now in 41 mag so a 10mm seems pretty close with TOP end loads and users report success in field. Robar, I'll have to look into that, thanks for all the info.

What difference btw would you figure on mv 4.25 vs 5?

I've owned and hunted a Smith 29 .44 Mag since 1967. My first choice as a field pistol for pigs and deer.
But if I needed something to conceal, then it would have to be a 1911 in 10mm. To do both, I'd have to go with a 1911, either a Colt or a Kimber. Fully adjustable sights, of course.
Riding inside my waist band over my hip on the strong side, the thing conceals better than a 2 inch w/ holster. Comfortable and accessable with either hand as long as it's carried butt to the front and rocked back. E

Ok, here are some oddball options. First, have you looked at the charter arms bulldog in .44 Spl.? It is a smaller, 5 shot revolver that can be ccw'd without leaving people wondering if that is a gun in your pocket, or you are just happy to see them. With a 225-240 grain bullet, they pack a whallop with either lead SWC or SWCHP bullets, or any of the JHPs out there. There are even some made specifically for expansion in a .44 Spl. I use mine as a backpacking gun since we only have mountain lions and the occasional 2 legged predators here in San Diego.

Another option would be to get a .45 ACP 1911 and a .400 Corbon barrel for it. You get 10mm performance at .45 ACP pressure and recoil levels. And better feeding reliability because it is a bottle-necked round.

If neither of these float your boat, I would go with the Glock in 10mm. I have heard from several pig hunters down south that it is their ideal hog gun right out of the box. It is almost a ballistic clone of .41 mag, with a High-cap mag. They make a compact and subcompact version as well, IIRC. And if you go with the subcompact, you can use the compact sized mags with a grip extension to get it to fit your hand better. Just some food for thought...

-Mb

Seen the Charter, really like the pre-lock S&W Stainless in the past....

Feeding, not heard of any 10mm having feed issues, love to hear more. Again do hear great things on Glock, and out the box last as is, but just don't fit my hand and the smaller one is a tad too small in hand.....seems elsewhere users of Dan Wesson were fairly satisfied and Kimber. A spring/buffer change seem all needed to hold up to thousands of full power ammo.

Guess I am leaning hard on 1911 design.....largely due to fit to hand as well as concealment size/dimensions.

The Charter Bulldog is too lightly built. And sorry but I don't have velocity figures for different barrel lengths. It matters more in 10mm than .45.

This is my question too. On another thread I'm considering the Kimber Eclipse II in 10mm. My problem with the Glocks is I just don't like the way they look.

What is wrong with the Kimber II's?

I've owned Colt, Glock, Smith and Wesson, and Wyoming Arms 10mm's. I liked all of them. The Glock certainly has the advantage in firepower and I personally, don't mind its looks. I don't find it attractive, but I don't see it as ugly like some do. However, I would only choose the Glock over the defunct Wyoming Arms Parker, of those I have owned. The Glock's recoil is not bad but it felt like it was going to explode everytime I touched one off. You could feel the pressure. Plus I handload and I don't want a gun that is dangerous with handloads. Of those I have already owned and shot, I would choose the Smith 1006 first and the Colt Delta Elite second or if I wanted a 1911 platform. The Smith was a great gun all around. All you give up with either over the Glock, is firepower.

Scandium: S&W 329pd Lighter than any 1911 or 6 shot .44 Special, and it is a .44 Magnum to boot. Or a SC frame 1911 if you don't want a round gun.

Polymer: G20 is good, or any polymer frame .45 ACP with +p's

Steel: any 1911 you like in either 10mm or .45 ACP. You can convert to .45 Super for true magnum like power.

Get a good .41 w/ 4" barrel and call it good. Stuff it full of 2400 and 210 gr bullets.

Let me know when you drive a 265 grain cast WFN at 1300 from your 10mm Glock.

Agreed, a heavy loaded 10mm is not in the same realm as a heavy loaded .41.

If I was you, I'd buy a FA97 in 44 special, in 4.25" round butt configuration, and call it good. I have 3 FA 97's and they are an awesome piece, for sure. The round butt would allow the discreet carry and the 44 special doesnt' have any flies on it for power.....

Tom

Let me know when you load 16 rounds in your .41.

For a field only piece discreet carry would not be any problem and agreed a 10mm will never be a top loaded 41 or perhaps 44 sp for that matter, I simply am looking for a gun to do what I need it to do in a shootable package, not excess recoil, realizing a 41 or 44 may be better, but a 10mm may be plenty gun for my intended use. Love to hear more Tom on the 3 you have/use.

Once I get a new job, I'll keep an eye out for a good clean used 97 but in the meantime may give a 10 a whirl. A revolver in 10 does not interest me, as I'd as soon use a 41. That is about my limit on recoil wanted. The sixgun in 10mm will lose gas in the gap, so I am not attracted to them, though they likely shoot fine.

SURE like the 4" or smidgen under 4" whatever they call it, 610, but that config would be JUST RIGHT in a 41 mag IMHO.

Been tempted to chop one of my 657s....or just sell one to get a 10. Lots of ideas/choices. Thanks.