Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Hunting with a 10mm?

My standard preface: I am not a full time handgun enthusiast. Sorry.

But I have been chasing my tail for year trying to stay loyal to the 45LC. I have a pair of Rugers and hunted hard to get an 1894 Trapper in 45LC.

I am wanting more of a hunting handgun. I'd like to have a 5.5" Redhawk in 45LC. Seems I have to offer really good sexual favors and $900 for one of those. Major downer.

In my searching I noticed a trend for many to tote G20s. From Bush Pilots to backwoods campers. I've kinda thought the 10mm was dead?

So I have stumbled onto several pics of Long Slide Glock 10s that have kinda lit my fire. Lone Wolf is right down the road from me, but I am seeing mixed reviews. I'd really prefer the longer sight radius of the 6" LS.

Can anyone weigh in if even a stock 4.6" is "football" sized target accurate at 50 yards? Asking way too much? I do realize much is on the shooter, but guns capable?

Seems like a viable option to take afield at every moment. I see many, many bears each year. But I am not some guy from Delaware who has to have "Bear Protection". My thoughts are the opposite.... I want to be able to stalk up and tag a target of opportunity. But pull double duty as a carry gun(field not town).

Anyone kill anything with a 10mm?

IMO, your Rugers in .45 Colt are much better suited than a Glock in any caliber for hunting.

While I've heard a lot of talk about using the 10mm as bear protection, I haven't found a documentable instance of one being used defensively.

Most Glocks, in any caliber, will shoot into 6-8" at 50 yards and many will do much better. If I was considering an aftermarket barrel I'd personally choose a KKM, which will increase the pistol's accuracy potential by quite a bit.

I've killed several deer with a Glock in .45 ACP (Mod 21 & 30) and a hunting buddy has killed a few with his Model 20. He shoots 180 JHP's and has never achieved full penetration. I get full penetration with 200/230 JHP's about half the time.

All of our shots have been within 30 yards and our recovery distances have been virtually the same.



Addendum (just for the sake of it...)

Here's an interesting post about a Glock 21 used to kill an attacking bear; http://gunnerforum.com/semi-auto-pistols/6135-grizzly-bear-gets-killed-9-rounds-glock-21-45-acp.html

I'm not disparaging the 10mm, but most of the enthusiasm about the 10mm is based on inflated ballistics - here's some hard data: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjsXvXEryDJjdFhsRUcwSHRUcktCMmhOMTVFa25xa1E#gid=0

Based on these results, a stoutly loaded .45 gives up very little to the 10mm in most loadings.

Yes, minute of a football at 50 if you do your part. Just like the .45 Colt, you need to seek out the premium factory loads (or reload) if you want to tap the true potential of the 10mm. Underwoods offers a good selection with real ballistics printed on the package, and federal just entered the full-power 10mm game. Far from dying, it seems it is seeing a resurgence.

From a ballistic perspective, a hot loaded .45 Colt trumps the 10mm but that's not really the point. A .454 trumps the .45 Colt and no one disparages the Colt because of it. The 10mm full power 10mm slots itself between the .357 mag. and the .41 mag. Nothing to sneeze at for sure, and it can nip the heels of factory loads .41 mag. out of a short barrel. The .41 is more powerful, but it is typically listed out of a longer barrel. A 3" .41 loses a lot of steam over a factory 6" test barrel. In any event, there are two great things about the 10mm.

1. You can carry an auto that is well suited for self defense. When carrying in many outdoor areas (anywhere but grizzly country) the 10mm has the muscle to get the job done, and self defense may be more important than animal defense.

2. Just like the .357 mag., you can use it with loads of varying power levels. You can shoot .40 S&W power loads at the range and load with full power 10mm for the woods. My Glock digests both without any drama whatsoever.

Don't pick it because it is better than what you have, pick it because you want to hunt or carry an auto. If you can't tell, I am totally sold on the 10mm for most uses. I feel comfortable and confident in a full power 10mm for woods and self defense use.

I think I got my point across.

What load do you use the most? And is that a laser? That's kind of cool to see a landard in use.

dang nice shootin...especially that little gray.......

this is gonna be kinda long winded but here goes.

I have a Glock 20 with stock length KKM barrel and adjustable sights. Football at 50 is very reasonable. I carried mine all season trying to get a deer up close to take a shot. Had one about 60 at fading light and didn't feel comfortable with the angle. Anyway I digress

As far as killing power, I shoot DT cast loads in mine. I finished a doe this season that was shot with buckshot and the damage was pretty strong. My father in law raises cows and a few weeks ago he had one that needed to be put down. He had already went out and shot it several times with his usual livestock dispatcher a 32 S&W long. He came back to the house and said he neded my help. Took the 10 out there and the cow looked as if it had not been shot at all. I placed a round right behind its eye and it slammed the cows head in the dirt. Blood was pouring from the hole like a fountain as well as out the mouth. Not to be graphic but after seeing the damage it did to that big cows skull, I was impressed with the power of the little 10. I own 44 mags and a 454 casull and I don't feel undergunned with my 10 with the full power loads. Its a whole lot easier to carry than the big guns and for pistol ranges I feel no need to carry anything heavier and for the fact that I shoot it well and I am confident with it. Im about to pick up a glock 29 for CCW.

In the past Buffalo Bore 180gr gold dot was my load of choice but since they changed bullet brand I have been using Winchester 175gr. Silver Tips and am impressed with them so far. Yes, that is a crimson trace railmaster laser, an awesome little gadget. The lanyard was mostly for hunting out of a tripod so I didn't drop it.

I shot the fox at night, one handed out the passenger side window of my truck with some CCI 200gr FMJ Blazers. I shot three times and two connected before he dropped. You can see both holes.

So far for me only one kill, a decent sized hog in TN at the 24hrcf hog hunt, but I was thouroughly impressed with the performance. I can (in my 10mm) push a 180gr Gold Dot to 1375fps. I just noticed in an article in the latest shooting times that 1380 is the speed they got from thier brand spankin new model 69, in FORTY FOUR Magnum! Anyway, I am not afraid of anything in the lower 48 while packing my 10 with those loads. Buffalo Bore and Underwood sell 215gr HCFN loads that go over 1200fps. I can think of very few situations that one of these loads could not handle, that would not then require or at least strongly suggest some sort of a rifle as the logical next step.

Lots of you tube video's of folks killin stuff with a big ten. With some handloads and some of the hotter factory loads it is the equivalent in every way of a 41 Magnum with factory fodder. No one has ever suggested that a 41 Magnum in factory load guise is not sufficient for any reasonable game hunting in the lower 48 at least.

I predict that if you try it out, you will, like many of us here, become rather hooked on this round. And no it is FAR from dead, in fact it is gaining a large resurgence and following. Quite a few manufacturer's building 10mm's again. I sure wish I could afford one of the Dan Wesson 6 inch long slide hunter 10's, them is COO- EL!

For out and out power those Vaqueros if they are the original ones not the New Vaquero can be loaded up to dinosaur loads if you want the recoil in the 45Colt. I've got a bunch of the original Vaqueros in 45Colt and have a 300g load going over the chronograph at 1204fps but it's hard to shoot.

With the proper loads I think the 10mm will get'er done for the needs you mentioned. I would agree with the comment about the KKM barrels over the Lone Wolf and have a long brutal bad history with Lone Wolf barrels, KKM would be the way to go.

Many handguns have tremendous accuracy potential, the real question is can we shoot them up to that potential. When I see Hiccock45 shoot an assortment of Glocks and many repeated hits at a 12" gong at 70 yards and then hit again at 230 yards on a larger gong, I end up knowing that the limiting factor in duplicating those feats is not my handgun but me.

The 10mm in the Glock format is popular for backcountry users in the West for it's power and capacity. When loaded with hot factory loads or equally hot reloads it can be a great tool.

If the Vaqueros are the New Vaqueros I would look to the Glock.

Jesse,

I have a G21 (45 acp) Longslide. The slide is lonewolf's and I Have had no problems with it, and have seen rep's from Lonewolf pipe in over at Glocktalk when someone is bitching about their slide or other products and they have taken care of any issues. I went with a KKM barrel because lonewolf's chamber support is reputedly not as good and KKM has a better rep for accuracy. Just shot mine with 45 acp +P, off the bench at 15 yards 1.2", at 25 yards you could overlay the same group plus about a 1/2" flyer(?). You mention the crazy prices that redhawks are going for (these days), Unless you have a LE or military discount a G20 is going to run you around $570, A longslide around $260(?), a KKM barrel around $170, plus the internals for the longslide (you can always rob the internals from the Glock slide though)... not an inexpensive route either.

Jerry

Jerry,

That is one WICKED and COOL looking Glock! And I am not a GLock guy in the slightest. But that one gets my attention.

If timed and sprung correctly for some 45 Super ammo, that one would be a kick butt game slayer.

Jerry-

Many thanks. That is EXACTLY the info I needed. If I go that route, I was wanting to run the LW Slide with a KKM barrel. Can obviously be done.

Putting pen to paper sucks, but that's reality. You are totally correct. I can get a little "help" on the Glock and parts. But not enough to be a major Game Changer.

I do live in Grizzly Country. It's on my mind at times, but not like so many others. As I mentioned, having the ability to take a Black Bear cleanly is very appealing in a Spot and Stalk scenario of creeping along a logging road.

There is no way the 10 could touch my Rugers as far as KE or KOs or whatever. But as was said, that wasn't really my intentions.

There is a lot to be said of a capable Auto with 15 rounds on hand vs a Single Action pistol with 6 rounds and lots of skill needed to get them off.

The Texas guy with all the great hunting pics.....you have some really well placed rounds! Putting the rounds in the right places sure helps any stats. Great job.

I use a 6" Glock barrel in my G20, much better than the LW barrel I started with. I am not a Glock fan, but would have to try hard not to like the G20 as mine is set up, and with the Burris Fastfire III "red dot" sight, it is very easy to hit football sized objects at 50 yards. The 10mm can be problematic as far as case support, ammo integrity, and the "ka-boom" issue, but I think is a good choice for the uses you want.

If I wanted more, rather than a .41 mag revolver, a 1911 in .460 Rowland would be a good alternative.

They are 220 grain hard cast not 215.

Problem with the 10mm is bullet selection. The various 180-200gr JHP's are too lightly constructed for anything but lung shots on deer. Which is fine if you can work within its limitations. The heaviest loads consisting of 220-230gr LBT's at 1100fps are at best similar to middle weight loads for the .41 and .44 magnums. You can beat that in a Colt SAA .41Spl. If you're going to compare boutique loads, then it's best to look at Buffalo Bore's 230gr .41 load that runs 1450fps, or their 265gr load that runs 1350fps. No, the 10mm is not nipping at the heels of the .41Mag. It's not even close.

The .38-40 shares the same bore diameter, and Beartooth Bullets (for one example) will sell a FN hardcast in 401 or .402 diameter, that will work well in either a .38-40 or a 10mm.

I was also surprised that a 5" S&W 610 will give higher velocity than 3 different 10mm 1911's, and I expect one of the Ruger Blackhawks would do even better.

I use the LW 6 INCH in my Glock 20 SF . I use a 24 lb recoil spring. I replace the Trigger with a Fulcrum Trigger System and the sights with the Mepro Adjustable Tritium . My load is the 200 gr Horandy XTP with Longshot and Starline Brass

In my experience the 180 grain XTP hp holds up rather well at 1300+ fps. The Buffalo Bore 265 grain clocked about 1260 fps from my S&W M-57. The 230 grain in the high 1300 fps range. A 40 cal 220 grain flat point is a formidable load my most things in the lower 48 IMHO.
But a 255 grain hard cast at 1090 fps from a 45 Super is very potent as well with the larger diameter.

I believe this was directed at my comment. What I said was the 10mm with top end boutique loads can nip at the heels of factory . 41 loads. The point is NOT to compare top end 10mm loads to top end .41 loads for the .41 is clearly more powerful. No one said otherwise.

The point is that it is entirely possible to buy ammo for a 10mm that approaches FACTORY strength .41 ammo, especially when that factory .41 ammo is fired out of a 4" or less barrel. No one that I know says a factory load out of a .41 mag is inadequate for deer/black bear/etc. If a factory .41 works for the job, then a top end 10mm works as well. If you need a top end boutique load out of a .41 mag just to get the job done, a top end 10mm isn't going to cut it.

So what you have with a 10mm is a gun that exceeds the .357 magnum and CAN nip at the heels of some factory .41 mag loads.

My experience and (somewhat minimal as of yet) testing of the 180gr Gold Dot and Golden Sabre indicate that both of those can blow through a good sized hog AND put the big hurt on an oak tree on the other side. They also blow through a large pile of water filled milk jugs.

They work SO danged well, I have yet to purchase and try any 200-220gr bullets in my big ten, although I probably will when I get a little more cash in my hands.

Define "good sized hog".

I personally don't believe the 10mm is a 41 magnum in a semi-auto pistol, but you can run it close . I prefer 200 gr or heavier bullets in the 10mm to give it a fighting chance against a 41 Mag Revolver and the power level it is capable of when fully loaded

About 225lbs or so. Bullet would obviously have worked on a much larger pig based on the reaction of the big bark blast that was created on the other side of said piggie.

Most black bears in the mountainous areas are only about 250lbs, so the big ten is quite clearly a decent enough choice in the bear hills for most folks.

I've used the 180gr Gold Dot extensively. It's a good deer and varmint bullet but I wouldn't depend on it to "blow through" anything bigger than a small deer and only on broadside shots.

The Gold Dot gives less penetration than the XTP's in my experience.

Safariman, how about a boar hog with a good sized grissel plate? A big difference than one without.

No chance to try that out yet, but I think it would work just fine. Do you have a place in mind to shoot such a hog? I want to get a few more things done and under my pre dyalysis 'bucket list'. That sounds like a good one to try to sneak in before I get all hooked up!

A true wild boar will have a gristle plate.

Yea, a "Good size (large)" hog with a gristle plat (armor) with 1/2" to 1" worth of dried mud, combine that with the vitals BETWEEN the shoulders (not behind the shoulders), add to that the shoulders, you have a need for some penetration. That walnut size brain is sometimes hard to hit also.

All that being said, I have not had a problem with killing them in a relaxed state. When they are pissed and want a piece of you, it is a different story. I have some soiled underwear for proof.

I generally use a hard cast 180gr TC with a BH of 18 and above. Have no problem with penetration.

When I am wearing new clean underwear, I carry my 460 Rowland with hard cast.

+1, Gibby

long time ago, shot a "good size large russian hog" on a ranch north of chico calif. We were required prior to hunting prove we could hit something, and show what kind of bullet/caliber we were using. I shot mr hog has he was sucking the guts out of a dead cow. That is with a 30.06 150grain nosler partition at maybe 50yards. And it was moving at about 3000fps. It rolled him over and he went back to eating. Another round at point blank and it still took him some time to be convinced. Just like in elk or other species, huge difference in the animals.
Now if i could just get on those feral hogs around here, maybe i could see what a 10 would do. But it ain't no .41magnum on the top end.

I have shot a few russian strain hogs in Northern Calif as well. I lived in NorCal for several decades. I know all too well about that Gristle plate! I had a large hog near Sonoma Calif. Take several 200gr Nosler Ballistic tip bullets from a 338 Winchester Magnum in the ribcage and show no effect! the bullets simply failed to penetrate very deeply.

My Sig 1911 in 45 Super covers all my field requirements.

The guide i was with on that russian pig hunt told a story of a guy with a .44magnum pistol, and why they were so insistent of what you were shooting, and if you COULD shoot.
Seems this guy wounded one of those boars with the .44 and the pig promptly charged him. He was firing as he was backing up, and finally stopped it at his feet, as he was laying flat on the ground.
I have Mr. Pig hanging over my desk right now. He is a constant reminder about using enough gun. I am not saying that any of these handguns wouldn't eventually kill a pig, but when is a consideration, and dependent on the pig.

I have a bunch of big bore pistols, but in some situations that is the reason i bought a marlin .45/70

How soon a handgun of proper caliber and bullet choice stops a pig is also very dependent on shot location as is a rifle also.

A properly loaded big bore revolver (or auto) gives up nothing to a rifle in terms of lethality. Use the wrong bullet in the .44Mag and/or put it in the wrong place and bad things will happen. No different from any rifle.

As CraigC concurs, an encounter with dangerous game could potentially be adverse. I have no doubt a properly loaded 45 Super or Colt would quell such an encounter.

I never paid much attention to kinetic energies, sectional densities, etc. I have always just gone out and shot critters.

HITTING a fast moving target that is moving not only horizontally, but somewhat vertically, as animals tend to bounce up and down in their gait, is far more challenging than the inexperienced realize.

That is why a higher capacity weapon is not a bad idea. I love my 44 Magnums, but sometimes in bear, wolf mountain lion country, having 14,15, 16 rounds on board for immediate use is not a bad idea and one of the reasons I carry a high cap big bore auto quite often.

You can still get sub .20 splits on a big bore auto, shooting heavy hard cast bullets. Knowing that possibly a good percentage of your hits are going to be on flesh, but not perfectly placed, it makes a lot of sense to be able to pull the trigger 15 times in 5-6 seconds versus trying to get even 6 shots off and dealing with magnum recoil. Odds of getting 6 320 grain cast bullets moving at 1200 or so FPS into a fast moving target in a few seconds are slim.

The Glock 10mms and .45s make a lot of practical sense.

If we start comparing the 10mm - or any other handgun - to a rifle for hunting, as Craig C seems to be doing, the handgun loses. It has less velocity and energy, and is more difficult to place a precise shot with. These are simple facts. Comparing the 10mm to other handguns, however, is different. The 10mm has power and fire-power, and at handgun ranges, when shots are placed well, should do a good job on most medium and a lot of large game. As Mackay said, you have to hit the animal - and hit it well - and at times rapid follow-up shots can be very helpful, without getting into a "spray and pray" mindset.

I don't know where you got that.

A properly loaded handgun in the proper caliber does not take a back seat in the terminal department. Energy is meaningless in predicting lethality and anyone that thinks other wise is misinformed.


Exit in a mature bull elk's rib cage from a 180 grain fired from a 300 win mag. Bullet impacted with about 2600 fps, calculating to 2700 FPE. I am holding a 300 win mag cartridge for size comparison.




Exit in the same elk's rib cage from a 440 grain wid flat point hard cast fired from a 500 JRH at about 950 fps for 888 FPE.




The bullet with the least energy in this case did the most damage from start to finish.

The fact that big bore revolver cartridges with a good SWC or LBT work so well, yet produce so little kinetic energy should make folks question the validity of KE as a gauge of a cartridge's effectiveness. I guess too many believe the old horse hockey about energy and 'need' a simple answer to a very complex question.

Thank you. Well said. Folks should hunt big game with a handgun prior to making sweeping and general statements about their terminal effectiveness.

Not a user of the FPE in my caliber determinations here, either. Making a hole through vital parts and motation bones is most reliable predictor of effect. The only advantage rifle bullets have is - sometimes - (velocity needs to be pretty danged high) hydraulic overload effects far from the initial bullet strike area and path. It is usually from very high velocity and thus, hydraulic overload of the liquid filled body, that we get the bangflop/DRT type kills.

While I am not in any way diminishing a handguns ability to kill cleanly and make big holes, they cannot approach high velocity rifles in terms of damage to tissue, blood vessels and nervous system upset far from the impact zone that a rifle can impart. There are good reasons why 270's and 30/06's are used more often than 45/70's on deer and the like.

I have shot big game with exceedingly high velocity rounds like the 6/284 and 257WBY and caused bruising (burst blood vessels) across the entire ribcage and front shoulders of big game animals. Usually, in these cases, the lungs and upper heart are poured out of the thoracic cavity in liquified form. Travel after the hit from the animals is usually zero or maybe a couple of staggering steps, and that is all she wrote. A big hole from a big bore revolver would also have killed, if one was close enough to make a good hit, but not as dramatically or quickly and certainly not from as far away.

BUT, we cannot make a handgun bullet of sufficient weight go that fast out of a revolver or any managable semi auto handgun (I do not consider the XP-100's or long barreled Contenders etc to be true handguns, but more of a hybrid) to create those kinds of velocities so we have to rely on adequate penetration, sometimes with SOME expansion, and great bullet placement to do the job.

There are times in the hunting fields, such as trailing in thick cover that I much prefer a handgun to a rifle. IME the handgun does not always come in second to a rifle.

Safariman, are you a handgun hunter?

I have told this story before. One day checking fences I came up on a mamma hog (Eurasia) and her piglets. She saw me. She bluffed once. I pulled out my 1911. She then charged me from 35-40 yards away. I was able to hit her twice in the head and one near miss in her shoulder. I had to jump out of the way as she ran right through where I was standing. While she was turning to come back to me, she fell and went down. If I had not jumped, she would have got me. I then finished her off with a brain shot. She was full of adrenaline because of her piglets. The two shots that hit her in the head made a mess of her head, but she was still on the hoof running. I was shooting a 45 ACP with 230gr XTP's.

I started carrying my Colt Delta elite after that. We have a growing problem with these hogs on the farm. The 10mm probably would not have made a difference in this case. But who knows.

Now, here is what I did.
I carry a 1911 all the time on the farm. You can hop on a tractor, hop in a truck or four wheeler, chop wood or do anything you want and that 1911 is comfortable all day long. Even during duress, I do not "point and spray". But, I wanted to be able to shoot faster and harder. I was looking at the 460 Roland for a long time. After this incident, I went ahead on the project. The 460 uses a chambered compensator at high pressures. You can get off a shot accurately much faster. You are shooting well into the 41 magnum power with control of like shooting a 45 ACP. You have to try one to believe it. The 1 1/2" extra on the barrel has never caused a problem on the farm. That was my solution to help my current situation. I use Hardcast bullets for the penetration aspect. Like jwp475 and I have discussed, the jacketed bullets for the 45ACP are limited in the Super or the 460. They just are not built for those velocities. The 40 Bullets have thicker jackets, and hold up better in my experience. But I am sold on the comp for quick and accurate follow up shots. This is a wilderness self protection application, not a conceal carry one.

FPE is not accurate in any manner as to predicting terminal performance as these picture perfectly illustrate.

Exit in a mature bull elk's rib cage from a 180 grain fired from a 300 win mag. Bullet impacted with about 2600 fps, calculating to 2700 FPE. I am holding a 300 win mag cartridge for size comparison.




Exit in the same elk's rib cage from a 440 grain wid flat point hard cast fired from a 500 JRH at about 950 fps for 888 FPE.




The bullet with the least energy in this case did the most damage from start to finish.


The ballistic pendulum proves positively the the belief in complete energy transfer is totally incorrect



The only total transfer is momentum which is what the pendulum measures, kinetic energy is calculated, not measured.

The grizz and moose on the left








A rifle would not have been more effective than the 475 used in the top photo or the 500L used in the bottom photo

Whitworth, I have shot a few critters with handguns, but do not classify myself as a handgun hunter. That said, I have shot quite a bit of game with large non expanding bullets in Africa and a few over here. They work, obviously, and kill stuff just as dead if one can get close enough to make a good shot. AND, if one is a far better shot with a handgun than I am!

The 475 Linebaugh with a 420 grain bullet at 1400 fps has 11.6 Newtons forces. The 300 win mag with a 180 grain bullet at 3000 fps has 10.665 Newtons force.

When converting to force the handgun does not take a back seat to 300 win mag rifle in fact the handgun takes the front seat.

Yet it is not force OR FPE that do the job. It is tissue and bone destruction, period. Secondary missile tissue damage and hydraulic overload damage to distant parts of an animals anatomy do not occur until the impact velocity is well over 2,000fps. Big bullets absolutely do work, one would have to be quite ignorant to debate that. But on some game animals, a quicker kill yet can be the result of secondary missile (pieces of bone, tissue, etc) and hydraulic pressures busting up distant blood vessels and Nerve centers via the effects of bullet velocity. This is why the fast .224's often give much quicker kills that a 45/70 or even a 30/30.

Probably the best description and explanation of this I have ever seen, and these results are backed up by experiments run by the military in the 40's and 50's as well as field observation of thousand upon thousands of hunters. A great read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock


Then there is the fact that a whole lot more people can shoot a 300WinMag better than they will ever shoot a 475 anything. I can shoot my 340 and 416 Rifles, but disdain a handgun above a 44 Magnum in power and recoil.

Have we sufficiently hijacked this thread?

Do any of the last ten posts by anyone have ANYTHING to do with the 10mm? Not much, I fear

But this stuff sure is fun!

Big Bore Bullet make big holes and this lets a lot of blood out and lot of air in quick and this is what kills any animal, regardless of their size

Force is indeed a factor in producing the wound channel. I highly recommended this book on the subject.

That looks like it would be a great read. If I find it for sale I will grab it and read it.

Always willing to learn and expand my knowledge base.

"The single most expensive thing a man can own, is a closed mind"

PS Thanks again for the refferal to Jack Huntington. As soon as I sell a couple of toys and have some play money, he will be seeing my RIA 1911 in 10mm and 329PD for action and trigger work. Maybe sight replacement on the 329, as well.

The idea of damage at distant locations from the wound channel is a bit controversial to say the least.

I shoot hogs regularly with a suppressed .44 mag, using 300 - 335gr either "solid" Barnes bullets or Hard Cast at under 1100 fps. Penetration is amazing, kills are quick and sure - BUT the ranges are 75 yards or less. I have shot a large sow at 130 yards with a .300 Win Mag and 130gr Barnes TTSX that went down just as fast, with more tissue damage. The difference is the range a pistol is effective at versus a rifle of this type. Had I been able to hit the hog at 130 yards with my suppressed .44, I think the big hard cast would have penetrated, because once they start moving they slow down, but keep moving - if that makes any sense? The damage in that case, however, would not have been as much as the .300 Win Mag. Hand guns are short range weapons, with short barrels. Rifles can be long range weapons, with much longer barrels and telescopic sights. Different tools for different uses, but each can well be "better" for the use it was designed for than the other.

I consider the 10mm to be a high velocity, lower bullet weight "weapon", almost like a rifle hen compared to a larger caliber, slower velocity handgun - longer effective range, probably not as good as a heavier, slower bullet up closer. (see, Mark? I got in something about 10mm.

Not to those who have seen it hundreds of times, it isn't. Nor is it controversial to those who have studied it in depth like the US Military and others. I used a 300RUM for collecting bait animals in Africa because it, more often than not, put everything it touched right down, right now. No tracking, dragging, chasing etc. when getting as many baits into the trees as possible in as short a time as possible. Could have used my 416 Rigby with 350-400gr bullets that would have had a much higher theoretical knock out factor but on real live animals, impact speed and the resultant trauma to the not touched directly CNS etc. was the hands down winner for DRT, right NOW.

Well Mark you need to do a bit more research on the subject IMHO Dr. Fackler was a battle field surgeon before he turned his life's work to the study of wound ballistics and doesn't agree. I tend to stand on his take of the matter.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock



Fackler's contra-claim[edit]
Dr. Martin Fackler, a Vietnam-era trauma surgeon, wound ballistics researcher, a Colonel in the U.S. Army and the head of the Wound Ballistics Laboratory for the U.S. Army�s Medical Training Center, Letterman Institute, claimed that hydrostatic shock had been disproved and that the assertion that a pressure wave plays a role in injury or incapacitation is a myth.[16] Others expressed similar views.[17][18]

Dr. Fackler based his argument on the lithotriptor, a tool commonly used to break up kidney stones. The lithotriptor uses sonic pressure waves which are stronger than those caused by most handgun bullets,[citation needed] yet it produces no damage to soft tissues whatsoever. Hence, Fackler argued, ballistic pressure waves cannot damage tissue either.[19]

Dr. Fackler claimed that a study of rifle bullet wounds in Vietnam (Wound Data and Munitions Effectiveness Team) found �no cases of bones being broken, or major vessels torn, that were not hit by the penetrating bullet. In only two cases, an organ that was not hit (but was within a few cm of the projectile path), suffered some disruption.� Dr. Fackler cited a personal communication with R. F. Bellamy.[16] However, Bellamy�s published findings the following year[20] estimated that 10% of fractures in the data set might be due to indirect injuries, and one specific case is described in detail (pp. 153�154). In addition, the published analysis documents five instances of abdominal wounding in cases where the bullet did not penetrate the abdominal cavity (pp. 149�152), a case of lung contusion resulting from a hit to the shoulder (pp. 146�149), and a case of indirect effects on the central nervous system (p. 155). Fackler's critics argue that Fackler's evidence does not contradict distant injuries, as Fackler claimed, but the WDMET data from Vietnam actually provides supporting evidence for it.[20][21]

While my experience is dated (80's), I had a Colt Delta Elite in 10mm and I was using the Norma Factory loads (200 gr. I think) on Hogs around Tallahassee and a small whitetail on the lease over in Quincy. It always worked pretty well, nothing needed to be shot twice and nothing ran far.

It had a little kick, and shooting it near dusk was a treat, big fireball.

I sold it to a friend who sent it back to Colt I think in 2005 for a refresh and it was reblued; it's still his truck gun.

Last I heard he still shoots hogs and the occasional gator with it.

That is about how I treat my 1911 in 10mm, an all around GP daily carry, in the truck, fun shooting handgun. It will be seeing less trail and stream fishing outings now that I have another 329PD 44 Magnum that is much lighter, though.

JWP, this concept is alien to me. Can you explain? Forgetting whether relevant or not, one can calculate the momentum (MxV) of a moving bullet or the kinetic energy of a moving bullet (1/2xMxV^2) at any point along its flight path up to (and even after impact if you can measure that). Those two physical concepts involve only mass and velocity of the bullet.

Force, however, is mass times acceleration. The flying bullet after it leaves the barrel, does not have force. It does not accelerate after it leaves the barrel. So, there is no A in the MxA calculation. When it hits something of a certain mass, it may cause it, as a whole, to accelerate in one direction, but usually not very much. It can cause numerous particles (like an exploding water jug, watermelon, or tissue inside of an animal) to collectively accelerate with the individual masses of each particle in countless directions. But I have never heard how that can be calculated.

A cartridge's powder charge does exert force on a bullet in a barrel, but that can't be what you mean. In the end, it results in a given velocity muzzle velocity, which, for a given bullet, is (whether high or low, good or bad) what matters. For example, if you have a cartridge in a gun with a 10" barrel that can accelerate a 300gr bullet to a given velocity (say 2,000fps) it must exert twice the average force on the bullet than a load in a 20" barrel that achieves the same velocity must exert (in the shorter barrel, it accelerates from 0fps to 2,000fps twice as fast). But it can't matter how quickly a bullet accelerates to its muzzle velocity in terms of its effect on game after it exits the barrel. And you can't calculate the force a bullet will impart on an animal.

So, forgive me if I a misunderstanding, but how are you getting the Newtons-of-force results above?

I think you might be referring to momentum, which favors slower, heavier bullets (because the velocity is not squared as in the KE calculation), but I'm not sure.

EDIT: I think you are talking about momentum, not force. And the units are Newton-seconds (Newtons times seconds).

Newton's force is is 1 KG times 1 meter per second. Convert FPS to meters per second then convert bullet weight in grains to KG and multiple together.

http://m.wikihow.com/Calculate-Force


http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/history/newton3laws.html

Fig Newtons would be a good bait for Wild Hogs IMHO.

Those original Norma loads were hot. Real hot. Did not mate up very well with the early Delta's. The S&W 1006 could take a steady diet of them.

Probably would.

The best bait (in traps)for hogs that I have found is:

Cracked corn with Tang or powdered Gatorade sprinkled on top. They will work hard to get all that powder. They fight over it.

To stay on topic, a 10mm works wonders in hog trap clearing.

Was hoping to report on shooting a hog today, and whether or not it's stomach contents contained Fig Newtons, but, alas, the 10mm did not get to speak today. Smelled hogs in the woods at one point, and got lots of pictures off the trail cams of hogs (and deer) at night, but no shots with the pistols. My wife will be out of town this weekend, though, and I really hope to give my 10mm a baptism in hog killing.

By the way, snakes are out. Hardly ever see them on my place - think the hogs keep them thinned down, but almost stepped on the same one twice today. Both times he was evidently more afraid of me than I of him, and beat a very hasty retreat.

Mike-

If you kill a hog that has eaten Fig Newton's. Report back in meters not yards for distance of shot. Before you shoot, yell
E=(mc)^2. Make sure they understand or they won't die.

I do not know if Speer makes shot capsules for the 10mm. Better take your model 60 or a bulldog with shot for them snakes. Just saying. Follow your nose with hogs. Through some powdered Tang upwind. They will come to you. Yea Right! Good luck.

For the braniac's, do not take offence. I did learn from you guys.

Okay, it's not Newton's force. Newton was a guy, and they named the unit of force after him.

No. A Newton of force is not "1 KG times 1 meter per second." It is 1 KG times 1 meter per second-SQUARED.

I'm sure the Newtons above you are referring to are Newtons x seconds, which is a unit of Momentum, not force. You cannot measure the "force" of a bullet.

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=191493

m = meters
M = Mass
Kgs = kilograms
s = seconds
V = velocity (m/s)

Momentum = Mass (in kgs) x Velocity (in m/s)
Thus, Momentum is measured in (kg x m)/s.

Force = Mass x Acceleration = kg x m/s^2
One Newton of force is 1 kg x 1m/s^2

Newton times the number of seconds (or Newton x s) = (kg x m/s^2) x s = (kg x m)/s

Thus, Momentum = (kg x m)/s = Newton x s

Thus, the metric units for momentum is Newton x seconds or more simply: (kg x m)/s.

No one ever has attempted, as far as I know, to measure the "force" of a bullet, which is a meaningless concept. At any given moment in time, it has diameter; sectional density; ballistic coefficient; velocity; mass; momentum; and energy (and any other formula that is a composition of some of the above). But it has no force because it is not accelerating after leaving the barrel.

In case there is any doubt:

Converting the 180gr .300 WM load you referenced above at 3,000 fps to metric units:

1 kilogram = 15,432.3584 grains. So there are 1/15,432.3584 kilograms per grain.
Thus, a 180gr .300 WM bullet has 180/15,432.3584 kilograms of mass = 0.0117 kgs.
Also 3,000 fps = 914.36 m/s.

Remember: Momentum = Mass (in kgs) x Velocity (in m/s) which translates to units of Newton x s OR (kg x m)/s.

For the 180gr/3,000fps .300 WM load referenced above, in metric units of momentum, you have:

0.0117 kgs (Mass) x 914.36 m/s (Velocity) = 10.665 (kg x m)/s (Newton x s). Exactly the same as you said above: �The 300 win mag with a 180 grain bullet at 3000 fps has 10.665 Newtons force.�

Only it is not �Newtons [of] force,� but Newton-seconds of Momentum.

You�re saying �Newtons of force,� but meaning �Newton-seconds of momentum.�

I'm not saying momentum matters or that it doesn't, but "force" has nothing to do with it, and is not the same thing as momentum.

Marine Hawk...

Wow, cool posts! I am no math wizard by any stretch, so cannot claim to understand fully all that you wrote or posted, but you made it clear enough in your writing style and presentation that I got the gist of it.

You shed much light on the topic, IMO.

As for me, I will stick with what my experience and that of others has shown. Holes through vital pieces/parts and critical bones (always) plus hydraulic effects from very high velocities at impact (sometimes, and only with fairly high velocity rifles) are reliable indicators or predictable killers of large game. And the bigger and more dangerous the game animal, the less reliable is the Hydraulic overload part of the equation.

Also, a few gunwriters have written good articles in fairly recent years about momentum being a much more critical or important part of the equation. And momentum is lost rapidly with the loss of weight, which is why the new breed of super bullets are so superior to what we had a (very!)few decades ago. i.e they maintain much more momentum after impact to do more disruption, damage and penetration.

Safariman, I agree. And note I was just correcting minor terminology. There are sooo many variables. One bullet/velocity combination might work better on larger game with a bone impact. Others might work better with smaller animal; others might work better on both when no bone is hit; some may work better at longer ranges where you need a sleek bullet to get out there without mortar-like trajectory; others (like a flat nose HC larger diameter handgun bullet) might work better at shorter ranges when you are not planning to shoot (or capable or shooting) hundreds of yards with a handgun, etc ...

No one has all the answers, but there is some interesting data here, including a lot of actual penetration data and the theory behind it: http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html

More generally, the same guy has some conceptual ideas here: http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html

I really like the guy's approach (in that last link) to the various theories. For example, the Taylor Knock Out, though given credibility by various accomplished writers, is completely silly for normal hunting:

Taylor Knockout (TKO)

I almost hate to comment on this one because it happens to be a favorite of one of my favorite gun writers, a man of outstanding skill and a reputable hunter whose guidance in such matters should not be taken lightly (and I don't refer to Taylor!). Taylor himself was also a man of unimpeachable experience and his views on rifles and calibers, especially for dangerous game, is taken as gospel on the subject.

However, this formula has got to go.

I'm sympathetic to the motivations which brought about its creation. The "smallbore cranks" were a cult phenomenon at the time, preaching vehemently about high velocity and kinetic energy. A number of this following ventured to Africa, and like their predecessors in the heyday of blackpowder "express" cartridges, experienced miserable failures in the field, sometimes with fatal consequences to the shooter or guides. Taylor was attempting to counter this "scientific" kind of argument with a kind of scientific methodology. Applying his many years of experience to the problem (and it must be confessed, his biases as well), he developed a formula which favored the kind of bullets and cartridges he knew to work reliably:

TKO = Bullet Weight (lbs) x Impact Velocity (fps) x Bullet Diameter (in)

Regrettably, this formula is as misleading as any kinetic energy figures or OGW or any other I've seen. For example, a hand-thrown baseball would have roughly twice the TKO of the standard nitro express load. I doubt if anyone would argue that bouncing a baseball off the noggin of an elephant would produce any positive result. Taylor himself acknowledged that there wasn't any appreciable difference in the killing performance of the various .400s, .416s, .450s, .465s, .470s, .475s, and .500s on dangerous game when loaded with reliable bullets of sound construction. But his TKO formula (as generally interpreted) exaggerates any difference that might exist because it makes the bore diameter equally as important as the velocity; thus a .488 caliber .475 Jeffery No. 2 is seen to be 7% more potent than a .458 caliber .450 NE even though they both have the same ballistics. The comparison becomes even more exaggerated between a .450/.400 NE and a .500 NE in which the larger bore is calculated to be 55 % more potent, even though Taylor regards them as being very similar in killing performance. In fairness to the author, the TKO value is generally misinterpreted (notice that the table he provides only includes loads for solid bullets). Taylor himself said of it:

I do not pretend that they [TKOs] represent "killing power"; but they do give an excellent basis from which any two rifles may be compared from the point of view of the actual knock-down blow, or punch, inflicted by the bullet on massive, heavy-boned animals such as elephant, rhino and buffalo. (African Rifles and Cartridges, pg. xii)

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about this word "shock"; men seem to be under the impression that it implies killing power. But that is erroneous. (African Rifles and Cartridges, pg. 58)

Elaborating, the author indicates that this stunning effect truly applies for the most part to near misses of the brain on elephant, enabling a more leisurely dispatch with a follow-up shot (possibly of lesser caliber) or, especially, permitting the shooting of other nearby elephants, while the first is down. Such tactics are no longer permissible and were never ethical in my view (Taylor was a self-acknowledged poacher). Indeed, whether his TKO is true even in this sense is a highly contentious matter, disputed by some very experienced African hunters (I will not pretend to be highly experienced in this regard, but I have seen a Cape buffalo shot between the eyes, within millimeters of its brain, with a .500 NE which did not produce any effect whatsoever). More recently, Craig Boddington has voiced a similar doubt on the basis of his observations and those of other contemporary hunters and game control officers ("Like a Freight Train", Rifle Shooter, November - December 2009, pgs. 38 - 42). But the point here is that Taylor never offered this formula as an indicator of killing or even "shocking" performance for hits on the body. That is an American gun pundit extrapolation of thought. Taylor includes TKO values for everything down to the .256 Mannlicher, but not with a view to offering the relative merits of one small-bore or medium-bore against another for general hunting use - its to show how puny these are relative to the big-bores for stopping an elephant. Still, Taylor also made the point that even a stopping rifle was ineffective with poor shooting:

"Both barrels from a .600 in the belly will have little more apparent effect on [an elephant] than a single shot from a .275 in the same place." (African Rifles and Cartridges, pg. 59)

American hunters and gun writers use terms like "stopping power", "shock" and "killing power" to describe how quickly a deer (elk, antelope, etc.) falls when hit. Practically no one hunts elephant anymore and I can't remember the last time I saw an article on that subject. Promotion of the TKO is indicative of the careless way in which any quasi-scientific method is seized upon, even though the originator of it may reject that purpose to which it is put (though, again, I am not endorsing or placing validity on Taylor's TKO calculation, even for the purpose he intended).

Incidentally, if there is a "knockout" effect it will almost certainly be a function of bullet shape, presented area and velocity. Bullet mass will not matter greatly, but a separate calculation would be necessary to assess whether sufficient penetration was provided.

http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html

Good night, this feels like an early 90's time capsule in here with all the Taylor/Fackler stuff. Is Shawn Dodson going to post next? When will Marshall and Sanow or the Strasbourg goat tests be drug out. I suppose it is fun to talk about, but for me the bottom line is this.

All other things equal...
Bigger bullets kill game better than smaller bullets.
Faster bullets kill game better than slower bullets.

In the handgun realm, the 10mm slings a fairly big bullet along at a fairly high velocity. Sounds good to me.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force

Unfortunately, it's a lot more complicated than that. Things are never equal and they cannot be. Big doesn't need to expand and it doesn't have to be fast to work. Small has to be fast and it has to expand to work. Two completely different dynamics.

I LOVED reading of the Strasbourg goat tests! You are treading on holy ground there, mister!

More seriously, your interpretation of the killing power of the 10mm matches with my thoughts. And, being a 40 cal, it does not have to expand to work well. I plan to experiment with some 215gr HCFN bullets for it one of these days soon coming. That said, starting the very reliable expanding Gold Dot 180's at a chronographed 1375, gives me a good set of killing power theories at work, simoultanasly. A fairly large bullet to begin with, capable of pretty deep penetration, hitting at about as high of a velocity as handgun bullets can be expected to generate. I have some 155gr solid copper Barnes hollow point bullets to try in this gun, I should be able to start them at around 1500fps, they might be a real deadly combo. Those and some 215gr FNHC pills will be next up in my experiments when I get a little bit of play money in my hands for more bullets.

Marine Hawk, wow you did it again! In two posts you have, IMO, shed more light than many piles of posts by other members with armchair or Monday Morning Quarterback ameteur theorists who post this theory or that one and call it proven science or fact.

You are 1000% correct, sir that when any number of circumstance change, almost any of the popular theories can be found wanting.

This is why so many of my hunting rifles are of large diameter, and shoot deep penetrating bullets FAST. IF the Hydraulic overload don't get it done, the big deep hole through parts neccesary for the continuation of life and/or motation certainly will.

Thusly, my rifles for African and Alaskan XXL sized game have been my hot loaded (to roughly equal the mighty 416 WBY) 416 Rigby, my wildcat 340 Tyrannosaur that pushes a 225gr TTSX at 3100fps and as my smallest bore used there a 300 RUM sending 180gr TTSX bullets out at 3200fps. The 300 RUM and 340 T both knocked the wind right out of the sails on game as big and tough as Eland and Zebra, not to mention Kudu and the smaller plains game animals and were fast and flat shooting enough, plus accurate enough as well as flat shooting, for the "Poodleopes" as I call them, i.e. the Springbok, Klipspringer, etc.

I am saving several of the studies that you have cited to my 'favorites' list for future reference. I remember well Craig Boddington's article debunking the knock out blow idea of the big bores and his citing the 40-41 cals as being better and more reliable penetrators. I used to be something of an Elephant hunter, but even if my health returns, I fear that the hunting of these great beasts is going to be quickly out of range for all but the wealthiest of hunters. I am sure glad I went and did what I did, when I had the chance.

Thanks again for a couple of terrific posts!

WOW! I just read Rathcoombe's FULL terminal effects bullets report! What an AMAZING piece of work! Easily, far and away, the most complete and best testing of any bullet and wounding effect report I have ever seen, and I have read a bunch of them.

Marine HAwk,

This particualr article or series of tests need to be put into a separate thread in the hunting forums here. IF you do not cite and paste it in those, may I? (with a nod and note of appreciation/acknowledgement to you for originally bringing this to my attention in this forum) sir?

Not really:

Big is a sufficient (but not necessary) condition for good performance.
Fast is a sufficient (but not necessary) condition for good performance.

It follows that
Big=good
Fast=good
Big and fast=really good
Small and slow (BB gun)=really bad

If it is small, it better be fast. If it is slow it better be big.

I think we are saying the same thing.

Define "deep penetration", because I have not found that to be the case at all. It expands very quickly and I would not use it on deer sized game where I thought the bullet would encounter a shoulder on the way in.



Not really, you're trying to simplify something that is as far from simple as it could be.

Spend less time over analyzing it.
Spend more time loading and shooting.
Splitting hairs here.

Like Elmer said-- "Let's go shoot some rocks way out there".

Shoot more-talk less.

Well summarized and spot on. Thusly, I love my 340 wildcat pushing a big bullet (225gr TTSX) pretty fast (3100fps) why choose one or the other? When one can have both!

Dumbazz me will stick to my OM Ruger 44 Special conversion and plunk 250 gr 429421's at 1000 fps knowing that it will work.

The 429421 is a "dumb bomb". But it kills $h!t dead. Big or small,it kills them all.

The 180gr Laser-cast out of my 10's is developing the same reputation for me. Followed by the Beartooth 200gr FNGC.

No complicated math/physics to it. They just kill.

Safari, just wanted to let you know the other day I was window shopping, i.e. looking at 1911s. I saw they had a few different models of STI's, but the sales man wasn't pushing them, he was a huge fan of the RIA's. I might add this guy is a shooter also.

The RIAs, he thought were better, smoother than the Ruger he had out for comparison. They seem to be a hell of a deal this day and age.

I asked about the 10 mm, he checked and if they can get one, they sale for 610.

I want a 1911 and a 10mm, so I might start with this combo.

But it is complicated. The simpletons would have us believe that kinetic energy is a proper gauge of a cartridge's effectiveness when your example proves that to be bunk. Any handgun round produces but a fraction of the energy of even an average rifle round, yet they work just as well within their effective range. The hard part is getting people to discard their precious foot pounds.

Nothin dumbazz about that. My carry loads for my 329PD are about the same deal. My SWC bullets are a tad bit heavier because that is what I have on hand. But the formula is a sound one and well proven.

I am sure pleased as can be with mine. I have had a pretty good pile of 1911's and this one is my all time favorite so far. When I get a couple of bucks ahead I would like to have the trigger worked on a little, but it is quite good for a factory 1911. A marvelous value, for sure. Shooting times did a big article and spread on exactly the gun we are talking of, specifically the 10mm 1911 and they were very impressed, as well.

It is not complicated unless you make it that way. I have >70 hours of math,physics and chemistry and do not care. Loading,shooting and hunting is what I care about. Sure, my understanding of the disciplines help a lot. But I am not in the business of ballistics, OR teaching it, OR trying to impress people with it.

Use what you know and make it work. Have a good time doing it.
Enjoy it. Now that is not rocket science.

Sometimes people have to come full circle in life!

Just because you do not care does not mean it's not complicated. Terminal ballistics is far from simple. It's only simple to the simple-minded who think it's just "simple physics". If it were simple, we'd all be following energy figures and nobody would be arguing. Yes, it's really easy to figure out what works. What is not so easy is figuring out why or how to accurately compare one load to another. You don't have to be "in the business" to care. Anybody who has ever been in a discussion like this one when kinetic energy comes up cares to one degree or another. If you think that energy is NOT a proper gauge, then the question is, what is? Or can it even be measured? Those are not simple or easy questions to answer. Even if Gibby doesn't care.

If you really don't care, don't participate. I don't care about casting bullets but I don't go into casting forums and say, "who cares?".