Editor, The Armory Life
Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “10mm vs. .40: Was the FBI Wrong (or Right) About This?” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/10mm-vs-40/.
I love both the 10mm and the .40 S&W, but as Paul Harrel showed in one of his videos, and something that I've often suspected, some manufacturers, like Federal, do not load their 10mm any hotter than their .40 S&W. This drives me crazy, since these manufacturers are simply making more profit margin so that their customers can "SAY" they are shooting a 10mm.
A 10mm should be loaded as it was originally designed, where the power was nearly at .41 magnum range of power.
Agree 100%Another myth.
No, it doesn’t even come close to .41 magnum…in equal bullet weights, 10mm is a .357 magnum level power… .41 magnum smokes 10mm.
After watching I could not tell why the author came to the conclusion the 10mm was better. Having dealt with government purchases I doubt there was any need to create a 10mm other than to give out more contracts. Can anyone tell me the NEED that the 10mm solved? What was wrong with the 40mm? What deficiency was resolved? Longer range accuracy? Stopping power? What?
I don't want to shoot one of those. not from a handgun anywaywith the 40mm
Close to my point exactly. I am a skeptic of government agencies creating a solution to an unknown need. Saw it all the time. Maybe there is a need in the realm of hunting?10mm predates .40S&W by several years, so…
10mm came BEFORE .40.Close to my point exactly. I am a skeptic of government agencies creating a solution to an unknown need. Saw it all the time. Maybe there is a need in the realm of hunting?
I think the point of that sentence was “they both headspace off the mouth”, not they have the same headspace, but…I did a double take as well.I didn't make it past the part where the idiot states that the headspace for these two cartridges was the same. It's a shame that your staff member responsible for approving submissions can't make even a tiny effort to fact check the articles before posting them just to be posting something.
There certainly was in the mind(s) of someone or agency. It wasn’t a bad choice really.10mm came BEFORE .40.
Perhaps the correct question is: was there ever an actual NEED for .40?
I own an XDM-E 3.8 10mm OSP (w/Holosun507C-X2) and find it eminently comfortable to shoot. Don't feel any difference really between my 9mms and this 10mm. Just so you know, I watched the Apollo 11 Moon landing on live tv....so this is not coming from a youngster who sneers at recoil and eats nails for breakfast.
If anyone out there is debating whether or not to buy this pistol, I'm open to questions.
Thanks for the correction. I was under the impression the 10 came after the .40. I learned.Close to my point exactly. I am a skeptic of government agencies creating a solution to an unknown need. Saw it all the time. Maybe there is a need in the realm of hunting?
I fundamentally agree with you on your point.Put both of them up against a timer doing the same drill, and I guarantee you will see there is a marked difference in how recoil is effecting accuracy. Either you’ll be slower to keep the sane accuracy, or you’ll be just as fast but with reduced accuracy in the 10mm.
More energy going out the front means more energy coming back as recoil…if Ike Newton knew what he wa talking about a few centuries ago.