Thread: 10 mm Rnd
4/21/2006 8:53pm, #1
10 mm Rnd
So I was talking to a friend the other day and we was talking about 10mm round. He claims that it was standard issue for FBI till the FBI agents said the firearm was too powerful and hard to control.
Anyone heard this or know anything about the 10mm Rnd?
4/21/2006 10:14pm, #2
There's a pretty decent website that's about all things 10mm. Here's a link to the "history" section, so you can read about the 10mm and it's involvement with FBI yourself.
http://www.bren-ten.com/id7.html"No. Listen to me because I know what I'm talking about here." -- Hannibal
4/21/2006 10:19pm, #3Originally Posted by Garbanzo Bean
4/21/2006 10:22pm, #4
If I'm going to be stuck at home with a busted ribcage while my friends are out partying, I might as well be of some use."No. Listen to me because I know what I'm talking about here." -- Hannibal
4/22/2006 9:08am, #5
He's pretty accurate, actually. (That's a rarity with "my friend told me" stories about guns.)
The FBI was very interested and somewhat involved in 10mm development, and S&W developed the 1076 mostly for the FBI. However, the 10mm carries a lot of recoil when it's loaded to its potential. And it's also a long round, so it requires .45-size frames.
The FBI found that a lot of agents hated the size of the 1076 and the recoil of the round. The first solution was to download the 10mm to about the level that most factory 40 S&W loads run today (keep that in mind, it's important later on the quiz.)
But that brought up the question: Why are we forcing agents with small hands (like females) to adapt to this very big pistol with its very big grip, if we're not getting superior ballistics anymore because the 10mm is being loaded down into the lower ranges of its potential?
This led Smith and Wesson to the idea of a round that would be 10mm/.40 caliber in diameter to retain the advantages of that bullet, but shorter than the 10mm or the .45 so that it could fit in a much smaller frame. Thus the .40 Smith and Wesson was born.
Cops love it because it fits more rounds than a .45 into a grip the size of a 9mm. It's much less powerful than full-house 10mm, but since most factory loadings of the 10mm are NOT full-house loads and haven't been for some time, it's actually ballistically similar. And if you have small hands, you can carry it in a Hi-Power with the same grip as a 9mm.
People sometimes call it "40 Short and Weak" because it's essentially the downloaded version of the 10mm. . . . but most of the people getting the full potential out of 10mm are handloaders rolling their own. It's not really a fair comparison.
4/22/2006 11:47am, #6Originally Posted by Don Gwinn
Hmmm makes me want to shoot a few to compare it to the 9mm.
4/22/2006 12:19pm, #7Originally Posted by Don Gwinn
4/22/2006 1:56pm, #8
After reading of a bit It seen like the 10mm is nice rounds for personal protection, if you got the strength/hands to handle it.
However, Don you mentioned that if the 10mm isn't a full-house load it about the same as a .40.
That begs the questions how does one know it is a full house load and do you know of any companies that still make the full-house 10mm auto ammo?
4/22/2006 9:39pm, #9
"About the same" was probably too strong a word, but the advantage is not as much as it once was and certainly not what a handloader can wring out.
This is only Remington's factory ballistics tables, but it serves to illustrate the point. Remington sells a UMC loading (cheap ball plinking ammo) in 10mm and 40 S&W. In 10mm, you get a 180 grain bullet pushed to 1150 fps. In 40 S&W, you get the same bullet pushed to 1015 fps. So by moving up to that bigger, bulkier frame (a Glock 20 uses the same frame as the Glock 21 .45--huge--while the Glock 22 uses the same frame as the Glock 17--far less huge) you get a measly 135 feet per second. Remington says the energy difference is 529-388=141 ft-lbs, which seems like a surprisingly large gap for the same mass and such a small difference in speed, but who am I to argue?
If you compare this (apparently one and only) 10mm round offered by Remington to some of the badder 40 S&W offerings from the same company, the line blurs further. The Express, Golden Saber and even UMC in 165 grain weights get up into the 485-499 ft-lb range, only about 30 less than the 180 grain 10mm.
Yet, this guy reports taking a 150 grain Nosler hollow point bullet to 1476 fps--that's 726 ft-lbs of energy at the muzzle! With the same 165 grain bullets Remington was using in several of the hot 40 S&W loads we saw a moment ago, he got to 1400 fps.
With the same 180 grain bullet used in the Remington UMC 10mm factory load, he got 1275 fps and 650 lb-ft of energy. Now the comparison between the 180 grain 10mm and the 180 grain 40 S&W goes 650-388=262 ft-lbs of difference, rather than 135.
But those are serious loads. They'll be unpleasant for many people to shoot, and it takes careful and patient development to work your way up from lighter loads to these kind of pounders, watching for overpressure warning signs as you go. If you jump right into the loadings he's showing, you run the very real risk of getting badly hurt.