Warm up your FLAME THROWERS!

Take the gloves off, and discuss:

What is better. 10mm or .357 Sig?

from a discussion in the Conspiracy

This entry was posted in Guns, Random. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Warm up your FLAME THROWERS!

  1. alan says:

    I’d say they are both suboptimal because they are relatively rare and expensive.

    It doesn’t matter how “good” a round is if it’s too expensive to shoot.

  2. Yankeefried says:

    Well, if I have to play by your rules: 10mm because you can shoot it in a S&W 310/610.

  3. bluesun says:

    Well, everyone knows that 9mm is the best round, so since 10mm is like a 9mm, but increased by the power of 1, it must be even better. It’s like turning it up to 11. Er… 10?

  4. Wally says:

    357, all day long. I have a few thousand rounds stocked here…. Nice bottleneck for easy feeding, “LEO acrry it” for legal defense…

  5. Lokidude says:

    10. Bigger holes are, as a rule, better. If you’re a reloader, straight walls make it far easier to load. You get to use heavier bullets (also, as a rule, better than the alternative.) Ammo isn’t much worse than shooting 45ACP, and is plenty available, even in my podunk town.

    And if bottleneck pistol cartridges are as awesome as Wally says (and with all respect to His Evil Genius), why is there only one that’s even semi-mainstream in modern guns?

  6. Wally says:

    Loki, personally i find bottleneck carts easier to load. One less step on a manual press.

    And I could cite the 7.62×25, the 357AMP, and the 32NAA as mainstream, but it would be clear that I was grasping at straws πŸ™‚

  7. 10mm. Just as powerful but more flexible, i.e., bullet weights from 135 to about 200 grains; I’ve heard of some folks taking hogs with the heavier bullets. And folks talk about the beastly recoil of the 10mm, but I could shoot 155-grainers at 1375 fps all day long.

  8. Old NFO says:

    Um… neither??? Both of them (to me) are a solution in search of a problem…. neither are cheap to shoot, ammo is expensive and not readily available, and they are one more caliber to maintain in the ready locker…

    • With all due respect, Old NFO, I think a semiautomatic pistol caliber that’s more or less the ballistic equivalent of the .357 Magnum could be quite useful in many situations. The problem being sought for here could very well be that revolvers carry only six rounds. πŸ˜‰ As much as we all talk about how much we might need more than ten rounds in whatever situation, I think that’s something we need to keep in mind; no doubt if the 10mm/.357 Sig bashers said something to the effect that “Six rounds of .357 is all you should need,” the anti-gunners would be on that like a fat kid on a cupcake. (And I’m not saying you think that; I am just making the observation.)

      • Old NFO says:

        True Pistolero, but I’m looking at it from a practical aspect… I don’t own either one, don’t plan to buy either one… I have enough guns in .357, .38, .45 that have equivalent power and that I already have stocks of ammo for. When I look at ballistics, I can’t justify buying for that reason either… When I carry a revolver, I either have a speed loader or speed strip in my pocket, so I have 12 rounds to either stop the threat or give me room to disengage. And those guns are bought and paid for, and the ammo is paid for, and I’ve trained with/shot them for years.

  9. TJP says:

    Why does .357 Sig even exist?

  10. Ben C says:

    Not sure why you are bothering with these wimpy little calibers when you can get a 460 Rowland upper for your M&P 45. Stuck in MASS so you can’t get normal size mags for the smaller rounds, might as well go big.

    I blame IRC

    • Wally says:

      with some platforms you sure can get preban 357 sig mags, even though the 357sig wasn’t created until the ban was underway.

      Glock .40 mags work fine for feeding the .357sig. And so do uzi mags πŸ™‚

  11. Joat says:

    .357 sig exists to get .38 super performance in a gun designed for .40, and .40 is just 10mm minimum, so 10mm must be better.

  12. TJP says:

    You know, I’m really sorry. That post wasn’t inflammatory enough. I also forgot to mention that it costs as much as a Kia to correctly build a 1911 today because they were originally designed to be built with child labor alongside wooden wagon wheels in sweatshops choking with clouds of atomized pig fat used to lubricate the machines, and if John Browning were alive today he’d get killed when his Glock exploded because the case head of a 10mm wasn’t fully supported.

    Also: When your recyclables are picked up, the soda bottles are sent to FN, the soup cans are sent to Sig-Sauer and the beer cans are sent to factories that make AR receivers. Izhmash could save money if they didn’t rifle the barrels on AKs–no one would be able to tell the difference in accuracy. Rube Goldberg designed the lock-work inside S&W’s revolvers, and Rugers are such a waste of metal that Taurus buys one so they can melt down the steel and build three defective revolvers. H&K sucks just because.

  13. Blackhawk101 says:

    Anything below 45 ACP was invented for use by little old ladies and men in wheelchairs…

  14. mike w. says:

    Damnit! I’m mad I wasn’t in GBC to take part in this!

    .357SIG OF COURSE! πŸ˜›

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Actually this is all the discussion. It was prettymuch me, Raudhbjorn, and Jigsaw, and we were mostly talking about the weather. But I wanted to start getting product up on the blog, so threw it up there. Good for discussion!

  15. wrm says:

    The 357 SIG ballistics are good. That’s about all.

    The magazine capacity matches the 40/10mm. The cailber matches the 9mm. Worst of both worlds.

    I still want one. Of each.

Leave a Reply to Wally Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *