Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
357mag and 10mm for protection against large animal
I have heard either 357mag or 100mm is the minimum you need against large carnivores. I take it that means in case you need to, hunting ungulate with those two rounds is possible. Is one more powerful than the other?
How much more powerful are those compared with 9mm, 40sw, or 45acp? I have heard 10mm is just a longer 40sw. Does that mean you can put 40sw in a 10mm pistol like you can load a 38spec into a 357mag revolver?
Does the barrel length matter for either round? As in, for a handgun, do either rounds require a certain barrel length to reach the stopping power necessary for large angry beasts?
I know 357mag can be fired from a lever action rifle, and the length is obviously much more than a handgun. I know 10mm has sub machine gun/carbine and they too have longer barrels. But I am talking about handguns for back pack gun because it is light and easy to carry.
There are 2-6 in revolver for 357mag, and full size, to sub compact 10mm auto pistols. With everything being equal, what be heavier a 357mag revolver or a 10mm pistol? Which do you prefer to buy?
357mag and 10mm for protection against large animal
I have heard either 357mag or 100mm is the minimum you need against large carnivores. I take it that means in case you need to, hunting ungulate with those two rounds is possible. Is one more powerful than the other?
How much more powerful are those compared with 9mm, 40sw, or 45acp? I have heard 10mm is just a longer 40sw. Does that mean you can put 40sw in a 10mm pistol like you can load a 38spec into a 357mag revolver?
Does the barrel length matter for either round? As in, for a handgun, do either rounds require a certain barrel length to reach the stopping power necessary for large angry beasts?
I know 357mag can be fired from a lever action rifle, and the length is obviously much more than a handgun. I know 10mm has sub machine gun/carbine and they too have longer barrels. But I am talking about handguns for back pack gun because it is light and easy to carry.
There are 2-6 in revolver for 357mag, and full size, to sub compact 10mm auto pistols. With everything being equal, what be heavier a 357mag revolver or a 10mm pistol? Which do you prefer to buy?
I do know the following, which addresses (some of) your questions. YMMV, mostly my opinion.
I AM a casual day hiker, in the Cascades, usually ten mile or less up into the deep woods. I AM NOT hiker overnight into the wild of Alaska, where the last of the major critters roam (other than Canada, where I assume a handgun is not an option).
I usually, though not always, have my 1911 Commander in a thigh holster where it's secure and accessible. Haven't needed it yet, in many years. Used to carry a Thunder Ranch 45ACP revolver, large frame scandium, on same theory before selling it as an oddball anachronism.
Yes, "they" say 357 is a great cartridge for animals and people. Look at enough shooting data, that seems to stand out. I'd probably spend not a ton on a 4" revolver for a hiking gun if I went that way, lots of options. Nothing I couldn't solve four shots in 1.5 seconds from my Commander, with 240gr JHP Win Silvertips or whatever I have in it for defensive ammo, though. I'd hate to get shot with either.
Now: were I in Alaska, a guide who knew what he was doing day-in/day-out in the back country, I'd re-ask the question. There may or may not be a real reason to walk around with 44 Magnum 4" barrel Rugers or whatever out there, or even bigger. Find one, ask. 2" barrel 500 S&W must exist for some reason.
Some handguns are "light and easy to carry" like my HK VP9SK in a body holster. Try that with my steel Commander, nuh-uh: more work. Full 5" barrel, forget it: that's a battle or duty gun. Move up to large frame magnums, same thing. You'll be thigh holstering that thing. If that bothers you socially, tough luck. Bigger magnums weight 3-4 lbs though.
On 10mm: not many of these left, compare ammo costs and lack of choice. Too bad, was an interesting idea but didn't have an obvious need, they figured out. More bang than a 45ACP +P, but bigger rounds and bigger guns. If one insists, a Colt Delta Elite is an option. Needs big hands and ability to deal with recoil. I personally like 357 mag better. I'd also probably look at a 5" Desert Eagle in that cartridge, the slightly smaller vs previous version, though they're way-expensive. In a revolver, which I don't like very much, again I'd think about 4" or else it will be real bulky, real fast.
Not sure I'd hunt much with a 45acp or 9mm, if-anything. 357 Mag, guys do, in those rifles as well. Same with 44 mag. There is a case to be made for having both lever rifle and some sort of sidearm in one of those calibers, as a ranch gun, if that's your thing.
For a decades, 45 ACP and 1911s were my do-it-all handguns, caveats above. Never mind rifles. Past couple years, I'm branching out a bit. All can be re-sold for some fraction of the investment, I've not lost much on re-sale especially if buying used and "quality" used. It's fun to experiment with what you like , what you'll be doing, for what works and doesn't. I cut bait on that which does not work.
Just a disclaimer, the largest "animal" I ever encountered are the 2-legged kind. So take my opinion for what it's worth.
Everything I've read is the .357 magnum is more than adequate up to black bears, anything bigger than that you'll need to up the caliber to 44 magnum, 45 colt and up. So if your potential bigger animals include brown bears, elk, moose, and polar bears, I'd suggest you upgrade to a more potent caliber. But if it's black bear, cougars/ mountain lions, wolf, coyotes, etc., then I think a .357 magnum is fine.
Now the comparison between a .357 magnum and a 10mm, here's what we can get into a bit of controversy. Based on link above, yes the barrel of a gun, particularly the .357, makes a difference. A 158 gr .357 magnum from a 4 inch barrel has a velocity advantage over from a 2-inch barrel, roughly by 200 fps. If concealment is not a factor for you, then I'd suggest a 4-inch revolver. The 10mm Glock 20 has a 4.6 inch barrel.
Back to compare the two calibers, first is a revolver and the second is a semiautomatic. The bottom line is which one do you shoot better under stress? Then carry that one. Other factors become secondary. If your primary worry are the animals, then a revolver is just fine. But if your worries include 2-legged kind, or pack animals like wolf/ wild dogs, then a higher capacity semiauto may suit your needs better.
The 10mm is a more powerful round than 40S&W. Comparing a 180 gr, the 10mm has roughly 200 fps advantage over the 40S&W, so it hits harder. But that comes with a higher recoil and louder muzzle flash. The FBI initially switched from 9mm to a 10mm but the recoil was too much for "average agents", so they dropped down to a 40S&W instead. There are arguments on whether a 10mm is up to a .357 magnum power. Some argue yes while other say it is just shy of a .357 magnum. Either way, I think you'll be perfectly fine with either calibers.
Having said all these, I believe a 40S&W, a 45ACP, a 10mm, and a 357 magnum are all perfectly adequate for woods carry, unless you're in Alaska, then I'd suggest a .44 magnum, .45 long Colt, .454 Casull, .460S&W, and .500S&W Of course, everything changes if you use the handgun calibers in a level-action rifles.
357mag and 10mm for protection against large animal
I have heard either 357mag or 100mmis the minimum you need against large carnivores. I take it that means in case you need to, hunting ungulate with those two rounds is possible. Is one more powerful than the other?
How much more powerful are those compared with 9mm, 40sw, or 45acp?
Yeah, umm, that would certainly handle any critters. Even tracked armored ones, lol.
357mag and 10mm for protection against large animal
I have heard either 357mag or 100mm is the minimum you need against large carnivores. I take it that means in case you need to, hunting ungulate with those two rounds is possible. Is one more powerful than the other?
How much more powerful are those compared with 9mm, 40sw, or 45acp? I have heard 10mm is just a longer 40sw. Does that mean you can put 40sw in a 10mm pistol like you can load a 38spec into a 357mag revolver?
Does the barrel length matter for either round? As in, for a handgun, do either rounds require a certain barrel length to reach the stopping power necessary for large angry beasts?
I know 357mag can be fired from a lever action rifle, and the length is obviously much more than a handgun. I know 10mm has sub machine gun/carbine and they too have longer barrels. But I am talking about handguns for back pack gun because it is light and easy to carry.
There are 2-6 in revolver for 357mag, and full size, to sub compact 10mm auto pistols. With everything being equal, what be heavier a 357mag revolver or a 10mm pistol? Which do you prefer to buy?
Personally I carry a .357 S&W model 13 with a 4†barrel when I hike around Helena MT. We’ve got kittyKats but mainly the largest threat when I hike the hills behind my house are mans best friend and man. I also carry bear spray and I have deployed that once on a dog. It was quite effective.
However when I’m in griz country and hiking I carry spray and a 5â€barreled Ruger super Blackhawk in .44. I have a chest holster for that. Why not a 10mm? Because I like and shoot the Ruger well.
There are some that say a .44mag is being ‘undergunned’ for Griz, but I’m pretty impressed with Buffalo Bore’s offerings in this caliber. Plus I reload- so a great deal of ‘stuff’ is available out there.
In a different thread Alaska Eric was saying that a 10mm Glock was currently the "go to" bear gun around Wasilla. He lives there and so should know what's what.
From what I have read, you are unlikely to get more than 2 shots at a bear, if it starts a charge from a close enough range you would be justified in shooting it. So I guess the superior long-term firepower of an automatic does not buy you much.
To muddy the water some more, you can get the 10mm in revolvers.
Me, I would go with my "Dirty Harry" long-barrel M29, because I already have it, and have a shoulder holster that makes carrying it somewhat more practical. Something like Buffalo Bore or my own cast bullet handloads would be the ammo.
For hunting deer, as I recall in Georgia where I used to live, a .357 was legal for deer but only if the barrel was 6" or longer. Yeah, barrel length matters in terms of actual bullet velocity. Also in sight radius.
Carry what you are comfortable with, what you shoot well. For bears I think of the .44 Mag as minimum - remember you are not shooting at an unsuspecting bear in a hunt, you are trying to turn a charge, and that takes more power.
Actually for bears what I would really want is a Guide Gun in 45-70. Not much harder to carry than a big pistol or revolver, but a lot easier to get hits with and more power.
I think it important to understand the 357 mag is a shadow of its previous self. When originally designed, the working pressures were 47,500 CUPs of pressure. Few pistols of the day could stand a steady diet at that pressure(read Smith & Wesson). SAAMI reduced pressure to 44,000 CUPS and problem solved for several decades. Then came the cheap, crap import pistols (Taurus in particular) that were having issues with metallurgy so SAAMI again reduced pressure. Originally the pressure in PSI would have been near 45,000PSI. Now max pressure is 35,000 PSI. So there has been a near 25% reduction in pressure in the 357 Mag over the years. Frankly, they should drop the "magnum" from its name and just call it the 357. As a shooter of when the 357 was a magnum, it was quite the powerhouse. Now it's a plinker at best. It's not a firearm I would want to carry as a self defense round for any large animal. A large animal requires LOTS of penetrating bullet. That requires velocity and bullet weight, both of which the 357 doesn't have anymore. The 10mm on the other hand can push 220gr lead bullets at 1250'ps. That also exceeds any 45ACP loads in terminal power. I carry a 10mm Long Slide. It will commonly add velocity of 50 to 100'ps over normal 5" barrel length velocities. There are also rifles chambered in 10mm and they have a corresponding increase in velocity over a 5" barrel length. As a more direct comparison, the 10mm is more like a 41 Magnum than a 357 and carries more terminal energy to the target than a 45 ACP. The biggest problem with a 10mm as a self defense round is over penetration. Most of the available factory ammo will penetrate over 20" of ballistic gel. Some, much more than that, like the Underwood ammo.
FWIW, I can handload 135gr bullets out of my 10mm at 1600'ps. A 9mm with the same weight bullet is hard pressed to top 1100'ps. The 10mm is a lot of gun, but there are bigger and more powerful out there.
As was mentioned previously, the Glock 10mm is the go to pistol these days in Alaska. And that's for bear and moose protection. As for ammunition, there are two trains of thought. Some go with a heavy 220 grain round and others go with a light penetrator round. Either way, swap out the spring with a #24 spring to handle the higher pressures.
In a different thread Alaska Eric was saying that a 10mm Glock was currently the "go to" bear gun around Wasilla. He lives there and so should know what's what.
From what I have read, you are unlikely to get more than 2 shots at a bear, if it starts a charge from a close enough range you would be justified in shooting it. So I guess the superior long-term firepower of an automatic does not buy you much.
To muddy the water some more, you can get the 10mm in revolvers.
Me, I would go with my "Dirty Harry" long-barrel M29, because I already have it, and have a shoulder holster that makes carrying it somewhat more practical. Something like Buffalo Bore or my own cast bullet handloads would be the ammo.
For hunting deer, as I recall in Georgia where I used to live, a .357 was legal for deer but only if the barrel was 6" or longer. Yeah, barrel length matters in terms of actual bullet velocity. Also in sight radius.
Carry what you are comfortable with, what you shoot well. For bears I think of the .44 Mag as minimum - remember you are not shooting at an unsuspecting bear in a hunt, you are trying to turn a charge, and that takes more power.
Actually for bears what I would really want is a Guide Gun in 45-70. Not much harder to carry than a big pistol or revolver, but a lot easier to get hits with and more power.
The 10mm Glock G20 seems to have gained popularity in Alaska, but loaded with hard-cast ammo (hard lead cast bullets), probably for the following reasons:
a. Hard-cast bullets are designed for penetration with minimal expansion
b. A very large handgun such as a .44 Magnum or even a .454 Casull would probably be better than a pistol, but with a pistol such as the one above one can fire more shots rapidly and with little recoil to interfere with aiming.
c. Hard-cast ammo is hard on barrels, and barrels for most pistols other than Glock are expensive.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course, everything changes if you use the handgun calibers in a level-action rifles.
