460 Rowland vs 10mm Woods Defense

Mar 3, 2017
95
4
8
#1
Started out looking at the 10mm for a woods defense gun. Then came across the 460 Rowland. Seems like it's a pretty good cartridge. Anybody have experience with it? Is it as powerful as they say - on par with the 44 mag? What platform do you use for it? I'm thinking the Glock 21 or FNH FNX-45 would be a good choice.
 

ruebarb

Sergeant of the Hide
Feb 7, 2018
119
41
28
Littleton, MA
#2
I have a Glock 40 running hot 10mm, 180gr 1300 fps, I also have the FNX 45 tac with the 460 Rowland. I just shot the fnx with the 460 rowland yesterday.

Initial impressions, it shoots completely flat, with my RMR I can easily and consistently hit a torso size steel at 100 yds without bracing the pistol. It was fun to shoot and the accuracy was amazing. My RMR was still sighted in for 45acp at 40ft. It makes huge craters in the dirt and slams that steel. It is very impressive. The extended cases makes chambering the round a little finiky, sometimes the first round would not go in completely, wiggle the slide and good to go. This is with factory loads., all subsequent rounds in each mag fed without issue.

I haven't done enough testing for reliability. I plan on making my own 185, I found the COAL on my dummy rounds made a big difference with chambering, basically go long as you can and still fit them in the mag, I have not shot any of them yet.

I would go 460 over 10mm any day, I was actually consider selling my 10mm. The 460 was amazing. I need further testing on reliability to make a full recommendation
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
711
196
43
#3
I wouldn't go 10mm, but I have no experience with the 460, sorry. I always thought it looked interesting.

The best option that I have found is a full size or larger HK USP in 45acp. From the factory, it is built to handle 45 Super. It functions perfectly with it, is very accurate, hits like a good .44, and the gun itself, though not classy like a 29 or 1911, is really purpose built for the field. Lightweight, high capacity, extremely reliable and accurate. Large controls and a large trigger guard make cold weather, gloved use easy. The trigger options are excellent, and the safety is a plus, imo. Several companies make good 45 Super ammo, plus 45acp is always an option for city use or low cost, low recoil practice.
 
Sep 16, 2009
3,989
112
63
56
Kansas
#5
I had a Wilson 460 Rowland. It was very accurate and unfailingly reliable. Recoil was mild with the large ported break. Not a really ideal set up for carry. More of a range set up for me.

I find a 30 Cal. carbine better than any large heavy handgun for woods use. More accurate, more powerful and easier to carry in truck or on tractor. YMMV. Not sure what you are defending yourself from? That could make a difference. Big bears are one thing, meth cookers another.
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
1,810
1,232
113
Dallas, TX
#8
To compare with the above:

9mm 480 ft pounds muzzle energy
.40 588 ft pounds muzzle energy
.45 592 ft pounds muzzle energy
.357 Sig 636 ft pounds muzzle energy
.357 Magnum 783 ft pounds muzzle energy

However you need to figure out what you are shooting at as certain targets speed and total muzzle energy is king, other targets hard mass is king.
 
Mar 3, 2017
95
4
8
#9
.460 Rowland 1001 ft pounds muzzle energy
.45 Super 694 ft pounds muzzle energy
10mm 718 ft pounds muzzle energy
.44 Mag 1533 ft pounds muzzle energy
.50 AE 1664 ft pounds muzzle energy
Just curious, where did you get your number from?

I was doing something similar on the Underwood website and came up with:
460 Rowland 255 GN @ 1300 fps = 957 ft*lb
44 mag 305 GN Lead @ 1325 fps = 1189 ft*lb
10 mm 220 GN hard cast @ 1200 fps = 703 ft*lb

Overall were matching up - just a little different on the 44 mag.
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
1,810
1,232
113
Dallas, TX
#10
Just curious, where did you get your number from?

I was doing something similar on the Underwood website and came up with:
460 Rowland 255 GN @ 1300 fps = 957 ft*lb
44 mag 305 GN Lead @ 1325 fps = 1189 ft*lb
10 mm 220 GN hard cast @ 1200 fps = 703 ft*lb

Overall were matching up - just a little different on the 44 mag.
https://www.underwoodammo.com/colle...n-jacketed-hollow-point?variant=7865926975545
https://www.underwoodammo.com/colle...ead-flat-nose-gas-check?variant=7865932546105
https://www.underwoodammo.com/colle...5-grain-xtreme-defender?variant=7865932873785
 
Likes: Bender

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
711
196
43
#11
I don't personally care much about FT pounds of energy, as no credible modern ballistics lab cares about it vis-a-vis real world performance. A measure of penetration is much more relevant to handgun field use, whether hunting or self defense from the mythical internet bear;-)

A hard cast lead bullet, from about 250g up to about 320g, going over 1000fps, seems to offer pretty much all the penetration a guy can use in North America. Hunting really big game in Africa will be a little different, but not much. The benefit for the big bears, is recoil control and followup shots, when you choose a load that penetrates enough, rather than go for something you can barely control or shoot accurately due to the excessive recoil.

Of course, everyone has the preferences, regardless of actual need, and that's why almost none of us have the same rifles. Pick what you like, that you enjoy shooting, and call it a day. Just make sure it runs in your hands, and not just on the net. :)
 

BCX

Sergeant of the Hide
Mar 18, 2018
295
64
28
#12
Does anybody know the performance difference between 460R and 45 Super?
I have loaded 45 Super to mid level Rowland specs. Heavy recoil spring, heavy striker spring, a strong mag spring and a FULLY SUPPORTED CHAMBER IS A MUST. We also have experience with 10MM + P. We get caught up in max velocity and FPE but when it comes down to it, functionality and shot placement is the key.
 
Apr 6, 2017
290
5
18
Georgia
#13
A big thing often overlooked is snake shot compatibility. Snakes tend to be more of a nuisance on many hikes. I have heard 10 can shoot the 40 snake rounds but personally never tried (not sure if I would try that or not though). you Can’t do ported if you do snake shot though so that’s a trade off, that’s why I tend to go revolver when talking woods gun. I have had 45acp shot cycle a P320 when you are not talking bear. Personal favorite is something that can fire 45lc shot (either Ruger 45lc for hot bear loading, 454, or 460sw mag). The amount of shot is much more than 38 spl or 45 acp. Or maybe have snake derringer as different option to a semi auto.
 

BCX

Sergeant of the Hide
Mar 18, 2018
295
64
28
#14
We have compared my 45 SUPER DUPER load which was a Hornady 200 Hap bullet @ 1380-1400 FPS and a hot 10mm w Hornady 200 XTP @ 1350-1380 in ballistic gel. If i remember correctly penetration was 18-20 inches.
 
Feb 13, 2017
101
17
18
Wellington, OH
#15
I have loaded 45 Super to mid level Rowland specs. Heavy recoil spring, heavy striker spring, a strong mag spring and a FULLY SUPPORTED CHAMBER IS A MUST. We also have experience with 10MM + P. We get caught up in max velocity and FPE but when it comes down to it, functionality and shot placement is the key.
That's one of the reasons I haven't tried 460 Rowland, you have to have heavy this and heavy that to get the gun to function without beating itself up. My 10mm Glocks are pretty easy to shoot out of the box. Heck even my Mom had no problem shooting my G29 with pretty warm loads, and she doesn't like shooting anything larger than 9mm.

Dave
 
Nov 17, 2011
2,578
2,517
113
29
Massachusetts
#17
woods defense against what?

do you really need .44mag/ .460 / ect . power for the types of critters you are going to find?

unless you are in Griz country....or moose country......you really dont need anything terribly powerful.

hell, 90% of the time, my "woods gun" is a .38....as the only thing i really need to be concerned with is coyotes and the occasional rabid animal.
 

hermosabeach

Confused Coffee Drinker
Feb 13, 2012
3,441
3,982
113
78
#18
You cannot shoot the 460 Rowland without a muzzle break.....

For Hunting or meth head defense, I am not going to put in earplugs.... so the Rowland is out as is any ported firearm....


It's a great round buy I would prefer hard cast underwood or buffalo bore ammo in either 357 or 44 to be on my side....
https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=396

If you want a semi auto, then a Glock in 10MM or even your Glock 22/23....

plenty of people have shot moose... up close with a 40 cal glock.... not the preferred hunting round but easy to carry on your snow machine...
 
Mar 26, 2006
263
43
28
#19
If I'm in big bear country I'm carrying a lightweight 44Mag or 41Mag. They're lighter than semi autos anyways.

The 41Mag is ported, so if I have the choice I carry the 44. I made the mistake of firing that 41 without ear protection ONCE. I'd do it in defense of life again, but only then.

Hence I have no use for the Rowland. Beyond the carry inconvenience of the comp, it's just not practical if you care about your hearing. If you want a semi I'd carry the 10mm. If I'm carrying a semi that's what I do.
 
Nov 17, 2011
2,578
2,517
113
29
Massachusetts
#20
I don’t know why everyone is yammering about hearing damage.....

If you are on the range.... wear hearing protection.

In a SD scenario, how many rounds are you planning on shooting?

1-3 rounds is not going to harm your hearing to any significant effect.

A .44 mag is going to due just as much practical damage as a braked .460.

And honestly, I’ll happily lose a little hearing if it means I’m not mauled by a fucking bear
 
Mar 26, 2006
263
43
28
#21
I don’t know why everyone is yammering about hearing damage.....

If you are on the range.... wear hearing protection.

In a SD scenario, how many rounds are you planning on shooting?

1-3 rounds is not going to harm your hearing to any significant effect.

A .44 mag is going to due just as much practical damage as a braked .460.


And honestly, I’ll happily lose a little hearing if it means I’m not mauled by a fucking bear
Not meaning to sound like a jerk, but if you say such things, it means you've never shot such guns and don't know what you are talking about. I can shoot a 4" 44Mag without hearing protection and it's loud. Shoot a similar braked or ported handgun...I have...once...tinnitus for 12 hours.

As I said, I'd do it again in self defense but why do so when there are equally effective options lacking this disadvantage?

I've always taken pretty good care of my hearing. In all of my shooting years I've screwed up exactly three times. Once with that 41Mag....once with a buddy shooting across my ear during goose hunting...once a braked rifle going off next to me before I could get my hearing protection in. Three shots total...and the damage and intermittent tinnitus resulting is noticeable.
 
Likes: W54/XM-388

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
1,810
1,232
113
Dallas, TX
#22
Not meaning to sound like a jerk, but if you say such things, it means you've never shot such guns and don't know what you are talking about. I can shoot a 4" 44Mag without hearing protection and it's loud. Shoot a similar braked or ported handgun...I have...once...tinnitus for 12 hours.
As I said, I'd do it again in self defense but why do so when there are equally effective options lacking this disadvantage?
I've always taken pretty good care of my hearing. In all of my shooting years I've screwed up exactly three times. Once with that 41Mag....once with a buddy shooting across my ear during goose hunting...once a braked rifle going off next to me before I could get my hearing protection in. Three shots total...and the damage and intermittent tinnitus resulting is noticeable.
Which is why from the stories I heard of people who went big game hunting, the professional guides really really hate anyone that brings a rifle with a brake on it.
 
Feb 13, 2017
101
17
18
Wellington, OH
#23
If I'm in big bear country I'm carrying a lightweight 44Mag or 41Mag. They're lighter than semi autos anyways.

The 41Mag is ported, so if I have the choice I carry the 44. I made the mistake of firing that 41 without ear protection ONCE. I'd do it in defense of life again, but only then.

Hence I have no use for the Rowland. Beyond the carry inconvenience of the comp, it's just not practical if you care about your hearing. If you want a semi I'd carry the 10mm. If I'm carrying a semi that's what I do.
What do you have in 44Mag that's lighter than something like a G20/G29? And how fun is it to shoot? I assumed when I go out west to hunt I'd carry one of my 10mm's, but maybe a 44Mag would be better?

Dave
 
Mar 26, 2006
263
43
28
#24
What do you have in 44Mag that's lighter than something like a G20/G29? And how fun is it to shoot? I assumed when I go out west to hunt I'd carry one of my 10mm's, but maybe a 44Mag would be better?

Dave
Smith and Wesson 329PD. You don't even notice the weight on your belt. Look at the numbers, lighter than a semi option. As for "fun" to shoot with full bore loads? No, but if you have the 500SW grip on it (now standard, I believe) it is manageable and you can get through a couple cylinders. Fine for SD. VERY snappy.

If a grizz charges you the difference between a 6-round cylinder and a G20 magazine will be meaningless. You stopped the bear or you are food or it's knocked away. Don't get me wrong, I'm a HUGE 10mm fan.

My 10mm full size 1911 and Commander are indeed fun to shoot with full power loads. A full power load in a 329 is not. But they are in different leagues in terms of power.

I shoot the 329 often with "44 spl" loads, now that IS fun. When I bought the gun it came with clam rubber grips which left the grip backstrap exposed. I loaded it up with full bore loads and started to shoot. It was the only gun I've ever shot which recoiled noticeably worse each round due to the lightening in the overall weight of the gun due to spent rounds. After 3 rounds I cried uncle and set it down. With the 500SW grip installed this is not a problem.

The 41 I references is a Taurus Titanium, not made in quite awhile. I love the gun but literally I will never again fire it unless I am double muffed or my life depends on it due to the porting. Night and day difference compared to the 329, same barrel length.
 
Nov 17, 2011
2,578
2,517
113
29
Massachusetts
#26
Not meaning to sound like a jerk, but if you say such things, it means you've never shot such guns and don't know what you are talking about. I can shoot a 4" 44Mag without hearing protection and it's loud. Shoot a similar braked or ported handgun...I have...once...tinnitus for 12 hours.

As I said, I'd do it again in self defense but why do so when there are equally effective options lacking this disadvantage?

I've always taken pretty good care of my hearing. In all of my shooting years I've screwed up exactly three times. Once with that 41Mag....once with a buddy shooting across my ear during goose hunting...once a braked rifle going off next to me before I could get my hearing protection in. Three shots total...and the damage and intermittent tinnitus resulting is noticeable.
Tinnitus for 12 hrs....... but I am assuming you’re hearing has recovered and you are not suffering long term effects? Correct?

I’m not saying it won’t be uncomfortable....

However I’m not choosing my handgun based on its comfort.....I’m choosing it based on its ability to kill the thing trying to eat me.

And I’ll happily take 12hrs of discomfort to avoid being eaten by a bear.

You are not going to shoot without hearin protection 99.999% of the time.........so why concern yourself with the 0.001% chance of temporary hearing discomfort?
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
1,810
1,232
113
Dallas, TX
#27
It's very easy with a high energy pistol with a brake, or a rifle with a brake or high powered caliber, to have lifelong hearing issues after unloading a handful of rounds without hearing protection. The father of one of my friends unloaded several rounds from a .300wm at a bear once, the hearing loss stayed with him for life.
 

hermosabeach

Confused Coffee Drinker
Feb 13, 2012
3,441
3,982
113
78
#28
If you have never fired a 308 with a break, one shot can permanently destroy your hearing.... I have tinnitus.... and have had it for years...

I agree that self defense shootings, its required to fight... deal with hearing later...

when planning on a SD gun, mine are never ported.... or comped
 
Feb 13, 2017
101
17
18
Wellington, OH
#29
Smith and Wesson 329PD. You don't even notice the weight on your belt. Look at the numbers, lighter than a semi option. As for "fun" to shoot with full bore loads? No, but if you have the 500SW grip on it (now standard, I believe) it is manageable and you can get through a couple cylinders. Fine for SD. VERY snappy.

If a grizz charges you the difference between a 6-round cylinder and a G20 magazine will be meaningless. You stopped the bear or you are food or it's knocked away. Don't get me wrong, I'm a HUGE 10mm fan.

My 10mm full size 1911 and Commander are indeed fun to shoot with full power loads. A full power load in a 329 is not. But they are in different leagues in terms of power.

I shoot the 329 often with "44 spl" loads, now that IS fun. When I bought the gun it came with clam rubber grips which left the grip backstrap exposed. I loaded it up with full bore loads and started to shoot. It was the only gun I've ever shot which recoiled noticeably worse each round due to the lightening in the overall weight of the gun due to spent rounds. After 3 rounds I cried uncle and set it down. With the 500SW grip installed this is not a problem.

The 41 I references is a Taurus Titanium, not made in quite awhile. I love the gun but literally I will never again fire it unless I am double muffed or my life depends on it due to the porting. Night and day difference compared to the 329, same barrel length.
Thanks for the detailed explanation, I hadn't thought about time vs. getting rounds off. I would probably still carry the G29/G20 as empty weights are ~2-5oz difference, obviously power factor is not the same. But it never hurts to have a good excuse to buy another S&W revolver!

Dave
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
711
196
43
#30
Thanks for the detailed explanation, I hadn't thought about time vs. getting rounds off. I would probably still carry the G29/G20 as empty weights are ~2-5oz difference, obviously power factor is not the same. But it never hurts to have a good excuse to buy another S&W revolver!

Dave
One problem with that line of thought is that no one shoots a 329 with bear loads as well as they shoot a 10mm semi, or anything even close. Not only is this an issue for followup shots, but it takes a higher level pistol shooter to get the first round accuracy, especially at speed, with a 329, that a bear charge requires.

If you study actual bear attacks, which are pretty well catalogued these days, you are WAY better off with a .38 or 9mm that you can actually hit with, than a big bore, heavy recoiling revolver that you won't train with and can't use under stress.

Of course, all of this is for extremely rare scenarios, but if you actually need to work in bear country, which I have done, it is better to have facts and skill on your side, rather than preference and speculation.

FWIW, when I worked in bear country on a semi regular basis (not hunting, I did that for fun on my own time), I almost always carried a semi auto .308. Way better option.:)
 
Mar 26, 2006
263
43
28
#31
One problem with that line of thought is that no one shoots a 329 with bear loads as well as they shoot a 10mm semi, or anything even close. Not only is this an issue for followup shots, but it takes a higher level pistol shooter to get the first round accuracy, especially at speed, with a 329, that a bear charge requires.

If you study actual bear attacks, which are pretty well catalogued these days, you are WAY better off with a .38 or 9mm that you can actually hit with, than a big bore, heavy recoiling revolver that you won't train with and can't use under stress.

Of course, all of this is for extremely rare scenarios, but if you actually need to work in bear country, which I have done, it is better to have facts and skill on your side, rather than preference and speculation.

FWIW, when I worked in bear country on a semi regular basis (not hunting, I did that for fun on my own time), I almost always carried a semi auto .308. Way better option.:)

If you want to trust your life to taking down a charging griz with a 9mm or 38 penetration, that's your business. But not me.

But you're right, you need to be able to control the gun and you also need to be able to carry it and not get tired of the weight and leave it in the truck.

My 329 is headed back to SW later this year. All the actual practicing with bear loads has taken a toll on the blast shield. Just because some people don't practice doesn't mean it isn't a good idea for those that do.
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
1,810
1,232
113
Dallas, TX
#32
My 329 is headed back to SW later this year. All the actual practicing with bear loads has taken a toll on the blast shield. Just because some people don't practice doesn't mean it isn't a good idea for those that do.
That's where a Ruger Super Redhawk with a long barrel comes into it's own, but many don't want to carry the weight.
 
Feb 13, 2017
101
17
18
Wellington, OH
#33
One problem with that line of thought is that no one shoots a 329 with bear loads as well as they shoot a 10mm semi, or anything even close. Not only is this an issue for followup shots, but it takes a higher level pistol shooter to get the first round accuracy, especially at speed, with a 329, that a bear charge requires.

If you study actual bear attacks, which are pretty well catalogued these days, you are WAY better off with a .38 or 9mm that you can actually hit with, than a big bore, heavy recoiling revolver that you won't train with and can't use under stress.

Of course, all of this is for extremely rare scenarios, but if you actually need to work in bear country, which I have done, it is better to have facts and skill on your side, rather than preference and speculation.

FWIW, when I worked in bear country on a semi regular basis (not hunting, I did that for fun on my own time), I almost always carried a semi auto .308. Way better option.:)
The bolded portion is also part of my reasoning for carrying the 10mm over a revolver. I have many, many more rounds downrange with a semi than I do with a revolver, use the platform you're most experienced with methodology. I should also clarify that if I'm out west I'll be carrying a rifle as well, looking to tag something like an elk. I'd use the rifle in my hands first!

Dave
 
Likes: SLG

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
711
196
43
#34
If you want to trust your life to taking down a charging griz with a 9mm or 38 penetration, that's your business. But not me.

But you're right, you need to be able to control the gun and you also need to be able to carry it and not get tired of the weight and leave it in the truck.

My 329 is headed back to SW later this year. All the actual practicing with bear loads has taken a toll on the blast shield. Just because some people don't practice doesn't mean it isn't a good idea for those that do.
I think you missed the point, but with a 329 and bear loads, that's easy to do. ;-)

I enjoy shooting .44 revolvers quite a bit. If you can shoot them well, that's great, most people cannot. A 329 makes it much harder to do well, compared to even a MTN gun, let alone a 5" classic. Even though I can shoot a .44 well, I can still shoot a 10mm faster, with the accuracy needed for this particular job.

Anyone asking for advice on a bear gun in a thread on a forum, is not an experienced .44 shooter. For them, a reasonably powerful load, in a gun they are already familiar with, is a much better choice.

Actual bear attacks have been, and are, stopped every year with calibers that no one on the internet would ever recommend. I would not recommend them either, though like with almost anything self defense related, the gun you have with you beats the gun you left at home.

I do not prefer a 10mm, as I find them to be unreliable with full power ammo. If you think you have a reliable one, and you are happy with the power, then drive on. I choose a steel .44 magnum, or an HK 45 USP, with 45 super loads. Ive also played with .41's, .44spl, and some smaller calibers. Bears are a lot like people, they dont want to be shot with anything.

Does that make things more clear?

Now, as for you wearing out your 329, what loads are you actually shooting through it, and how many of them, and how often?

I ask, because I've never met anyone, ever, who is willing to shoot more than about a cylinder full at a time. And then, not very often.
 
Last edited:
Mar 26, 2006
263
43
28
#35
I think you missed the point, but with a 329 and bear loads, that's easy to do. ;-)

I enjoy shooting .44 revolvers quite a bit. If you can shoot them well, that's great, most people cannot. A 329 makes it much harder to do well, compared to even a MTN gun, let alone a 5" classic. Even though I can shoot a .44 well, I can still shoot a 10mm faster, with the accuracy needed for this particular job.

Anyone asking for advice on a bear gun in a thread on a forum, is not an experienced .44 shooter. For them, a reasonably powerful load, in a gun they are already familiar with, is a much better choice.

Actual bear attacks have been, and are, stopped every year with calibers that no one on the internet would ever recommend. I would not recommend them either, though like with almost anything self defense related, the gun you have with you beats the gun you left at home.

I do not prefer a 10mm, as I find them to be unreliable with full power ammo. If you think you have a reliable one, and you are happy with the power, then drive on. I choose a steel .44 magnum, or an HK 45 USP, with 45 super loads. Ive also played with .41's, .44spl, and some smaller calibers. Bears are a lot like people, they dont want to be shot with anything.

Does that make things more clear?

Now, as for you wearing out your 329, what loads are you actually shooting through it, and how many of them, and how often?

I ask, because I've never met anyone, ever, who is willing to shoot more than about a cylinder full at a time. And then, not very often.
If you choose to bounce 9mms or 38s off a bear's skull because it gives you comfort you are more familiar with it, that is your decision. Just because there is an internet account of a 22 stopping a bear does not make it my choice. There is a minimum I am willing to confront a grizz with and it is 10mm, and all handguns are already underpowered.

Just like you question powerful revolvers for most people, I questions steel framed guns for most people. Almost without exception, I see them left in the truck where they do zero good after the first hard hike.

This leaves us individually finding the balance point between power, carryability, and shootability. As the internet proves we can debate this endlessly. And it is curious that on hunting-focused sites people focus on heavy, cumbersome uber powerful revolvers, and on a this site I curiously see recommendations on grossly underpowered rounds. As with most things it seems the practical solution is probably in between.

My 329 gets several hundred rounds per year, probably 20-30% full power loads. Full power are 300gr Buffalo Bore or equivalent reloads. It's really not so bad with the 500SW grip. The fact that people today CHOOSE to make themselves non proficient with revolvers is not a reflection of the applicability of the tool for the job, but rather a reflection on the people. By no other metric than rounds per second is a 10mm superior to a 44. And I love my 10mms with a passion. But if you can't shoot a revolver well I highly recommend a quality 10mm...and with some knowledge most reliability issues are simply fixed by understanding that most production guns are tuned for underpowered factory ammo and adjustments should be made accordingly.
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
711
196
43
#36
If you choose to bounce 9mms or 38s off a bear's skull because it gives you comfort you are more familiar with it, that is your decision. Just because there is an internet account of a 22 stopping a bear does not make it my choice. There is a minimum I am willing to confront a grizz with and it is 10mm, and all handguns are already underpowered.

Just like you question powerful revolvers for most people, I questions steel framed guns for most people. Almost without exception, I see them left in the truck where they do zero good after the first hard hike.

This leaves us individually finding the balance point between power, carryability, and shootability. As the internet proves we can debate this endlessly. And it is curious that on hunting-focused sites people focus on heavy, cumbersome uber powerful revolvers, and on a this site I curiously see recommendations on grossly underpowered rounds. As with most things it seems the practical solution is probably in between.

My 329 gets several hundred rounds per year, probably 20-30% full power loads. Full power are 300gr Buffalo Bore or equivalent reloads. It's really not so bad with the 500SW grip. The fact that people today CHOOSE to make themselves non proficient with revolvers is not a reflection of the applicability of the tool for the job, but rather a reflection on the people. By no other metric than rounds per second is a 10mm superior to a 44. And I love my 10mms with a passion. But if you can't shoot a revolver well I highly recommend a quality 10mm...and with some knowledge most reliability issues are simply fixed by understanding that most production guns are tuned for underpowered factory ammo and adjustments should be made accordingly.

I give up. This is like the scene in that stupid bay watch remake movie, with the cop and the lifeguards where you are only listening to the parts you want to.
 
Top Bottom