C'mon guys. I hear this a lot and I just don't get it. Do you guys think it's too powerful? If you can handle a .357 magnum you can handle 10mm. A lot of people falsely believe the 10mm is the ballistic equivalent of .41 mag, and it's not. I would say that .41 mag might be "too much" for CA, but definitely not 10mm.
To explain what I mean, I'll just paste a post of mine from another thread:
"When you start doing your research, you quickly realize the 10mm was developed to duplicate the performance of the .357 magnum in a semi-auto platform. To put things into perspective, the 200 gr 10mm bullet (the original 10mm bullet weight) has virtually identical sectional density to 158 gr .357 projectiles. The 158 gr .357 traveling at ~1250 feet per second was a standard issue LE load back in the day, so to speak. The original 10mm load as developed by Norma was a 200gr bullet at 1200 feet per second. When you piece these tidbits of info together, it becomes pretty evident that the people behind the 10mm were chasing .357 ballistics for the Bren Ten pistol and the 10mm cartridge.
For those that argue 10mm matches .41 magnum ballistics, sure it does. From a minimum 6" barrel, loading them hot as you can, you can enter the weak end of the .41 magnum spectrum just like how you can hot load .40 S&W to equal the watered down 10mm loads.
Many years ago Winchester had loads, Silvertips I believe, in 10mm and .41 that had the same muzzle energies and velocities printed on the box. This is what started the myth that 10mm =.41 magnum. What many people don't realize is that when the .41 mag was developed, there was a magnum load and a watered down "police" load (.41 was originally developed to be a LE load, but S&W decided to magnumize it which resulted in guns that were way too heavy for practical use. Another story for another day). 10mm has suffered as a result ever since. Most people seem to think that the 10mm is a bear gun only when it was also originally developed as a LE round that was meant to give LE .357 performance in a semi-auto package with greater capacity/firepower over a revolver. I've even heard a gun store commando tell people looking at 10mm to go with .357 instead because 10mm is too powerful lol.
For perspective a couple of common 10mm and .357 "bear" loads:
Buffalo Bore HEAVY 10MM OUTDOORSMAN - 220 gr. Hard Cast - FN (1,200 fps/ME 703 ft. lbs)
Buffalo Bore HEAVY 357 MAG OUTDOORSMAN - 180 gr. Hard Cast LFN-GC (1,400fps/M.E. 783 ft. lbs.)
Underwood 10mm 220 gr. Hard Cast- FN (1200 fps/ME 704 ft. lbs)
Underwood .357 180 gr. Hard Cast- FN (1400 fps/ME 784 ft.lbs)
220 grain 10mm and 180 grain .357 have similar sectional densities. Even still, .357 still edges out 10mm, which is why the whole 10mm = .41 magnum argument just doesn't jive. When comparing hangun rounds of different calibers, always compare sectional densities for a more apples to apples comparison, not bullet weights.
My primary EDC is a G29 with 155 grain loads at ~1400 FPS. 155 grain 10mm has virtually identical sectional density as 125 grain .357. The 125 grain .357 @ 1400-1450 fps was for many years considered the ultimate manstopping round with the highest percentage of one shot stops comparrd to other calibers. The 155 grain 10mm at similar velocities mimics that .357 load nicely."
If you guys want a 10mm, don't think it's just for bears. With hard cast loads from some of the boutique ammo makers, sure. But with proper spec 10mm defense loads, you've got 10+1 rounds of .357 magnum performance on tap, more than that obviously for those in free states. I say proper spec because there's a lot of 10mm ammo out there that's barely hotter than 40 S&W. Just go off of the original Norma spec. 200 grains at 1200 fps, and eventually they rleased a 170 grain at 1300 fps.
Oh, and in an ammo crunch, you can shoot .40 S&W out of your 10mm