GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-18-2013, 21:47   #51
OldSchool64
Platinum Membership
Senior Member
 
OldSchool64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,843
Now I need a drink!!
__________________
still living & learning

Last edited by OldSchool64; 04-18-2013 at 21:49..
OldSchool64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2013, 21:52   #52
Warp
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
 
Warp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NE of Atlanta
Posts: 29,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by copo9560 View Post
A bullet traveling faster than design won't penetrate fully but suspect it would cause a very painful wound. Isn't this the concept behind the original 5.56 loads??
The bullet being unstable in tissue and yawing/tumbling, thus breaking up, creating multiple would channels, and limiting penetration, is the idea behind the ball ammo in 5.56.

One major difference here, obviously, is that as a rifle roudn 5.56 has adequate energy to go around. Handgun rounds, not so much. Even 5.56 has more than double the energy of the hottest 10mm or .357 mag out of a handgun.
__________________
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

I HIGHLY recommend Google Chrome and Adblock to all world wide web users. (I would have left GT a long time ago without these extensions!)

Last edited by Warp; 04-18-2013 at 21:52..
Warp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2013, 21:58   #53
OldSchool64
Platinum Membership
Senior Member
 
OldSchool64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,843
Ok, now we're getting off topic. Maybe someone should start a new thread on "energy transfer". Like that hasn't been done already.
__________________
still living & learning
OldSchool64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2013, 23:31   #54
Zombie Steve
Decap Pin Killa
 
Zombie Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Old Colorado City
Posts: 19,934
Generally speaking, the .357 magnum has cooler lookin' boolits.

Caliber Corner
Zombie Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2013, 23:49   #55
fredj338
Senior Member
 
fredj338's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: so.cal.
Posts: 21,164
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchool64 View Post
The energy is "in the bullet" so wouldn't it be more correct to say that energy is released at the point of bullet failure?
I mean fragmenting bullets work quite well as long as they come apart at the proper penetration depth.
Agree or not??
And that is the issue. IF the bullet never reaches vitals, it's a spectacular failure leaving an ugly surface wound. So energy alone is a terrible measure of a rounds ability to stop a threat. The bullet must reach vitals regardless of caliber.
A 130gr/270 @ 3000fps puts out a huge amount of energy, over 2600ft# @ the muzzle. A buddy of mine shot a big bull elk & found a 130gr/270 smashed & stuck in the shoulder blade of the elk. So not only did the 2600Ft# not kill said elk, it got away to be killed years later by him & his 338-06. So the bullet must reach vitals regardless of any book numbers.
A 180gr/10mm is slightly inferior in penetration to a 158gr/357, assuming bullet construction is identical. In a 4" 10mm, 1250fps, in a 4" 357mag, 1250fps. The advantage of more rounds goes to the 10mm in a pistol, but that is about it. Accuracy edge probably to the 357mag out @ hunting distance of 50yds+.
__________________
"Given adequate penetration, a larger diameter bullet will have an edge in wounding effectiveness. It will damage a blood vessel the smaller projectile barely misses. The larger permanent cavity may lead to faster blood loss. Although such an edge clearly exists, its significance cannot be quantified".

Last edited by fredj338; 04-18-2013 at 23:52..
fredj338 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2013, 01:20   #56
Tiro Fijo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,109
Fred, what sayeth you about the .257 Ferguson Hot Tamale? It seems to have broken some new ground, albeit with all copper bullets:


http://www.buckmasters.com/battlin-bullets.aspx
Tiro Fijo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2013, 05:13   #57
English
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 5,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by vandros View Post
Interesting... So, am I gaining anything if I load a bullet designed for 1000 fps to go at 1500 fps? Am I at least getting bigger energy dump, even if bullet itself falls apart? Many hot 10mm cartridges (1600 fps or greater velocity) use bullets that were designed for much slower .40 cal.
Well yes. But then again, no!

Much as I approve of almost everything fredj338 says, I disagree with him about "energy dump" being a myth. What it was was a half baked idea with an element of truth. Energy can be defined as that which does work. To understand this you have to accept that some or much of the "work" is effectively wasted. So if the bullet breaks up it takes approximately as much energy to do so as if you had broken it up with a hammer and chisel. For all practical concerns, energy is never lost but only changed and all work involves degradation of energy to a lower form - heat in particular. So the broken bits of bullet will be hotter than the equivalent non breaking up bullet. That heat energy does you no good in terms of disabling your opponent and so it is wasted.

What does happen is that a bullet which breaks up has pieces with lower sectional density than the original. The result is that they slow down faster. That means that they penetrate less, which can be a bad thing, but give up their energy to the surrounding tissue in a shorter distance. This can be a good thing or a bad thing. Giving up more energy in a shorter distance does significant work against a wider volume of tissue around the principle bullet track. What you need is for that wider damage to be at a useful depth.

In general, if you test your rounds in gel (the stuff does have its uses) and you are getting 12 or more inches in penetration you can be reasonably certain that your maximum width of significant tissue damage is at a useful depth for most civilian anti personnel use. If your bullet goes through an arm first you would have needed more penetration but you would have disabled the arm and that is usually a good thing. The extreme of this is the very high speed, very light, varmint rifle bullet fired at a moose. The result will be a shallow crater in the moose will no more penetration. The moose will not drop when hit or after some time.

Most people believe that it is better for a bullet to stay in one piece and I tend to agree with them. Hollow point bullet designers design and develop their bullets to function properly within a velocity window. Below that velocity the bullet will fail to expand or expand enough. Above it, it might break up or have its petals forced back along its sides and make its effective diameter less than intended. Cartridge designers try to select bullets to match the intended velocity of their cartridge - higher velocities need tougher bullets.

The problem here is that bullets are economic to produce only in very large runs and volumes. The result is that many bullets used in 10mm and 357SIG cartridges are really .40S&W or 9mm bullets by design. As someone else has pointed out, in many major brand 10mm cartridges this hardly matters as they are loaded far below their proper level. Since the 357SIG needs a different shape of bullet than the 9mm, this problem has been addressed more for 357SIGs which now have their own bullet designs. .357 Mags have a long enough history in hunting and SD for this not to be a problem and it is one area in which the .357 Mag might have an advantage over the 10mm.

By the way, the 10mm might edge into 41 Mag territory but cannot compete overall for the same reason that the .40S&W cannot compete with the 10mm - it does not have enough case capacity.

English
English is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2013, 09:43   #58
gatorboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,932
357 mag. 158 @ 1400
10mm 165 @ 1400

For hunting, I'd choose 357.
For SD, I'd choose 10mm.

Based on sectional density, bullet diameter and common launching platforms of each. That would be with those weight bullets. A 10mm with 180-200's in thick brush and closer shots would be my choice for hog, that or 44mag. I personally have a 6.5" 610 so even for longer shots, 10mm is viable. No doubt longer barreled revolvers are mechanically more accurate than Glocks or even most 1911's I know of.
gatorboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2013, 10:19   #59
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warp View Post
Yeah?

Why is it that, in baseball, when the bat breaks, the ball basically never goes very far or very fast?

That breakup requires/uses energy.
yeah, but the bat broke. :D

If the ball is the bullet and the bat is your body, and the bat breaks, ......


If a bullet fragments, it takes energy, but something has to oppose it for it to happen, and that opposition comes in the form of tissue, and the more violent the fragmentation, the more damage to the tissue.

Even not fragmenting, but just deforming, a bullet takes an equal and opposite reaction from the flesh/tissue in order for the lead to deform (Newtons Law). The equal and opposite reaction from the tissue is what leads to the damage.
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2013, 13:15   #60
fredj338
Senior Member
 
fredj338's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: so.cal.
Posts: 21,164
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by digilo View Post
yeah, but the bat broke. :D

If the ball is the bullet and the bat is your body, and the bat breaks, ......


If a bullet fragments, it takes energy, but something has to oppose it for it to happen, and that opposition comes in the form of tissue, and the more violent the fragmentation, the more damage to the tissue.

Even not fragmenting, but just deforming, a bullet takes an equal and opposite reaction from the flesh/tissue in order for the lead to deform (Newtons Law). The equal and opposite reaction from the tissue is what leads to the damage.
Again, unless the bullet reaches vitals, the energy means little to nothing. A 90gr JHP can be driven to 1400fps easily in a 9mm & give impressive energy, but if the bullet breaks upon heavy bone or a jacket zipper & fails to reach vitals, the energy is pointless. The 90-100gr JHP/JSP were quite the rage when the 9mm was adopted by LEA across the country. You would be hard pressed to find any dept today still using them. There have been dozens of reports of people getting up & fighting after taking massive amounts of energy from 12ga & rifle rounds.
__________________
"Given adequate penetration, a larger diameter bullet will have an edge in wounding effectiveness. It will damage a blood vessel the smaller projectile barely misses. The larger permanent cavity may lead to faster blood loss. Although such an edge clearly exists, its significance cannot be quantified".

Last edited by fredj338; 04-19-2013 at 13:16..
fredj338 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2013, 13:20   #61
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredj338 View Post
Again, unless the bullet reaches vitals, the energy means little to nothing. A 90gr JHP can be driven to 1400fps easily in a 9mm & give impressive energy, but if the bullet breaks upon heavy bone or a jacket zipper & fails to reach vitals, the energy is pointless. The 90-100gr JHP/JSP were quite the rage when the 9mm was adopted by LEA across the country. You would be hard pressed to find any dept today still using them. There have been dozens of reports of people getting up & fighting after taking massive amounts of energy from 12ga & rifle rounds.
Thats exactly why I'm a big believer in heavier rounds.

;D
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.

Last edited by digilo; 04-19-2013 at 13:21..
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2013, 19:10   #62
gatorboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by digilo View Post
Thats exactly why I'm a big believer in heavier rounds.

;D
Same here. 165 is the lightest I prefer in 10mm and 140 in 357mag - aside from 100% copper bullets which are longer for weight and tough. They allow for decent accuracy and penetration with lighter bullets, especially in a sub 3" revolver.

No way a 125 gr. 10mm Barnes HP that is as long as a standard 180 gr. JHP will get 1600+ FPS like is often claimed. Case capacity does'nt change and the main benefit IMO is similar performance as a heavier bullet with less recoil.

The 357mag would have had an equally impressive track record with bonded 140's as it did with the crappy 125 JHP's of 30 years ago. IMO, of course. Obviously no way to ever know for sure.
gatorboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 11:22   #63
Darkangel1846
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,683
They both are good rounds, will just about kill anything in the USA.
__________________
Peter 5:8
"Be sober, be vigilant; Because your adversary the Devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking who he may devour."
Darkangel1846 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 13:16   #64
Poohgyrr
trout fear me!
 
Poohgyrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sutter's Fort
Posts: 1,166


Both rounds can work, when put on target.

Ammo supply depends on your ability to buy factory rounds and handload your own - 357 Magnum is "easier" to find in general.

If this thread involves defense, then putting rounds on target will definitely include the platform. Platform is very important.

If Glock 10MM;s work then great.

Otherwise, a single stack 10MM auto or a five to eight round revolver, or a Coonan 357Magnum autoloader, might be the best choice.

Revolvers have MUCH better choices of grips - to fit your hands.

Before anyone complains about how much a steel frame handgun weighs, after a long hard day, I step on the bathroom scale. The five plus pounds I need to lose will more than make up for the few extra ounces of a steel frame.

Now, someday, who knows? Back problems, or other medical issues may demand I give up steel.

FWIW.
__________________
John Luke 22:36 Ephesians 4:26-32
357Sig Club #3531 S&W Club #10 BHP Club #35
"Life brings both sorrows and joys alike. It is what a man does with them - not what they do to him - that is the true test of his mettle." T. Roosevelt
Poohgyrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 14:18   #65
Michael Rye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,018
Guess I'll through my two cents in as well...

They are both perfectly adequate for self-defense and *SOME* hunting applications. There just isn't enough of a difference in top end loads to lose any sleep over.

If you prefer semi-autos and like the high capacity advantage, go with the 10mm.

If you're content with wheelies, go 357 mag ( I know the 610 S&W is a 10mm revolver...good luck finding one...LOL! ).

In short, I like em' both.
Michael Rye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 14:50   #66
gatorboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poohgyrr View Post

Before anyone complains about how much a steel frame handgun weighs, after a long hard day, I step on the bathroom scale. The five plus pounds I need to lose will more than make up for the few extra ounces of a steel frame.

Now, someday, who knows? Back problems, or other medical issues may demand I give up steel.

FWIW.
SHOULDER HOLSTER! Don't give up the steel.

On the belt, weight does matter when it's all in one place. A thick belt with some padding and a double mag pouch 180* over helps. G20 is a great compromise... with a double mag pouch to even it out.
gatorboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 05:21   #67
mrt949
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 863
It depends on what you shoot the best .
mrt949 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 06:28   #68
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 15,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cwlongshot View Post
Allot of arm chair ballistic techs will tell you these are equal...Well, they aint!

The missing equation is the .401 bullet vs .357 Bullet. In bullets on game, bigger means better. In terms of faster incapacitation.
Then there is both calibers loaded to SAMI spec for each. That 35K for the Mag and 37K for the 10mm. The 10 is notoriously loaded lite for all the ''ahem'' recoil sensitive folks who couldn't handle the round.
Then both need to be shot thru a same length barrel and finally both thru either a vented or non vented barrel. NOW we have a level playing field to compare them.

The 357 fired from a 10'' Barrel will get a 110g bullet to 1750fps and a 180g to 1300fps

The 10MM fired from a 6'' barrel will reach 1700fps with a 135g and 1250fps with a 220g.

That puts the 10 firmly into the lower end of the 41 Magnum with a 170g @ 12500fps. IF the 41 is shot from same barrel, style and SAMI max pressure.

CW
This is a good examination.
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 10:02   #69
Michael Rye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cwlongshot View Post
Allot of arm chair ballistic techs will tell you these are equal...Well, they aint!

The missing equation is the .401 bullet vs .357 Bullet. In bullets on game, bigger means better. In terms of faster incapacitation.
Then there is both calibers loaded to SAMI spec for each. That 35K for the Mag and 37K for the 10mm. The 10 is notoriously loaded lite for all the ''ahem'' recoil sensitive folks who couldn't handle the round.
Then both need to be shot thru a same length barrel and finally both thru either a vented or non vented barrel. NOW we have a level playing field to compare them.

The 357 fired from a 10'' Barrel will get a 110g bullet to 1750fps and a 180g to 1300fps

The 10MM fired from a 6'' barrel will reach 1700fps with a 135g and 1250fps with a 220g.

That puts the 10 firmly into the lower end of the 41 Magnum with a 170g @ 12500fps. IF the 41 is shot from same barrel, style and SAMI max pressure.

CW
I generally try to steer clear of caliber debates, but I cannot let this one go.

You talk about the need for same length barrels. I agree.

You talk about the need for both to be either vented or non-vented. I agree there, too.

Take it a step beyond that, though. They both need to be the same platform. Seeing as how there are very few semi-auto 357 magnums out there....how about let's compare:

1) An S&W 686 357 Mag with a 4" tube
2) An S&W 610 10mm with a 4" tube
3) An S&W 657 41 Mag with 4" tube

All revolvers, all same length barrels.

I can tell you two things:

1) There is absolutely no way that with similar weight bullets and with top end loads that the 10mm will out perform the 357 Mag by anywhere NEAR what the numbers in your post suggest.

2) With similar weight bullets and with top end loads, the 10mm will fall significantly short of what a 41 Magnum can do.

The 686 and 610 would give very similar performance. The 657 would be in a totally different league.
Michael Rye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 13:14   #70
Tiro Fijo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Rye View Post
...


1) There is absolutely no way that with similar weight bullets and with top end loads that the 10mm will out perform the 357 Mag by anywhere NEAR what the numbers in your post suggest.

2) With similar weight bullets and with top end loads, the 10mm will fall significantly short of what a 41 Magnum can do.

The 686 and 610 would give very similar performance. The 657 would be in a totally different league.


Agreed, & in a Ruger Single Action the gloves really come off with the Magnums.
Tiro Fijo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 22:51   #71
owl6roll
Senior Member
 
owl6roll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: ALABAMA
Posts: 902
Send a message via AIM to owl6roll
<~~~~Smith and Wesson 5 inch barrel 7 shot .357, would be my pick.
__________________
The fight will not be the way you want it to be. The fight will be the way it is. You must be flexible enough to adapt. -- Unknown
owl6roll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 12:10   #72
gatorboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Rye View Post
I generally try to steer clear of caliber debates, but I cannot let this one go.

You talk about the need for same length barrels. I agree.

You talk about the need for both to be either vented or non-vented. I agree there, too.

Take it a step beyond that, though. They both need to be the same platform. Seeing as how there are very few semi-auto 357 magnums out there....how about let's compare:

1) An S&W 686 357 Mag with a 4" tube
2) An S&W 610 10mm with a 4" tube
3) An S&W 657 41 Mag with 4" tube

All revolvers, all same length barrels.

I can tell you two things:

1) There is absolutely no way that with similar weight bullets and with top end loads that the 10mm will out perform the 357 Mag by anywhere NEAR what the numbers in your post suggest.

2) With similar weight bullets and with top end loads, the 10mm will fall significantly short of what a 41 Magnum can do.

The 686 and 610 would give very similar performance. The 657 would be in a totally different league.
The 10mm will hang with 357 up to about a 6" tube. I think full-house 10mm would beat full-house 357 from a 4" tube.
gatorboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 12:59   #73
fastbolt
Senior Member
 
fastbolt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Within the lightning (Northern CA)
Posts: 9,415
Another debate about which medium-bore handgun cartridge is "better", .357 Magnum or 10mm?

The 10mm is not a .41 Magnum.

"Energy Dump"? Is this Retro Week?
__________________
Sub Club #9; .40 S&W Club #1953; S&W Club #3913
Retired LE - firearms instructor/armorer
fastbolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 18:20   #74
Tiro Fijo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by fastbolt View Post
...The 10mm is not a .41 Magnum...

Yes, the more intelligent know this, however many who don't reload and are weaned on boutique ammo (as well as are intoxicated on the 10mm Kool-Aid) fail to grasp this simple point and it seems monthly the wheel gets "reinvented" here.
Tiro Fijo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 19:55   #75
Maine1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,264
I recently visited this issue, being a fan of BOTH calibers. Current EDC is a G-20. Posted elsewhere:

I got busy with the scale to make some comparisons between my regular EDC, and the Security Six

Caviat: right off the bat i need to state the obvious. The auto carried more rounds on board, reloads more rounds, and MIGHT be more compact overall( more on that).

GLOCK 20

28.35 oz, empty. Loaded with 15+1JHP= 41.30

1, 20 round magazine=16.25 oz. @ loaded 20 round magazines ( my usual load) = 32.5 oz.

6 rounds of 10mm=3.7 oz
total weight of Gun, 1 loaded 15 round mag, 2 20 round mags, and one round= 73.8 oz for a total of 56 rounds.


RUGER SECURITY SIX

39.15 oz, empty loaded with 6 rounds 158 gr lead 38's = 42.40

1 speed loader and 6 rounds= 4 oz, even
for the same 32 oz of the 10mm reloads, i can have 8 speed loaders ( or the equivalent) totaling 48 rounds, and 8 reloads.

Total package is 74.4 oz for gun and 54 rounds.

Pros for the auto: a bit more powerful round, in an easy to shoot package. faster/more copious reloads. VERY familiar platform, for me anyway. easy disassembly without tools,

Cons for the auto: thicker in some sections that the revolver, BRASS RECOVERY, plastic in construction,


Pros for the revolver: Ammo versatility without the necessity of spare barrels, option of using DA for for general use, SA fire for long shots or precision, greater sight radius, expectations of 100% brass recovery not unrealistic if prepared for, steel construction, modular construction, better DA trigger with a little tweeking, better ablity to alter grips to fit user

Cons for the revolver: greater weight for less capacity, less copious reload that must be performed more often in prolonged shooting, more bulky through cylinder, a little less overall efficiency.


Overall, the weights surprised me a little, as i though that the revolver would not compare as well ( might be because the last revolver i toted was a 44 redhawk, heavier ammo).

In comparing guns, The SS seems a little bigger, but really is not, the glock is thinner, BUT maintains that thickness throughout its area, the SS has a thicker cylinder, but in most paces is quite a bit thinner than the Glock. Loaded weights are pretty close.

between 10mm and 357: not a fair comparison for me, as i have loaded my own 10mm for a while, but have only loaded token amounts of 357, and have not tried to tweek it for my needs as i have with the 10mm. 10mm can push a 200 gr bullet a bit easier than the 357, at least that is what i have gathered so far. i may be wrong.
next is to to a side by side shoot with comparable rounds. This will also be biased, as i have had the glock far longer.

i DO expect the SS to have an edge with longer range shooting, however, as the SA pull on the Ruger is far better. And its does not fling brass into the tall grass.

I curretly run a 10mm, but will set up a GP-100 as my "plan B" gun in 357, as I like them. With some work and tweeking, they can run neck and neck in most uses.

With the revolver you have more GUN weight. With the Auto, more AMMO weight. OVERALL- pretty close.
Maine1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
.357 has cooler boolits, .357 magnum, 10mm, 10mm fantasyland, ballistics
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:49.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 819
208 Members
611 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42