Gun Owners?

[Kijona]

Hey Huff, how do you like that Para 10mm? I've never shot one myself - hear the recoil is about like a .45.

[yamahonkawazuki]

Hey Huff, how do you like that Para 10mm? I've never shot one myself - hear the recoil is about like a .45.

have heard this myself. do tell us huff

[Huff1371]

I don't think it's bad at all. Other than it being way too expensive to shoot, its the best of both worlds. Accurate as anything with amazing power/penetration and not that much recoil. I'd say far less than a 45. However i do shoot handloads in the 45 so it might be that I'm used to a hotter load. Great gun, just sucks the 10mm is all but gone.

[Janx101]

not have it anymore obviously .. but used to have a Glock 20 in 10mm .. not sure how the frame/recoil would differ from a para 10mm ... but..... used to shoot action matches at the pistol club with the glock .. they have a Major and Minor power factor division with the match to allow .38 and 9mm units to more fairly compete with the .40 (10mm) and .45 etc ..

now the memory is a little fuzzy (15 years ago) but i think that the 'power factor' number was 175 .. less than that is minor and more than that is major .... the power factor was calculated using bullet weight and chronographed muzzle velocity (and calibre I think?) .. but anway .. it is possible to go over 175 with a 9mm but accuracy would suffer and still leave it in the low end of the major range too...

most of the fellas had .45 springfield autos or similar for major .. and with a 200gn slug at reasonable velocity (for the match purpose) would give them a rating of about 220-230 ish .. with the highest i remember being 262 power factor ...

i had to 'prove' my 10mm power factor to compete in the major class .. so i made some handloads of respectable weight/velocity/accuracy and they factored at about 237 ... however just to see the capability by the formula i also made some MAX loads ... and with a 180gn gas checked lead bullet (no copper jackets on the range) .. i forget the exact muzzle velocity .. the 10mm came in at 296 .... the 155gn jacketed that i tested elsewhere factored at 309 ....

so .. i know the .45 can get up high .. but the 10mm beats it for upper potential .. and in the glock with 15 shot magazine .. its ... nasty.

those max loads though .. after running a 15shot series ... the accuracy for rapid firing was dismal .. and even for shoot/react/re-aim/shoot at a slower pace .. the recoil was decidedly rough on the hands.

just as an add on .. it wasnt as rough as my mates .454 Casull with heavy loads though .. that was just ... 

[Kijona]

not have it anymore obviously .. but used to have a Glock 20 in 10mm .. not sure how the frame/recoil would differ from a para 10mm ... but..... used to shoot action matches at the pistol club with the glock .. they have a Major and Minor power factor division with the match to allow .38 and 9mm units to more fairly compete with the .40 (10mm) and .45 etc ..

now the memory is a little fuzzy (15 years ago) but i think that the 'power factor' number was 175 .. less than that is minor and more than that is major .... the power factor was calculated using bullet weight and chronographed muzzle velocity (and calibre I think?) .. but anway .. it is possible to go over 175 with a 9mm but accuracy would suffer and still leave it in the low end of the major range too...

most of the fellas had .45 springfield autos or similar for major .. and with a 200gn slug at reasonable velocity (for the match purpose) would give them a rating of about 220-230 ish .. with the highest i remember being 262 power factor ...

i had to 'prove' my 10mm power factor to compete in the major class .. so i made some handloads of respectable weight/velocity/accuracy and they factored at about 237 ... however just to see the capability by the formula i also made some MAX loads ... and with a 180gn gas checked lead bullet (no copper jackets on the range) .. i forget the exact muzzle velocity .. the 10mm came in at 296 .... the 155gn jacketed that i tested elsewhere factored at 309 ....

so .. i know the .45 can get up high .. but the 10mm beats it for upper potential .. and in the glock with 15 shot magazine .. its ... nasty.

those max loads though .. after running a 15shot series ... the accuracy for rapid firing was dismal .. and even for shoot/react/re-aim/shoot at a slower pace .. the recoil was decidedly rough on the hands.

just as an add on .. it wasnt as rough as my mates .454 Casull with heavy loads though .. that was just ... 

Wow, very useful information! Thanks!

Anybody own a .357sig?

[MajorMalphunction]

I'm not too familiar with the round.

[Kijona]

Just made another gun purchase - I got a helluva deal ($79.99) on a Marlin Model 795 new. It was a display model that had an enormous amount of bluing scratched off the tip of the barrel from god knows what. I re-blued it and took it to the range. What a nice little tack driver. I got a BSA red/green/blue-dot 1x30 sight for it too. Fantastic fun, and the removable magazine is really nice.

...best part is that it doesn't care what kind of crap ammo you put in it. Even those notoriously crappy Remington bulk .22's fire just fine out of it.

[mister]

I do quick like the Marlin 17HMR. Nice little gun and caliber that. Top combination. 

Michael

[Kijona]

I do quick like the Marlin 17HMR. Nice little gun and caliber that. Top combination. 

Michael

I'm not quite sold on the Hornady Magnum Rimfire yet. I think the .22WMR (magnum) beats it out, ballistically speaking. I know the .17 edges the 22 mag out in terms of accuracy and trajectory, slightly, but I know it's also more susceptible to being affected by wind versus the .22. However, it's all so minimal that in practice it really makes little difference.

The reality is... a .223/5.56mm NATO will beat out any of that stuff every single day of the week. It's also, believe it or not, cheaper to shoot .223's than it is .22mags or .17HMRs.

[mister]

I do quick like the Marlin 17HMR. Nice little gun and caliber that. Top combination. 

Michael

I'm not quite sold on the Hornady Magnum Rimfire yet. I think the .22WMR (magnum) beats it out, ballistically speaking. I know the .17 edges the 22 mag out in terms of accuracy and trajectory, slightly, but I know it's also more susceptible to being affected by wind versus the .22. However, it's all so minimal that in practice it really makes little difference.

The reality is... a .223/5.56mm NATO will beat out any of that stuff every single day of the week. It's also, believe it or not, cheaper to shoot .223's than it is .22mags or .17HMRs.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the 22mag. But love the 17hmr. As for wind and accuracy. Here's some images. First shows the range. 3rd row, far left is my target. Second shows what my target looked like - I am shooting at a 10 meter air gun target at 110 yards with 2 inch roundels (damn small in otherwords). Third shows the grouping in Gusty conditions of two different ammo brands. Target 3 Hornandy I was getting buzzed by flies as I was shooting. This rifle was Not sighted in at 50 yards, only for groupings. All heart/lung aim points would have resulted in a kill at 110 yards in extremely windy conditions with 2 inch groupings - so windy sometimes I had to wait for the wind to die down cause it was moving my target board around.

I've never shot in such windy conditions ever. And yet, this round supposedly so negatively effected by wind to be nigh on useless in the field, has once again shown to actually be capable and all "no good in wind" claims just repeated hearsay by people who've never shot the round.







In Aust, 17hmr rounds are like $15 or so for 50, while 223 rounds are more like $25 for 20. So it is far cheaper to shoot the HMR. Though the 223 round would be my favorite centerfire caliber for sure.

Another caliber which is really taking off down here is the .204 although I personally see no need for it and would just as soon use a 223.

Michael

[Kijona]

I do quick like the Marlin 17HMR. Nice little gun and caliber that. Top combination. 

Michael

I'm not quite sold on the Hornady Magnum Rimfire yet. I think the .22WMR (magnum) beats it out, ballistically speaking. I know the .17 edges the 22 mag out in terms of accuracy and trajectory, slightly, but I know it's also more susceptible to being affected by wind versus the .22. However, it's all so minimal that in practice it really makes little difference.

The reality is... a .223/5.56mm NATO will beat out any of that stuff every single day of the week. It's also, believe it or not, cheaper to shoot .223's than it is .22mags or .17HMRs.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the 22mag. But love the 17hmr. As for wind and accuracy. Here's some images. First shows the range. 3rd row, far left is my target. Second shows what my target looked like - I am shooting at a 10 meter air gun target at 110 yards with 2 inch roundels (damn small in otherwords). Third shows the grouping in Gusty conditions of two different ammo brands. Target 3 Hornandy I was getting buzzed by flies as I was shooting. This rifle was Not sighted in at 50 yards, only for groupings. All heart/lung aim points would have resulted in a kill at 110 yards in extremely windy conditions with 2 inch groupings - so windy sometimes I had to wait for the wind to die down cause it was moving my target board around.

I've never shot in such windy conditions ever. And yet, this round supposedly so negatively effected by wind to be nigh on useless in the field, has once again shown to actually be capable and all "no good in wind" claims just repeated hearsay by people who've never shot the round.







In Aust, 17hmr rounds are like $15 or so for 50, while 223 rounds are more like $25 for 20. So it is far cheaper to shoot the HMR. Though the 223 round would be my favorite centerfire caliber for sure.

Another caliber which is really taking off down here is the .204 although I personally see no need for it and would just as soon use a 223.

Michael

Good lord I had no idea you actually did have firearms...well +1 for you man. I do want to be clear that my uncle (a gun fanatic if you've ever met one) owns both a 17HMR and 22WMR both with scopes. I guess it could've been just the difference in guns (the 17 was a stainless Savage with a bull barrel, and the .22 was a similar model though I think it had a longer barrel), but it seemed like the .22 fared better in the wind. Of course I wasn't performing a test or anything. Just wanted to be clear that I wasn't just repeating something I'd heard.

Anyways, is that a Marlin?

Never heard of the .204. But you're right, you'd be better off with something proven like the .223. Here you can get a box of 20 for $4.99. Of course that's "Monarch" steel cased ammo but it's not like something like Federal or other decent ammo is that much more. The last time I was at Academy (sports store), they had a case of 1000 Federal Champion FMJ .223's for $249.99. That's 25 cents a piece if my 6AM math is working correctly.

Cheapest .17's are $15 for 50 so that turns out to be 30 cents a piece, and obviously a .223 is worlds apart for less. It really sucks for you guys that the 223's are so much more.

That .303 British is pretty popular down there isn't it? What's something like that run?

Here in the US the most "bang" is either 7.62x39mm, 7.62x54mmR or .223. For some reason the 5.56 rounds are a good bit more than the .223's even though it's the same thing basically.

Everything else is about $1 or more a piece. 30-06, .270, .243...308 Winchester....everything. $1 per bullet, basically. I think the 300 Mag is about $2 a piece.

The ultimate fun is .22LR. Box of 1600 CCI "MiniMag" 40gr plated round nose ammo is $100. You can buy bulk 550 packs of 36gr Federal plated hollow points for $20. What sucks is in the last few years they've almost doubled in price. .22's used to be as cheap as 1.5 cents a piece.

[Huff1371]

It's also getting to the point that reloading is almost as expensive. My friend has a .338 lapua that cost about $4.00 a bullet. If he reloads it's around $3.75 for around the same quality. If he steps it up (not something I'd suggest in this calliber) it's about the same $4.00 for a little improvement but with time invested. That's why I stick to NATO calibers for recreation shooting. With the exception of 7.62x39, i can find 5.56, 7.62 NATO,  .45ACP or their equivalent (.223,.308) for cheap at a bulk rate. Now for hunting,  I've killed more deer with my .270 than I could ever remember. From ranges out to 500yds this has been my rifle of choice.

[mister]

Ex Mil ammo is cheaper. Like we can get chinese made stuff for cheap. But there's no way I can see putting some el-cheapo ammo through an expensive gun. Doesn't make sense to me. Why buy a $1,500 rifle and a $500 scope only to throw cheap ex mil ammo through it that looks like it will go off if you just pick it up.

Reloading. Yeah, people forget their time has a value + the cost of the reloading gear + storage of shell cases, primers, powder, press, etc.

Michael

[Huff1371]

Thats the great thing about military rifles. They are made to shoot whatever crap ammo goes in them. If I tear up a barrel on my AR-15 shooting tracers and lake city reloads it's about a half hour job to set a new one in. Granted the last barrel I bought was just because I wanted it, the one I removed was just fine after probably 20k rounds of the cheapest stuff available . I gladly pay $1000 so I can shoot cheap ammo without regret. This does not appy to $3000 hunting rifle, that gets loaded with ammo carefully selected for that gun in that weather for that application in that terrain.

[mister]

Oh yeah... old 303s are pretty big down here. And before we weren't allowed to have semi autos, there were heaps of SKSes floating around. Cheap to buy as well.

Though I prefer the old Swedish Mausers myself - 6.5x55. Throw on a synthetic stock and scope and you got a cheap kickass hunting rifle.

Another real popular caliber down here is the 243. Viewed as a kind of everything gun for the types of feral animals we get down here. But I have found a 223 still is more ideal for everything except maybe a water buffalo.

[Big Rich]

Speaking of 303 British, I have an old Ross straight bolt rifle. Looks just like this one:

http://www.gunsamerica.com/918358148/Guns/Rifles/R-Misc-Rifles/79P_ROSS_RIFLE_CANADIAN_STRAIGHT_PULL_BOLT_303_BRITIS.htm

Peep sight only, and still accurate.

[k.rollin]

Reloading. Yeah, people forget their time has a value + the cost of the reloading gear + storage of shell cases, primers, powder, press, etc.

Michael

I'm well aware of the opportunity costs, it's just something else I do for recreation. Not to mention it is the most economical way to continue shooting this:


.41 Magnum isn't cheap and the lowest cost ammunition comes from commercial reloaders (BVAC, et al) anyways, so I figure I'll do it myself.

[mister]

Yeah, most pistol shooters down here reload their own. Nice bunch of guys too, they let me shoot airrifle on their range cause it's the only range that does 10 meter targets. They cannot believe how tiny the airrifle target is.

Michael

[k.rollin]

I shot 3P 10 meter air rifle in high school; those bulls were definitely small.

[Huff1371]

Reloading. Yeah, people forget their time has a value + the cost of the reloading gear + storage of shell cases, primers, powder, press, etc.

Michael

I'm well aware of the opportunity costs, it's just something else I do for recreation. Not to mention it is the most economical way to continue shooting this:


.41 Magnum isn't cheap and the lowest cost ammunition comes from commercial reloaders (BVAC, et al) anyways, so I figure I'll do it myself.

That what happens when you get a great gun in a caliber that flops. My dad has the same gun (might be the super Redhawk, it's D.A.) but in .44 Mag. He bought it in the 80's and said he was conflicted between the .41 and the .44 Mag. Guess he chose luck, even if its still pricey to shoot. I ran into the same with my 10MM. Great gun, Great caliber, Horrible market for ammo. I belive Midway USA had reloding dies for the .41 on sale recently , check it out.