my 29 is accurate af, try getting a stronger recoil spring - this is what I have in mine

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/210364/wolff-recoil-spring-glock-29-30-36

" />

I have shot it about three times, but hope to give it a workout soon. trigger is awesome- Heavier 20lb spring and hennings guide rod. I love 10mm

Funny .40 Super review I found on cal guns.net by cstarr3:


So, I recently got some ammo to test out one of my project guns; a Glock 21 SF. After hitting the range on Saturday, I wrote the following in a Word document, so that I could later post it here:

I would like to jot down a few notes, while the .40 Super experience is fresh in my mind, on shooting this particular caliber. To be clear, I have shot a wide range of snappy cartridges, some of them less common than others. I have graduated from .40 S&W to 10mm and .400 Corbon, and from 9mm to .357 Sig and 9x25 Dillon.

Firstly, quick note on the .40 Super: it is more or less a necked down .460 Rowland. Some will tell you that it is a necked down .45 Super, but in reality, it has a brass about 2mm longer than the .45 ACP/Super. This makes the case about the same length as the .460 Rowland, even though the overall length of all these cartridges are the same. Because it is a high velocity 40 caliber round, it is often compared to the 10mm. I think that this comparison is misguided, but I still employ it as the 10mm is a known performer in semi-auto platforms, and it is a far more common cartridge.

My .40 Super setup is simple; it is a Glock 21 SF with a 24 lb. spring and Lone Wolf .40 Super stock-length barrel. For all intents and purposes, the modified Glock weighs the same as when unmodified. There are no weights, holo-sights, laser sights, weapon lights, extra do-dads or thing-a-mabobs on my Glock, so unloaded weight goes around the 27 ounces of the good ol’ stock Glock 21 SF.

The ammunition was Underwood (which uses Starline Brass, IMR 800-X powder, and, in this particular loading, 200 gr. Hornady XTP hollow-point bullets). The advertised velocity for this 200 grain juggernaut is 1400 feet per second. To put this in perspective, that is a bullet with 10% more mass traveling 18% faster than Hornady's 180 grain 10mm XTP loading. Comparing apples to apples by using the same brand ammo, the Underwood 180 grain .40 S&W travels at about 1100 feet per second, while the Underwood 180 grain 10mm travels 1300 feet per second (200 fps = 18% faster). The Underwood 200 grain 10mm Auto zips along at 1250 feet per second, while the Underwood 200 grain .40 Super goes 1400 feet per second (150 fps = 12% faster). If we restrict ourselves to using the same weight and type of bullet (165 gr. bonded hollow point), you will see a 200 feet per second increase in the speed as you jump from 40 S&W to 10mm to .40 Super. All in all, there is definitely some difference between the performance of 10mm and .40 Super… and it can be felt when shooting.

I set up at the local indoor range at 10 yards, off hand, with a 5 dot target. I only loaded 5 rounds in the first magazine. (When ammo is scarce and expensive, you do things like this to make the range trip last just a few minutes longer, while telling yourself it is just to get more practice swapping out magazines). I slapped in the magazine, relaxed, leveled off at the upper left target, and BOOM! I was the first guy on the range, so I didn’t have a symphony of 9mm and .45 to accent the barking of this hellhound, but it was absolutely clear to me that this was a louder-than-normal cartridge. As far as accuracy, it went right into the center of the little orange dot in the center of the target. This is a rare thing for me. On the other hand, the recoil was such that my fingers slipped down an entire finger groove on my Glock’s grip. I tried tightening my grip. After about the third shot, I found myself gripping the gun so tightly that I had a hard time keeping the sights steady.

After a second set of 5 rounds, I decided to load up 10 rounds in the magazine. This is not recommended. Though it is not really supposed to be, the outside diameter of the case must be a little larger than the .45 ACP, as the last round was a little difficult to get into the magazine, and made the magazine bulge slightly. This makes the magazine more finicky about being shoved all the way up into the magazine well, which exacerbates the problem of nose diving that thick, short, bottle-necked calibers like the .40 Super and .400 Corbon are prone to. I had two instances of nose dives, and both seemed to be attributable to the tight fit of cartridges into the magazine (the first happened because the round was not seated all the way to the rear of the magazine, and the second because I failed to push the magazine completely into the gun).

By about 10 rounds in, I was starting to feel a bit of shock numbness creep into my hands, and by 30 rounds, I was giving some thought to calling it a day. The recoil was such that I required a realignment of my grip every second or third shot. However, I got through the next 20 rounds fairly well, only jerking the trigger occasionally, with accuracy predictably suffering for it. I once read that, due to muzzle flip, follow-up shots with a 10mm are measured in geological epochs. The person who wrote that should try the .40 Super. Follow up shots don’t come so quick when the gun nearly flies out of your hand on every shot. I think that big-bore recoil junkies will appreciate the zealous jactitation of a semi-auto chambered in .40 Super. For those who are a little intimidated by the 10mm, you should not go to the range with a .40 Super, you will be scarred for many moons to come.

Now, I stated above that accuracy suffered, so I am going to dedicate a little time to accuracy, comparing it to the 10mm for perspective. First off, the way I group shots is to simply record the largest hole-to-hole measurement on each target, using the farther edge of the hole (rounded up to the nearest ¼”). I usually shoot 50 rounds into 5-dot targets, giving each target 10 rounds (convenient, with the magazine capacity laws). Though not a statistically sound practice, I average 5 groups of 10 shots and round up to the nearest 0.1”. This little idiosyncratic way of grouping gives a result not overly different from other, more popular forms of measuring shot groups.

On to the comparison… My 10mm uses the same Glock frame that I was using with the .40 super, except that I have Lone Wolf slide and barrel for 10mm. My current favorite factory load for the range in 10mm is Remington UMC 180 grain hard ball. It should be noted, however, that I am only a couple of months into shooting 10mm. So, on top of the couple of hundred UMC rounds, my experience extends no further than some PMC Bronze 200 grain hardball, some Armscor 180 grain hardball, and a box of PPU 180 grain hollow points. My average shot group for 10mm, off-hand, at 10 yards is about 3.6 inches. The 5-group average for the .40 Super is 4 inches. (3¼”, 3 ½”, 3½”, 4½”, 5¼”). I believe that the quality of Underwood’s products may have helped keep the spreads similar to my 10mm groups. If I were to use Underwood 10mm, I might find that it groups a little differently. In any case, the fact that the two averages are so close may indicate that the .40 Super produces what many 10mm aficionados would consider a manageable recoil and adequate accuracy. As a side note, the first three holes in the first target were all touching each other, giving a group that could be covered with a half-dollar.

I usually police my brass before I leave the range. This usually involves searching the area within a couple of feet from where I am standing. With the .40 Super, though, collecting brass practically requires a road trip. Most of the brass was ejected with enough force that they ricocheted of the stall, the back wall of the range, and I found them several stalls away. When picking up the brass, I noticed that there is a weighty quality to the .40 Super that is not found in most pistol brass. Another thing I noticed is the little imprint of the striker channel opening that was embossed on the primer. If primer cratering irks you, then .40 Super is probably not the round for you.

All in all, the .40 Super is a fine caliber. In fact, .40 Super would probably be my caliber of choice if I found myself routinely in danger of being attacked by orcas, wooly mammoths or cape buffalo. Until I happen to find myself in a situation where that is likely, I am probably just going to stick to 10mm…

…Until I get the Lone Wolf long slide and 6 inch compensated barrel chambered to .40 Super…

Remember your gloves. The checkered grip on the FNX will chew your hands up. I also usually get pinched on my trigger finger trying to bring the gun back down due to the recoil. Recoil on the lighter 135 gr bullets is about the same as 1300 fps 180 gr from a G29.

 
Similar is a subjective term.  I mean seriously, did you not see the enormous 10,000K fireball in the wound cavity?



More seriously, it does show that they all meet some penetration requirement (FBI perhaps?).  Anyway, assuming no other shenanigans on the part of the photoshopper, the 10mm does appear to penetrate deeper and leave a larger temporary cavity.  But the scientific conclusions are firmly stated in the caption.

 
I haven't broken mine yet, but I've pushed it a bit.

The 10mm wasn't included in the original photo at all.

Nice video!  I read on the Underwood site that the hard cast 220's were smoky, and that certainty seemed to be the case.

 
I looked closer and you are correct.  Didn't notice that before.  Thanks!

So centimeter doesn't go nuclear?

Either round has adequate power for personal protection.  Which round would allow a shooter to put two rounds on each of 4 or 5 (you pick) targets spaced one yard apart at 10 meters distance the fastest?   That is the one I would (did) pick.

For larger mammals like small bears or pigs I would think the round with the most power would be superior.  But that is hunting in the bush, not personal protection in an urban environment.

I really do not care what anyone else chooses to carry, for all I care, they can pick a mini 22 pistol, or a 454 casual in single action..they are free to choose.

Speak for yourself, we get bears and moose right here in downtown anchorage...

Having tried both, the Arfcom answer "get both" applies. I love a 1911 in .45 and I love 10mm. I shoot .45 like once a year, tops, but I shoot 10mm regularly. I do enjoy reloading, FWIW.

Capacity, power, good accuracy and solid controllability are all benefits of 10.

I've never had a problem with mine.

Tried out the EFK .40 Super barrel in my FNX today using Underwood 135 grain hollow points... Wow, this is my new favorite caliber.
Shot this old pumpkin that was left at the range at 25 yards.  The blow back was hilarious - I was dodging pumpkin guts, even from 25 yards away, ha ha.

Those are entry wounds by the way.. Crazy!