Glock 20 10mm

Dont have one but want one bad seems like the perfect carry gun in the woods plenty of power vs lots of capacity
 
I'm a bit biased as I've been a glock armorer for almost ten years but I Love the gun. I've had the G21 and G30 for years with zero complaints. I went with th .45 based on ammo availability but I have been thinking about a G20 a lot lately.
 
I have one. It's a good gun, I like the caliber and how it shoots. One warning thought, with a full magazine, it's pretty damn heavy. Just based on that it's not a "carry" gun for me. Maybe if I was in griz country, but even then a canister of bear spray would probably be a better choice.
 
I really like the gun as well have shot it a few times and would like to buy one but for carry in griz country you need more fire power IMO if you look at the ballistics of it they compare to the 357 and even the hottest 357 load is not recomended on a griz i went for the taurus tracker in 44 instead for my carry gun in the woods.
 
You better read the reviews on the Taurus tracker. There not the greatest I wouldn't want to trust my life with Taurus if a grizzly was charging I would have went ruger blackhawk but anyways I think the 10mm has more ballistic power than the .357 don't hold me to it. A lot of people are carrying this gun in grizz country I guess they figure if they get more fire power with the glock 20. But I was looking at a Taurus and then started researching and it definatly made me look elsewhere. But you may have got a good one.
 
I have several friends with the tracker and they have all loved them and mine shots straigt and always goes bang for me. I checked a lot of info on the glock before going to the 44 and if i was gonna carry it the only ammo i was gonna use was the double tap ammo in cast gas checked rounds for bear country. I found them on midway usa in loaded ammo but couldnt find them in just bullets to reload with.
 
I just ran the ballistics again on Handloads.com and if you compare 180gr and 200gr bullets the 357 outperforms the 10mm by a 100 to 200 fps based on the guys on there data. I am a huge fan of the 10mm esp for the auto and having 15 rounds but just seems a lil light to try and take down a griz
 
I have one and love it. Yes, it is not as powerful as the 44 mag, it's going to be closer to the 357 and 41 mag. However, 16 shots compared to 6. Carry an extra mag and that's 31 shots in a hurry.

Here is a cool video -

http://youtu.be/QdB8yo085Sw

Here is a link to 10mm talk - lots of info.

http://www.ar15armory.com/forums/10mm-Talk-Forums-f187.html

And a list of 40 different ammos that have been chronographed. I am going to order myself some Underwood ammo. I haven't been that impressed with the Double Tap...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ak5OC6bPsjO8dEh6eGZ3N3hpUU13SXM5cm9pZy16T0E&hl=en#gid=0
 
Can some one explain to me how bear spray is suppose to be more deterrent than a 200 grain 10mm projectile at less than 20 yards on a grizz? Seriously not trying to be a smart *ss but time and time again I see bear spray being recommended and then hear 357 mags and now 10mms not being enough for bear protection. There must be something im missing?
 
Glock 10mm is what I would carry in grizz country but I would order a longer barrel for it
 
I had a 29 (the compact 10mm) and wouldn't bother carrying one in the woods again. I can shoot most guns more accurately than a striker fired DAO and I figure there's about no way that it's worth lugging 10 or 15 rounds of pistol ammo around in the woods, as I am a weight conscious backpacker. Others may find otherwise. I now carry either a 17 oz. .38 or bear spray. If a cast bullet from a .38 doesn't penetrate a bear skull then I guess you'll read about me in the paper and know better. I wouldn't complain about a mid-weight .357 in my line-up either.

More likely I'll never have to use it and will have saved myself a bunch of extra fuss and pack weight. If I do have to use it I know I can shoot it accurately. Just my opinion.
 
There was a study done on grizzly / human encounters. Out of 79 encounters where people used bear spray there were only two injuries both of them being minor. I don't remember the exact numbers for using a gun, but it was surprisingly high how many people were injured with many of them being seriously injured. One of the theories is when confronted your body releases adrenaline which can cause you to shake, loose fine motor skills, and a host of other things which could affect your accuracy while shooting at a charging bear. The advantage of the spray is with the cone you have a lot more forgiveness on your room for error. One thing I would be really curious to know is if a bear attacks a human and is sprayed are they less likely to be aggressive when having contact with humans.

Even after reading the study I have hard time accepting that I'm safer with bear spray than a gun, but it made a compelling argument.
 
Back
Top