What's a pistol with the same power? stopping power and

>>31384605
>Stopping power
alll handgun rounds are about as weak as each other honestly

>>31384609
>>31384605
Why do revolvers always seem to come out on top?

>>31384605
Since you can get a Rhino in .40 Snappy and Whacky, just get a .40 S&W semi-auto with a 6" barrel.

Otherwise, .357 Sig can sometimes be sort of like .357 Magnum with light bullets. 10mm is probably most like .357 Magnum in terminal ballistics.

>>31384612
Revolvers have the potential for chambering efficiently bigger cartridges than autoloaders, but that doesn't make them really practical.
.357 is probably one of the most potent and sensible chambering for an all-around gun, but it isn't crazy more powerful than many typical pistol rounds. Plus revolvers have two to three times less cartrdiges.

"Range" in a pistol is meaningless as well. If you plan to shoot at further away than 50m, using a handgun isn't the way to go.

>>31384626
>"Range" in a pistol is meaningless as well
If you can shoot 100m targets with a .357 Mag, why shouldn't you?

Also .357 Magnum may not be bigger, but it has the potential to penetrate more flesh if the shot comes through, say, the side of the torso.

.357 Mag and 9mm seem to have the best track records for self-defense.

>>31384676
What about 10 and 12 mm?

>>31384680
10 mil is a decent round if you wanna just try something different than 9mm or .45.

12 mm is a meme

>>31384605
>reflex built into the gun
>fires from the bottom cylinder
I want one

>>31384676
>If you can shoot 100m targets with a .357 Mag, why shouldn't you?
I guess that, if you plan to shoot targets at long range (for a pistol - ie more than 50m), it begins to almost be trick shooting. At this point, any cartridge will do really. If you want to shoot far away, you shouldn't take a handgun and if you absolutely want to, cartridge is overall irrelevant.

.357 is certainly a very potent and efficient cartridge, there's really no denying that, but since pistol cartridges do just as well or so, taking a gun that has 2.5x more ammo is probably more sensible anyway. Stupid maths would say that since .357 isn't twice as powerful as any other typical cartridge, having a gun with more than 12 bullets is better.

What is the use of the gun should be the first question. If you plan to shoot targets, "stopping power" is irrelevant, "range" is overall irrelevant as any cartridge can be shot ok at combat range.

File: 48544.jpg (217KB, 1244x810px)

217KB, 1244x810px

>>31384605
>>31384609
Where you've been when revolution in combat sidearms happen?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mymewEQiQhY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pO91Mc437U

9x25 Dillon is a comparable cartridge. It's 10mm necked to 9mm, like .357 SIG with more oomf. You'll need a replacement barrel for an originally 10mm, like a Glock 20 or EAA Witness in 10mm

Literally any other 6" .357.
And it's 60ds, tardo.

>>31384605
Coonan makes a .357mag 1911. $2k though.

>>31384866
My fuckin' dream gun. Some day I'll have the money. Not sure if I want to go Compact or the full sized one.

>>31384866
Not worth it IMO.

>>31384612
Revolvers can fit longer cartridges, meaning more powerful cartridges.
This is because the majority of semi-auto handguns have the magazine located in grip. The larger the caliber, the larger the grip has to be.

The other option is to make Tec-9 style handguns in larger calibers, but the mag being separate from the grip isn't the most popular design today.

>>31384605
Another rhino 6d

>>31384935
I would go full size in .357 mag.

>>31384605
That would look better if the barrel stuck out a half inch.

10 1/2 inch S&W Model 500?

>>31384808
At $5k+ per pistol, the revolution isn't happening.

>>31384808
so... what's wrong with it?
and why has nobody tried anything like that before?