.357 and hunting

B

Bezoar

Moderator
Ive been debating this for many years. Do i get a .357 for hunting deer with?

Well here is some conclusions that i see proven on here.

1. it does alright within 50 yards.
2. most people cant hit a 8 inch paper plate at 50 yards with every cartridge in their handgun every time regardless of caliber
3. most people do not recommend it because of the "noise is louder then my mid level 45 colt/41 mag/44 special or 44 magnum load"
hearing protection peoples
4. Most people recommend bigger heavier calibers for these reasons
-more muzzle energy
-more penetration at longer ranges to compensate for bad range estimation. if you think the deer is at 50 yards but its really at 84 yards a 44 or 45 will give you a slight improvement in luck then a 357
-big heavy 250 grain bullet at 38 special velocity will work better then a 357 at punching through deer

5. most people only shoot deer through the shoulders in an effort to "pin it to the ground" then run up and finish it off.
 
ve been debating this for many years. Do i get a .357 for hunting deer with?

Well here is some conclusions that i see proven on here.

1. it does alright within 50 yards.
2. most people cant hit a 8 inch paper plate at 50 yards with every cartridge in their handgun every time regardless of caliber
3. most people do not recommend it because of the "noise is louder then my mid level 45 colt/41 mag/44 special or 44 magnum load"
hearing protection peoples
4. Most people recommend bigger heavier calibers for these reasons
-more muzzle energy
-more penetration at longer ranges to compensate for bad range estimation. if you think the deer is at 50 yards but its really at 84 yards a 44 or 45 will give you a slight improvement in luck then a 357
-big heavy 250 grain bullet at 38 special velocity will work better then a 357 at punching through deer

5. most people only shoot deer through the shoulders in an effort to "pin it to the ground" then run up and finish it off.
Click to expand...

Hunting deer with a handgun is a lot like hunting deer with a bow. Shot placement is critical. A 357 slug is very adequate if placed in the vitals. A 44 caliber is inadequate if it isn't placed in the vitals. Shoot what you can shoot the best. Handguns don't kill with knockdown power. They kill like an arrow kills, causing massive bleeding. A big hole in the gut won't kill as well as a smaller hole in the vitals. I've killed over 50 deer with the 357 and a dozen or so with the 44 mag. I personally like both calibers but shoot the 357 a lot more and I've very proficient with it. The only deer I've ever lost with a handgun was shot with a 44 mag. I made a bad hit and the deer got away. It happens. The draw back to handgun hunting is that very few shooters will put the time into developing the skills necessary to shoot the handgun well enough to hunt with. Again, I liken it to shooting a bow. You need to be able to put your shots into the kill zone at the distances you will be shooting at. Don't exceed your abilities when taking a shot. If you can keep your shots inside a six inch circle at thirty yards, you're probably good to go for typical deer hunting distances. Tighter would be better but the heart lung area is pretty generous. Become familiar with where it's located on the animal. One other thing, handguns shed velocity pretty quickly. I've posted pictures on her before of two different bullets recovered from the same animal with the same entry area. One shot at 35 yds and the other at 90 yds. You can't believe how much expansion you lose at the 90 yd shot. Another reason to keep the shots closer for reliable bullet expansion. It's not a rifle. Use a handgun within its limits and your limits and you can take a deer with it rather easily. Good luck.
 
NoSecondBest

Excellent advice!

That is about as well a written handgun hunting synopsis I've seen in awhile.

Kudos to ya.
 
agreed

Good analogy---Don't shot any farther than a bow. Biggest mistake new handgun hunters make is shooting too far...and if you can only put every round in a 8" paper plate at 25 yards. Then that's your maximum distance. One other thing ,and all bow hunters know this..when your in the woods. 50 yards seems closer than it really is compared to the firing range. doesn't hurt to actually got out in the woods and practice..things are a little different out there..

As far as bullet expansion goes , I never rely on it..I use a large bore pistol and the heavy bullet has a very big meplat.. Elmer Keith and John Linebaug and others have proven it , and I have proven it to myself. The Hornandy XTP is a fine Bullet but it still has to expand, and the pressure at the face of a bullet with a fat meplat and a medium hardness is exceptional. Out to 40-50 yards a full wadcutter is accurate enough for hunting and has a devastating terminal effect. Got to see it to believe it.

Them Speedbeef just fold up
 
I know all about archery hunting. the reason i cant relly use a bow anymore is the reason im leaning more toward 357 fun over 44 magnum or 45 blackhawk fun.

I think it was 6 years ago one of the archery magazines did some testing and decided the best compound hunting rig generated about 76 foot pounds of energy. thats just 32 sw LONG energy.
Every one of the hunting shows has no issue popping at a moose or elk or grizzly bear with that hunting rig at 60-80 yards. but use a 180 grain lead bullet that makes 760 footpounds of energy at the muzzle and your insane for little bambi use.
 
I've use 357 mag revolver for hunting for many years. With my iron sight revolvers I keep my range within 35 yards but with the scoped revolver I'll shoot out to 75+ yards. I use my handloaded ammo which is 180gr WFN cast bullet loaded with enough H110 to get 1,270 fps out of my 4 3/4" barrel revolver or 1,350 fps from the 6 1/2" barrel. This bullet does not expand but will punch a hole though both side on deer and hogs. I do not load hollowpoint bullets as they frequently to not expand or if they do expand they will not exit the animal. In my experience two holes will put the game down faster than one.
 
I've use 357 mag revolver for hunting for many years. With my iron sight revolvers I keep my range within 35 yards but with the scoped revolver I'll shoot out to 75+ yards. I use my handloaded ammo which is 180gr WFN cast bullet loaded with enough H110 to get 1,270 fps out of my 4 3/4" barrel revolver or 1,350 fps from the 6 1/2" barrel. This bullet does not expand but will punch a hole though both side on deer and hogs. I do not load hollowpoint bullets as they frequently to not expand or if they do expand they will not exit the animal. In my experience two holes will put the game down faster than one.
Click to expand...

As I stated, I've shot over 50 deer with the 357 over the last thirty some years. Most did not have an exit wound. I've found most bullets under the hide on the off side. It's amazing how much the hide can take and not allow the bullet to exit. I've seen high speed videos showing the hide on an animal stretch out for six inches or so and rebound back without letting the bullet out. I don't believe that they die any faster by having a hole on the off side. The internal damage is what kills the deer and the "extra" hole isn't necessary. If hit in the heart/lung area, they never go very far. I'd say on average the deer I've shot have gone far less than 50 yards at most and at least half have dropped within ten yards after being hit. My observations are based on a large population sample and appear to be pretty indicative of what will happen if the vitals are hit. FYI...in addition to the 357 handgun kills I have made, I have shot another half dozen with a Marlin 357 rifle and the results were the same. I'm not saying that heavier bullets at higher velocities are worse, I'm just saying I don't believe they are any better. Deer just aren't very hard to kill if hit properly.
 
Alot of people tell me that i should focus on the pure penetration of a 240 grain swc at 1000 fps. Just to get the momentum so that it still pokes through the shoulder bones at long range.

But depending on howthe animal is actually standing, thats not going to hit a vital organ in the chest cavity. I know its wierd but i only know of a few standing arrangements were the lung or heart would be put in a direct line with a shoulder shot....


Also on a side note, the 140 grain barnes and hornady 357 loads are advertised as hunting ammo. NO barrel length is specified, they only specify a big range of impact velocity to make it open.
no offense according to hornady velocity charts, the 38 special can make a 158 grain xtp OPEN
 
Neither the arrow nor the little pistol bullet kills with energy...

I think it was 6 years ago one of the archery magazines did some testing and decided the best compound hunting rig generated about 76 foot pounds of energy. thats just 32 sw LONG energy.
Every one of the hunting shows has no issue popping at a moose or elk or grizzly bear with that hunting rig at 60-80 yards. but use a 180 grain lead bullet that makes 760 footpounds of energy at the muzzle and your insane for little bambi use.
Click to expand...

The difference being that the bullet does not have have a pair of blades to widen the wound channel, cutting vital pulmonary and circulatory systems to create fatal hemorhaging ...... the broadhead wound track would be both deeper and wider than the S&W Long track ...... which very well might not be fatal .....
 
I wouldn't hesitate to hunt with a 357 at reasonable ranges. The aforementioned archery limits are probably about right. Just about any good bullet that would work for self defense would also work for deer.

JimBob86 is right. It's not really about energy. An arrow (even at much less than 76ft-lbs) will dramatically out penetrate a 44mag, say nothing of a 32SW.

I regularly bring my Glock 33 chambered in 357sig hunting with me. If I ever get the right chance, I'll shoot a deer with it. I use a 5.32" barrel and get in excess of 1,500fps from 125gr Hornady XTPs.
 
An arrow also weighs 350 grains and up (approximately) and is tipped with a razor. Put 76 ft lbs behind a knife, and it will stick in pretty deep. Bullets are bullets and arrows are arrows.
 
I don't believe that they die any faster by having a hole on the off side. The internal damage is what kills the deer and the "extra" hole isn't necessary. If hit in the heart/lung area, they never go very far. I'd say on average the deer I've shot have gone far less than 50 yards at most and at least half have dropped within ten yards after being hit.
Click to expand...

......



I don't hunt deer with pistol- I use a .270WIN, and my bullets pack close to a ton of energy at 200 yards ..... Some of the deer hit in the lungs run 50 or even 100 yards - others flinch a little ......one, I hit 3 times in the chest - he did not react much at all, so thinking I missed, I shot again ..... and again ..... after the third hit, he walked in a circle and laid down and died ..... the thing is: every one is different, and folks who say "every one has not gone very far" has not shot very many deer, or have magic internet nostalgia bullets......


I agree that an exit wound does not kill any faster ....... what it does do is leave a better blood trail. I lost 2 deer using a .45 flintlock with those little round balls ..... the deer did not go all that far ...... they just left a really sparse blood trail ..... the coyotes found them before I did. I'm not Dan'l flippin' Boone- unless there is snow on the ground, I'm not going to be able to track a deer that is not bleeding ......
 
I killed my deer this year with a 9mm carbine.

a 147gr bullet from a 16 inch barrel gets about the same velocity as a 357 from a non snubby revolver. assuming you're a decent shot and are able to load hot without blowing up your handgun 357 is more than sufficient.
 
I don't hunt deer with pistol- I use a .270WIN, and my bullets pack close to a ton of energy at 200 yards ..... Some of the deer hit in the lungs run 50 or even 100 yards - others flinch a little ......one, I hit 3 times in the chest - he did not react much at all, so thinking I missed, I shot again ..... and again ..... after the third hit, he walked in a circle and laid down and died ..... the thing is: every one is different, and folks who say "every one has not gone very far" has not shot very many deer, or have magic internet nostalgia bullets......
Click to expand...

I'll say it again, muzzle energy doesn't kill deer. Even "close to a ton of energy" from a 270 isn't going to do as much with a bad hit as a lighter gun with a good hit. Also, your rifle didn't impart a ton of energy into the animal. Most of it was imparted into what ever the bullet hit after going through the deer. Poor marksmanship and counting on " a ton of energy" aren't a substitute for good marksmanship a good shot into the kill zone.
 
I'm always curious about claims of the distance that deer travel after being shot. What I find most interesting is that the claimed distances "20 feet" or "40 yards" or whatever always seem to be right in the zone that the deer in my world ALMOST NEVER end up. What I've found, from personally shooting and helping others recover/drag hundreds, is that they either go no where or they go 100 plus yards. Very few go a little ways and stop. Sure, a few, but I can't understand the "never had one go over 50 yards". Mostly, they're either DRT or they go 100+. This is over a cross-section of weapons, from compounds with various broad heads, cross bows, muzzle loaders, shotguns (10, 12, 20ga) with various slugs and several rifle cartridges.

There's no discernible pattern. Double lung, double lung AND heart, one lung and heart... might drop and twitch, might run 150 yards, might stagger 3 steps and fall, might (rarely) go 20 or 40 yards and drop. If I had to guess, though, I'd bet on 100 yards every time over "under 50".

Exit wounds bleed a lot more and are nice to have. Certainly no downside whatsoever.


bezoar said:
5. most people only shoot deer through the shoulders in an effort to "pin it to the ground" then run up and finish it off.
Click to expand...

People do that? No one I've ever known.
 
There's no discernible pattern...
Click to expand...

Agree 100%.

Have also used many styles of broad heads, different handgun,shotgun, black powder and rifle ammo and there's is just no 'absolute's ' in where the deer's goin to fall.
Although admittedly, it's been several years since I've traveled out of state and used a center fire rifle for deer. Rifle ammo may have been greatly improved since then, I doubt it's been improved to the point of a guaranteed DRT every time.

Have blown the heart and lungs out of deer and had them run 60-100yds like they were not even hit then go down. Have had them DRT with the same shot. This has happened when using all of the above mentioned hunting tools.

Again, there's just no guarantee that a well hit deer is gonna be DRT, run no more then 20,30,50 or 100 yds. Especially when hunting hilly country.

Only shots that would most likely anchor a deer right where it's shot 100% of the time is a spine shot that severs the spine.

That's a shot I've successfully taken in the past with a bow but have learned to not care for as the screaming and obvious suffering by the paralyzed deer till it's put out of its misery is inhumane to me . YMMV!
 
Last edited:
I can't understand the "never had one go over 50 yards".
Click to expand...

Brian, read the post and don't misquote it. It doesn't say "never had one go over 50 yards". It says "on average", which is not the same thing. Also, as a staff member you might notice that the post has deteriorated away from the original OP to where people are leaving the subject matter and using the OP to attack other members comments. You should be sorting this out and paying attention to what the actual wording is rather than misquoting it. I don't care who agrees with what I say, or disagrees. I responded to the OP and gave my opinion and shared my experiences. If someone else has a different opinion they are welcome to share it with the OP rather than go off on a tangent and disagree with someone elses response.
 
Actually, I didn't quote you at all. It was a generic quote.

Your exact quote was:

NoSecondBest said:
I'd say on average the deer I've shot have gone far less than 50 yards at most and at least half have dropped within ten yards after being hit.
Click to expand...

Average of far less than 50 yards.

What I said was:

Brian Pfleuger said:
What I find most interesting is that the claimed distances "20 feet" or "40 yards" or whatever..."never had one go over 50 yards".
Click to expand...

Quite clearly, my response was prompted by yours but is actually a generic point on the general principle since it clearly makes references to several comments that you didn't make.

This is off topic, I'll give you that, but I do not understand how it's an "attack other members comments."

Since when is a disagreement and discussion "an attack"?
 
The .357 is good enough

You have to do your part. Keep that range short. I'm of the opinion that handgun bullets ought to get full penetration. You get a better blood trail with another opening.

Careful bullet selection is critical with a .357 mag. The 125 police load that is so effective on persons will not work so well on deer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top