357 Deer Load Advice

It's amazing how snotty people can get over such a simple thing. There are some clearly ineffective bullets, that aren't intended for hunting, that won't perform optimally. Sure, they will still kill a deer with proper shooter performance. I personally saw a grizzly who charged a ranger, who was taken down with a .357; he had no choice as that was the only weapon available.

Hunting should be done with optimal products, and while the xtp is a proven performer and will do quite well, does that make it the very best, and does it really justify striking out against those who think that there are better bullets? One of the bullets you showed had absolutely flattened, and that's certainly not optimal. The XTP is going to be pushing to it's limit at the 2,000 fps that will be achieved.

I stand by my judgement, a deer hunter may possibly be better served by a hard lead, and it will certainly be best using a bonded bullet meant for the cartridge, so that the expansion will be controlled, and the thing will retain it's full weight.

Almost any of the currently available bullets will perform well. Premium like xtp will do better than the plain remington soft points. Bonded like the fusion or a frame will do better. Any of them can still kill a deer.
Click to expand...

We all have an opinion and some of us base ours on experience. As I always say, a sample size of one or two is pretty meaningless. A sample size of zero is truly worthless. None of those dead deer would agree with you. As I've said, I've never lost one using the 357mag. It's all about bullet placement.....period. The XTP excells in every way. I've tried other bullets over the years and none of them did as well as the XTPs.....actual experience my friend.
 
My friend has the same Ruger 77/357 rifle.
His rifle really groups well with the 140 FTX factory load.
We chronoed them at 1,850 fps from his 18.5" barrel.
 
There are obviously a lot of differing opinions and looks like this is going to come down to personal preference more than anything. I think I've learned a thing or two about desired characteristics a hunting bullet should have and will just have to use my own judgement as to what I find best for my particular circumstances. Half of the fun I've had so fun with both my new 77/357 and SP101 is working up loads and trying to optimize my round selection.

Thanks again for all the input guys.

Not to completely change the direction of this thread, but does anyone have any suggestion on how I might test my load for penetration and expansion? Ballistics gel is likely out of the question. I'd like to find something that is perhaps less involved/expensive. I've read about people shooting wet phone books or stacks of wood. Any ideas are appreciated.
 
wet newspaper or phone books are an option. I like 158s, never shot a living thing with a .357, if I want a big bullet, 45-70!
 
I don't believe that anything really does an accurate representation. Ballistic gel is what folks have settled on, but it's $100 a block, give or take. If you try paper, it needs to be totally saturated not just a little wet. Other people think that water bottles are good, and it works, water is the greatest challenge for whether a bullet will hold together. Some of the things that have been used are unbelievable. People have even used bars of soap.
 
I had half expected there to be no easy routes to take. You say shooting water would be a pretty effective test of how the round will hold together? Would the be an accurate representation of expansion, too?
 
Yes, it would. A hollow point works by having a fluid substance get into the cavity at high pressure and it pushes outward as more water is forced in as it penetrates further. A soft point, one with no hollow, doesn't work that way, a soft point is just pressed flat by impact with anything.

The point about water is that it's the perfect medium for expansion of a hollow point. Testing them in water, a bullet that won't reliably expAnd in tissues may expand in water. A bullet that works properly at the proper velocity, and expands well in tissues may overexpand, or even break up when fired through water, especially if it's not built solidly, bonded, or some other means to limit expansion is used. Right now, the specialized bullets that are being sold for pistol rounds are engineered and tested to work within a fairly wide range of velocities, but loading a pistol bullet meant for .38 special, such as the mushy blitz kings I have, into a magnum rifle will result in that weak bullet literally tearing itself to pieces.

It's usually easy to determine the intended use for bullets sold for reloading. Any of the companies will be glad to provide that information.

To repeat, a soft point, non hollow point, works by being crushed, mostly. Testing in water won't give accurate comparison to a shot through a rib cage.

I personally don't believe in worrying too much about bullet at ammunition choices. My carry rounds are Sig. I suspect that some of the others are better. I carry 125, I suspect that maybe some times another weight might work better, but I'm not going to carry magazines around so I can try to have "better" rounds available. With a deer and 357 rounds, there really wouldn't be much point to that.

The reason I suggest the 180 is because the sectional density is much higher, and it should, with identical construction and similar velocities penetrate more deeply. Shooting the .357 should be given the most advantage possible. Or a person can buy the good old lead round nose that our police officers used for decades, I believe that John dillinger was killed by one. That's what's great about guns, putting any sort of big hole through a living creature damages them pretty badly, but you still want to make it a good hole.
 
Last November my son shot a small buck from about 40 yards away with my Marlin 1894 Cowboy in .357 mag. This rifle has a 24" barrel. The bullet was the 140 grain flex tip over 13.0 grains of AA#9 powder. He said the deer ran about 10 feet and fell over dead. The lungs and heart were destroyed.
 
David White has done quite a bit of testing of .357 Hunting Bullets. Go to his web site for a look.
Out of a 357 Maximum 180 grain Hornady XTP's expand pretty impressively.
The Hornady 140 grain FTX is made for the 357 Magnum. It should do well. It can be driven too fast from the 357 Maximum per Davids texting, so it should do fine from a 357 Magnum going slower.
The Hornady 158 XTP comes in two versions. The 158 XTP FP ( Flat Point) which has a small hollow point, and the 158 XTP HP. For deer you will probably want the Flat Point version.
The 180 XTP has two crimp grooves. I would suspect that you will be using the front crimp groove with the Ruger. The 180 XTP and the 140 FTX both eat up a lot of case capacity with a lot of bullet in the case.
I would do some load development, and see what kind of velocity you can get.
For powders you can probably do better than 2400. I would look at H110, 300MP, and Lil'Gun first followed by AA#9. I like 1680 in the 357 Maximum, but you probably cannot get enough 1680 powder in a 357 Magnum case with a deep seated bullet to get any speed up.
For bullets that you can get, I would look at the Hornady 158 XTP FP, 140 FTX, and 180 XTP. The Remington 180 is good also, but out of the supply chain at this time.

Just my 2 cents.

Bob
 
Ive got a few loads put together that I'll be testing today for both accuracy and velocity. If I'm able to reach what I would consider a reasonable velocity (1500-1600fps) with the 180gr XTP I'll probably stick with it and see what it does for me this hunting season. If not I'll head back to the drawing board and look into some other projectiles and powders.
 
You'll find the 180g really shines in a rifle. You can get enough velocity to get the expansion you want at longer distances. Out of a handgun the 180g simply can't be driven fast enough to get good expansion past sixty-seventy yards or so. You should consider getting that rifle reamed out to .357max if the rounds will feed through the action. I have a 357mag Browning Low Wall I had Bellm ream out to 357max and it's a very, very nice white tail gun. Minimal cost to do and the results are fantastic.
 
I think that the maximum is a fantastic round for rifle. Over 1,500 fps out of a medium length barrel with a 220 grain bullet. Put that in a rifle and it's the equal of the 44, at least as far as energy levels. It's a rifle round, it shouldn't have have been used as a pistol.
 
Last edited:
After testing my loads today, I've found that at the muzzle I'm getting about 1350fps from my 180gr XTPs. If I pick up some lil' gun I may be able to increase my velocities a bit, as well.

I'm fairly confident that I could get about 1700fps from my 158gr XTPs. Which would be preferable?


180gr

Distance FPS ft-lb
Muzzle 1350 728
25 1294 669
50 1242 616
75 1195 570


158gr

Distance FPS ft-lb
Muzzle 1700 1014
25 1616 916
50 1536 828
75 1460 748


These figures according to the hornady ballistics calculator

What do you all think?
 
If it were me, I'd use the 180g in a rifle. You'll get some decent expansion in a long gun, not so good in a handgun unless it's a close shot.
 
You need penetration more than diameter, you already have enough diameter for deer.
Click to expand...

Push them to legitimate carbine velocities and they will blow up on impact, especially when hitting shoulder bone.
Click to expand...


One of my sons uses a 357 Mag rifle for deer. He's shot some out to 100 Yards. Never lost one. We use nothing but 158 grain hard cast lead (Missouri Bullet Company #1 Ranger RNFP), driven at moderate velocities (1350ish, IIRC). I would think any of the hollow point rounds driven fast (as they would be from a rifle) would give too much expansion and not enough penetration. In my 25 years of hunting, I've found it's best to get that slug through both sides.
 
Last edited:
Which would be preferable?
Click to expand...

Again, to me it would be the 158gr and it has to do with bullet drop. The .357 outta a rifle is a very legitimate 100+ yard deer cartridge. Using your figures, with 158 gr bullets, if your rifle is sighted in @ 100 yards, difference of impact at 50 is under +2 inches. At 150, you only drop 6 inches. With a 180grainer, difference in impact @ 50 yards is almost +3 inches and at 150, you drop almost 10. Sight the gun in @ 50 yards and you have to hold 6 inches high @ 100 and 18 inches high @ 150 with the 180s. With the 158s and sighted in @ 50 yards, you only have to hold 3.5 inches high @ 100 and a hold at the top of the back @ 150 will still hit the deer in the kill zone. Much more margin for error in judging distance, more margin for error from the shooter and more impact energy downrange. Under 50 yards all of this is moot tho. If all my shots would be under 50 yards, I'd probably just use one of my .357 revolvers. Those shots out to 100 or a tad more is what makes me use the carbine.

But, of more importance than bullet weight in .357 for deer, is picking a bullet appropriate for deer. Again, many HPs in .357 are designed for SD/HD scenarios and are designed for maximum expansion, with minimal penetration, even from low velocity, short barreled revolvers. Many of those .357 HPs are designed to expand reliably @ .38 special velocities. You owe it to your quarry to use a bullet designed for hunting big game. Many of us nowadays hunt deer from an elevated stand, either a blind or a treestand. This means most entry wounds will be high on the body and are not really conducive to a heavy blood-trail. Exit wounds in those scenarios are generally low on the body, meaning a hole that does not need the body cavity to completely fill with blood before it starts to leak. You need to penetrate completely to create a exit wound. Most deer shot with a .357(rifle or handgun) are not bangflops, and a good blood-trail is always desirable. It is possible to take any bullet, loaded to any velocity, in any caliber, walk out into the woods and kill a deer within limited parameters. A responsible hunter does his best to make sure he has the widest parameters possible.

JMTCs.
 
I have killed most of my deer with a 357 magnum carbine (read some of my older posts if you need proof). The key is accuracy. I have killed deer with 125 grain HP and 200 grain flat nose lead bullets. the sweet spot seems to be 158-180 grains loaded pretty hot. If the bullet you are shooting is a HP then I would go with the heavier bullet.

If you are open to factory ammo the Buffalo bore 180 grain is very good for deer. There 158 grain also is very good but its a HP pushed very fast so its not as ideal as the 180. For there 180 grain bullets I was getting about 1775 FPS and the 158 grain I get about 2100 from a 16.5 inch barrel at the muzzle. Buffalo bore did use gold dots but now uses Hornady bullets in there 357 magnum ammo.

Hornady makes great bullets use the 180 and get a good powder such as H110 or MP300 or even 2400. I have never used lilgun so I can not comment on that powder.

If you have any other questions feel free ask. I feel a 357 magnum carbine is a very good gun for Idaho mule deer and smaller game. The larger caliber bullets seem to help with knock down power.
 
Last edited:
My Ruger BH's, a cpl of Smiths and a Marlin 1894 in .357 Magnum all love either variety of the 158 gr Hornady XTP. HP or FP, it makes no difference, with a 2.5x scope mounted on that handiest of all carbines, the Marlin will give you 1.5" gps all day long at 100 yds.

I don't push the load as much as some here advise, but 1650 fps is plenty for deer here in KY. I'd also suggest that the .357 is a 100 yd (at most) deer gun and that's only with solid chest shots, through both lungs or the heart. Any other angle is asking for a wounded deer, and padnuh, we owe them a quick death...no other outcome is acceptable. I'd advise to limit your shots to the working range of the shooter/gun combination when shot from a real hunting field position. In other words, work up your loads from a bench, but then do the rest of your shooting from field positions. It'll really open your eyes as to what is REALLY the range limit.

HTH's Rod
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top