357 mag compare to the 40 and 45?

I'm sure that someone will provide a link to perhaps more accurate information, but Marshall and Sannow have been keep stats. for more than 20 years. The 357 125 JHP has a 96% one shot stop in over 1200 shootings.
The 45 ACP is about 4% lower, and the 40 S&W is almost equal to the 357.

This is an unprovable science with many variables, and many respected authorities and called Marshall and Sannows into question.

All agree that bullet placement is the most important variable. So in answer to your question I think that the calibers are pretty much equal. It's up to you to practice. I would however use a heavy bullet for caliber to get the penetration to get the bullet deep enough to reach something to shut down the CNS or cause blood loss quickly.

If you can't shoot faster than the other guy; Shoot straighter. Chic Gaylord
 
besides price, they all are more or less the same. All of them kick a tremendous amount of behind when they hit flesh
Click to expand...

I hear that opinion on a regular basis. However, it wasn't the 158 gr. or the 110 gr JHP's that earned the .357 it's reputation and set a standard of comparison.

It was the 125 gr. jacketed or semi jacketed hollow point that produces the best balance between expansion and penetration along with, perhaps, a little temp. wound cavity which is hard to measure and denied by some.

The Federal 125 gr. was considered to be about the hottest when compared to Remington and Winchester. All are effective, and all tended to produce jacket separations which, apparantly, did nothing to hurt "stopping power", since they produced even more wound effect.

Of course, bonded bullets that hold together, no matter what, are all the rage these days. We've all just gotta have bullets that penetrate car bodies and windshields as well as other barriers.
 
Last edited:
Look at the nature of that assertion. How can you objectively quantify a bullet's "stopping power"? I know everyone worships 357, and for good reason. My point is that there are too many variables in shooting someone to lump it all up to specific cartridge, especially when the three choices here are all powerhouses.
 
Buffalo Bore shows heavy .357 magnum 125 grain rounds at 802 ft-lbs of energy.

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=1

Buffalo Bore also shows their heavy +P 180 grain JHP .40 at 484 ft-lbs, and their heavy +P .45 ACP 180 grain JHP rounds at 543 ft-lbs.

Some might consider all these as equals, but I do not. The .40 and .45acp might be pretty equal, along with the 9mm, but the .357 magnum is a different character, with some 50% more energy than any of the three service rounds (9mm, .40, .45acp).

This matter comes up frequently. Do a serach and you will get lots of opinion/
 
Last edited:
In my unscientific testing of both .357's and .45's in buckets of wet newspaper the .357 makes a slightly larger hole. I tested various weights and makes of hollow points in both calibers. the difference was not great. When you compare the smallest hole found to the size of your chest, even the smallest hole is a ridiculous amount of destruction and would be more than enough. The only load that put the .45 into the dirt was a certain unknown 158gr .357 truncated tipped semi-jacketed hollow point that I had from a friend. These bullets were completely un-called-for. they blew the crap out of everything, emptying and splitting a five gallon bucket full of wet paper while scorching and blackening the entire area...... Bear loads? Elephant? Who knows. I think that the difference is about automatic-vs-revolver rather than one being more effective than another. Both are excessive......... And we like that!
 
I believe in the suggestion that most of the legendary "stopping power" of the 125gr .357 comes from several factors:

1) At the time, these were probably the most reliable expanding bullets. Driven hard enough (1400-1500 fps) the bullets "behaved" nicely, expanding and penetrating when hollowpoints at lower speeds wouldn't expand.

2) It has been suggested (can't remember where to quote) that there were more experienced, practiced and "gun savvy" officers using the Magnums as an option, when a .38 or .38 +P may have been department issued. Better shot placement = better results. (I've also seen this as a possible reason why the .45 ACP is rated so highly, being more common with enthusiasts, rather than the rank-and-file.)

3) Psychology! A full-power .357 out of even a 5-6" barreled revolver is quite impressive from a shock-and-awe perspective.

As for good .357 loads, pick one you like. I like 140gr Hornady XTPs, 145gr Winchester SilverTips would be good as well, along with any number of other options.
 
Last edited:
2) It has been suggested (can't remember where to quote) that there were more experienced, practiced and "gun savvy" officers using the Magnums as an option, when a .38 or .38 +P may have been department issued
Click to expand...

Whooa there! You're talking about an era when "qualification" meant standing there with hand in pocket slow firing for top score, and then putting brass in pocket before reloading. Wasn't uncommon for officers to go thru a career without using a gun.

Todays training is far more realistic and combat related and times have changed.

Look at the nature of that assertion. How can you objectively quantify a bullet's "stopping power"?
Click to expand...

While the definition of "stopping power" is subjective, street performance can at least be determined by comparison. Argue about the definition all you want, but not about what bullets worked best on the street.
 
Last edited:
harry mudd,

Not to quibble, but how does a non-explosive bullet scorch and blacken anything, much less a bucket full of wet paper?

If the scorching and blackening came from the cartridge's powder burning excessively, that may be impressive from an optical point of view, but has absolutely nothing to do with the stopping power of the bullet, and actually belies a degree of inefficiency in the load.
 
Last edited:
I'm not saying that statistically the 357 isn't a great round. My argument is that when you have three different bullets so close to each other on the stopping power scale, the margin of error on a scale with so many different variables makes up a good chunk of the difference.
 
357, 40 or 45 all are great. I would go with what ever you feel most comfortable with.

I like the 357 but that is because that was the hand gun I learned to shoot on (that and the 22)

statistically I guess they say the 357 is the king of the streets but even as a 357 fan I would question those stats.
 
A good friend of mine, a KY State Trooper, once told me they (the KSP) had a greater % of one shot stops with their former duty gun, the S&W 686 .357 magnum, than the later two guns and calibers they have since went to which are the S&W 1076 10mm and now the Glock 35 .40 caliber. Whether this is true or not I can't say. I'm only stating what was told to me. ,,,virg.
 
isn't stopping power measured by how far back a person gets knocked when they get shot in the chest?
Click to expand...
If that's how it's measured then it doesn't exist. At least not If we're talking about any firearm that can be easily carried and fired by a human being.

Mythbusters demonstrated absolutely conclusively that even a .50BMG round at point blank range stopped by a steel plate in the chest of a human sized/weighted dummy wasn't sufficient to knock it backwards any significant amount.

Prior to that test they ran other tests involving pig carcasses and various calibers. The carcass was suspended from supports on which it was balanced. The team demonstrated prior to the tests that a thrown baseball would easily dislodge the carcass from the supports. They tested a couple of pistol calibers, a rifle caliber (maybe 2) and a 12ga. Only the 12ga provided enough of a "bump" to dislodge the carcass from its supports and even it didn't knock the carcass backwards. It just fell straight down after being dislodged.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top