357 mag vs 44 mag for hunting

Not hard to kill, sometimes, tell that though to the ones that ran off after a 270 blew out their lungs.
Click to expand...

Any deer with it's lungs blown out with a high powered rifle, will not run off very far and will leave a blood trail a blind man could follow. If they are not found, how does one tell where they were actually hit?

That said, a .357 will work well on deer as long as the shooter knows its and their limitations. While I prefer a .44 over a .357 for the increase in range, I have taken more deer with a .357 than a .44(handgun that is).
 
In heavy brush or wet conditions, there is no set rule as to how far they can go. Just because they go aways doesn't mean their not tracked and found.
 
In heavy brush or wet conditions, there is no set rule as to how far they can go.
Click to expand...

Regardless of how brushy or how wet it is, a deer with it's lungs "blew out" will only go as far as the remaining oxygen in it's brain and muscle tissue will allow it to. On hilly ground I've had them slide downhill after they died farther than they ran after being shot. Didn't make them any harder to kill. One reads posts all the time about folks that claim to have "double lunged" a deer only to trail it a 1/4 mile before loosing blood. Ain't gonna happen. Physically impossible. Any deer with it's lungs "blew out" is an easy kill and an easy find.
 
I have hunted with both in Ruger SBH.
Hands down the 44 mag is the better choice IMHO.
More than once it took a follow up shot with the 357 mag.
The 44 mag with a 300 grain JSP bullet is a great round out to 125 yards.
Now days there are better bullet choices.
Now if you hot load a 180 or 200 grain JHP they are deadly out too 150 - 175 yards.
You have to make up in velocity what you lost in weight and mass to get the same penetration of the heavy 300 grain.
 
Just an aside, lest there be any doubt, the .357 is capable of a lot. a grizzly attacked my father in yellowstone, and since the bear was in a very populated area, they didn't have time to bring in "swat." The guy at the local station went in to check out the situation, and when that big SOB charged him, he dropped the bear with 6 rounds of .357 fired into the front end. Lead 158 grain bullets.

I'm sure he would have preferred to wait for the special unit with the rifles, but the thing was only about 100 yards away from a crowded area, and it had already attacked one person.
 
Well buck we are just gonna have to agree to disagree. I've been hunting for 40+ years so I have seen a little.
 
I'm on the fence for this one. I've killed deer and hogs with both calibers and never had a issue as long as you use the correct bullet. I'm going to say shoot what you are accurate with and what ever fits your hand better.
 
I've killed two deer with handguns, one was with a 357 mag the other was with a 45ACP.

I have two 44 mag revolvers, for some strange reason I've never used either to kill a deer, although I'm sure they would be up to the task.

I plan on deer hunting this year with a handgun but the caliber I plan on using this year is a 45 LC so the 44s will stay in the safe another year.

I hurt my shooting hand about three weeks back in a horse mishap, the swelling has pretty much gone down but it hurts like the dickens when the revolver recoils.
I keep practicing though because our firearms season starts in 9 days.

Best Regards
Bob Hunter
www.huntercustoms.com
 
.357 magnum has done a number on whitetail, IMHO it's a formidable round for either man OR beast.
 
Last edited:
There are people who would disagree with the .45 acp as a deer gun. In the past it was not allowed for deer in my state. .357 magnum (not 38 special) .41 and .44 magnum, along with most other .357 or larger bore centerfire. the old cowboy calibers would have been included, the key was At or over .357 and at a minimum bullet weight.

I personally think the ACP is capable of deer hunting. I look at it as pretty much the equal of the .357 in that regard. Don't think that 9mm is particularly appropriate, or .38 special. Even with the newest best ammunition. I say that mostly because it's not likely that a person will get a double tap on a whitetail at 50 yards. A single round needs to be fully up to the task.
 
My long time hunting buddy says to get a 44 mag but I have always like the 357 mag because I can put 38s through it and practice for cheaper.
Click to expand...

What you need to practice is the recoil of the 357. The 38 is not useful practice except for fundamentals that you could do with a 22. The 38 in a proper 357 platform suitable for hunting becomes a plinker or a target round in a gun too big to carry everyday.

If you reload, you pretty well remove preoccupation with ammo cost. 41 and 44 Magnum are the more serious hunting guns and there is a full range of loads you can use, not necessarily intimidating.
 
Last edited:
It's true that working only with .38s will result in a variety of troubles when you fill it up with real loads.

If a person reloads, it's much better to load nothing but .357, but it isn't necessary to make every load a full power found.

Find a load in the mid range between full power and say 1,000 fps, train with both full and mid range loads.

You can save enormous amounts of money with lead and less powder, and still be able to shoot 296 and jacketed bullets properly when the time comes.

Honestly, I don't really find any problems when i set aside my S&W .38 and take out my colt .357. Get practice with both and your expectations will carry through.
 
I have taken deer with both calibers but prefer the .44 over the .357. My reasoning is that realistically you just don't always make that perfect shot. The .44 gives you that extra margin of error in those cases. I hunt with a Ruger Super Blackhawk in .44 magnum. I also hunt with a scoped T/C Contender in .44 magnum. The Contender has taken deer out at 100 yards with the 240 grain Hornady XTP bullet. You can't ask for much better performance with a pistol.

Jim
 
A few of the posts here mention recoil as a consideration for not using a 44 magnum.

I have owned and shot 44 magnums. I am not particularly big or strong, but the recoil didn't bother me.
 
Thank you, snyper. I get really tired of nitpickers.

.45 acp. I consider it adequate for hunting average sized whitetail deer. It may not work perfectly well with shots up the hind end. It may not be appropriate for the massive deer that are sometimes found in remoter areas. I'd personally hesitate to use it on anything much bigger than the deer that are typically found in my area, and I'd prefer not to fire unless I had a clear shot at the vitals.

I think of it as bow hunt type weapon. key is careful targeting. And YES, I know, I am purposely understating the probable effectiveness. I'm not someone who would deliberately inflate the value of a weapon. I am conservative.
 
I understand you're wanting to use a 357 revolver for deer hunting. I felt the same way years ago when I purchased a 6" Colt Python specifically for hunting whitetails. I never shot a deer with the Python, because I moved up in caliber to 41 mag before actually taking a shot on a deer, and then to 480 Ruger. If I am going to be hunting with iron sights, I take the 41 mag. If I want a scope or other laser sight, I go with 480 Ruger. Why? I think the 41 mag is sufficient for deer hunting, but I am much more comfortable with a larger caliber at normal loadings. I like an optical device to for sighting when hunting as it just makes me more confident that I can make the shot rather than just hitting somewhere in the heart lung area/front shoulders and more confident that the hit will put them on the ground. The bullet diameter, hence the hole size makes a difference.

The comments here have pretty much on target as those made by the gun writers from years ago in the magazines regarding handgun hunting. In short, the 357 from a 6" revolver is adequate with good shot placement on a deer. I would limit my range to those where you are completely confident that you can make the shot. The 41 or 44 mag are both better when loaded to normal pressures. The 45LC is equal to the 44 mag when loaded hot.

Whatever you choose, please practice unless your intention is only to take shots of opportunity (very close range) and carry a rifle anyway. Hunting being what it is, if I have a rifle with me, I always choose the rifle as I am more confident that it will do the job. Hence, if you want to hunt with a handgun, I suggest you use the handgun as your primary firearm while hunting and leave the long gun home.

Don't depend on being able to take a second shot with a handgun hunting. Use enough caliber to do the job with one shot. So, you know my recommendation, but you will do what you want.
 
Last edited:
These threads always get to me. The OP has not mentioned his hunting experience, but he has obviously never hand gun hunted before. The minimum caliber that "can kill a deer" is not what he was after. Unless you are a very skilled hunter that can manage a close shot opportunity (under 50 yds), and an excellent marksman that can make the precise shot, and an experienced tracker, who can recover it, I would avoid the .357. The .44 gives you more distance, a larger target area, and will do more damage and immobilize the deer faster.

Yes, .38/.357 ammo is cheaper, but if that is the deciding factor, you might be better off with a .357 carbine, and waiting until you learn to handload or can better afford ammo to handgun hunt.

I switched from .44 mag to .454 Casull years ago, (before the XTP bullets were available,) as I got tired of tracking deer that my 240gr cast SWCs were passing through. Yes, all kill the deer, but for a novice handgun hunter, why not use what does it best?
 
To TimSR

So are you saying the 357 carbine would do the job but the 357 handgun would not be so good?

I just bought a Ruger 77/357 for hunting and so I ask. I am not experienced with hunting, but wanted something that could be used for that but still take the same ammunition as my handguns.
Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top