.357 Magnum or bigger bore?

N

Nightcrawler

New member
Jeff Cooper, one of the inventors of modern pistolcraft, considers .357 Magnum a minor caliber. According to him, velocity isn't that important in a handgun catridge, which is probably true. No handgun cartridge is fast enough to generate hydrostatic shock, and even a .45 hardball at 850 feet per second will go clear through a human target at close range, so penetration isn't the issue either. I, personally, from what I learned in Physics class, would guess that the harder you hit the target, the more damage it will receive. How do you hit a target hard? The more mass you have, and the faster it goes, the more energy it'll have on impact. Again, high school physics here.

.357 Magnum, though not "big bore" (I'm a little confused as to where the Colonel considers the line between major and minor caliber to be), can put a heavy projectile onto target at high speed, up to 180 grains.

I've never heard of anyone suggesting that .357 Magnum is "not enough gun" for any social purposes.

.357 Magnum is about all you can find in a social revolver these days, that and .38 special. Sure, there's the occasional .41 Magnum, and reduced power loads for .44, but .357 reigns supreme.

So. Does the bigger bore of say, .41 Magnum, or a properly loaded .45 Colt round, really give them an advantage over a .357 Magnum round? I'm sure everyone has their own opinion, I'm just curious as to what they are. :)
 
Nightcrawler you just don't give up. I'll say that for you. Ok, I'll take the bait. Some conventional wisdom I have picked up over the years.

Some of the best stopping rounds COULD be. 45 ACP at 850-950, 45 Colt 250g at 900, 44 spl. 240s at 800?, something like that. So bullet weights between 230 and 250 at 800-950. Many people think this is ideal. I don't intend to shot anybody but I would tend to agree. You can't ignore the 45s and 44s. Impossible.

There is also decades of police ballistics that say a 38spl +P, 158g, lead hollow point, has never been a problem at close range, less than 25 feet. All of this is conventional stuff that is easily researched. I wouldn't want to be on the wrong end of one. A 158g from a 357, 2-1/2 to 4 inch, hollow point bullet is going to hurt. I don't care what formula you use. This is free advise and probably worthless.

justinr1
 
to be honest...

...I'm trying to talk myself into a .357 Magnum, because the ammo is cheaper. :) So, that explains my prodding. I'm sure as heck not trying to start another 9mm vs. .45 debate....I mean, if I was going to do that, I'd say, ".357 Magnum is too small bored to be an effective pistol round. .44 Special is more appropriate". Wait, that's what Jeff Cooper said, or implied...I dunno...he also said, in his writings, that revolvers are inadequate compared to autopistols. Hmm.

NOW I'm confused. I need to go lay down for awhile. LOL
 
Last edited:
I think the advantages of the big-bores (let's say 230 to 260 grains 800 to 1000 fps) is that they are low pressure rounds and generally easier to shoot (for the shooter and easier on the handgun). The penalty is you are forced into a large, relatively heavy platform (which probably contributes to their shootability).

The advantage of the .357 is that it can be had in a lot more portable package (remember, it really took off with the introduction of the Model 19). The penalty is, of course, it is a high pressure round and much tougher on the shooter (muzzle blast and recoil) and the handgun, in these smaller, more portable platforms. The .357's "social" reputation was made with 125 and 158 grain bullets in the 1450 to 1600 fps range--you and your weapon definitely pay a penalty for the these velocities in a small or medim framed revolver.

In a large handgun, I think you are better off with the big-bore--my personal favourite in the large handgun category is the .45 ACP/.45 AR.

These observations are primarily directed towards social purposes versus recrational, hunting, etc.
 
Nightcrawler, I admire the way you rationalize the 'need' for a new gun! :D

Seriously, I was at a John Farnam course last weekend. He spoke well of the .357 SIG, and it seems to be gaining ground among law enforcement types. Similar ballistics to the .357, I understand.

Of course, no justification is needed for owning a (pre-agreement) L frame Smith or a Colt Python in .357. Shooting eitgher is its own justificaiton!
 
I carry Glock model 26. That's 11 shots of 9mm 124 grain +P GoldDot for about 360 ft/lbs of energy from its stubby barrel. It's about the same size as a snubby, holds more rounds (damn near double), reloads easier, less blast (by a lot) than the .357 magnum and more powerful (by a good deal) than the .38 special. 9mm is also extremely cheap for practice.

For range use and hunting I would want a .44 rem. mag. Super Blackhawk Ruger.

Those are the two I would buy if I owned nothing and wanted two handguns to cover as many bases as possible.

If you must stay with revolvers and want your large and small frame revolver to match, then the .44 mag large frame and .44 special snubbie is hard to beat.

But if you're on a tight budget and still want the large revolver / small revolver in same calibers then two .357's do make sense.

One question Nightcrawler, WILL YOU HUNT WITH EITHER OF THESE ARMS?

Kilgor
 
What, me hunt?

Nah. That doesn't mean I won't end up buying something in .44 Mag, though. But that's it. I fail to see the utility of a .454 Casull or any of its fellow uber-magnums, other than to give one arthritis in the wrists.

I WILL be on a tight budget, though. But thanks for the input, folks!
 
When I want to go hotter than the .38 Spl +P, I go to the .45 ACP in the 1911-type.

My S&W model 66 doesn't see any .357 Magnums.
I find the .357 Mag. difficult to control, so my follow-up shots are too slow for defensive work. Also, I don't like the muzzle blast.

The .38 Spl. +P and the .45 ACP are much more controllable for me.

-Mk.IV
 
Nightcrawler,
Have you ever shot A .357 Magnum? Or how about a .45ACP or Long colt? Perhaps you have tried a wimpy .44Spl?

I ask because you never seem to understand the answers you recieve. Most of the people who have responded to you in the past here at TFL have years of shooting experience, I believe you said your 21 soon,so go A range of your choice and try some things out and Discover on your own what you like. Why do you care what somebody writes in a book. I started with a ruger blackhawk(sure miss that gun) :( in .357 shot .38's mostly because of cost and moved up and down the pistol scale for the past 25 years. I was going to sell my .44spl a month ago and prior to that I took it with me to my favorite shooting spot and fell in love with it all over again.

Try something, buy something and gain the experience
:rolleyes:

you are not going to get it from a book.
 
No handgun cartridge is fast enough to generate hydrostatic shock....
Click to expand...

Ever centert-shoot a jackrabbit at 20 feet with a 44mag using full power loads at 14-1500fps ? The shock is very impressive to say the least. It just about implodes them in half. Not like a HV rifle round, but there is definitely hydrostatic shock involved.

But back to your question, unless you're hunting large game, the 357 is plenty, although one of the good things about hunting with a mildly loaded hard cast 44 or 45 is that they give quick kills on small game without much meat damage.
 
Well, Coolray...

...No, I've never shot any of these. Lest we forget, the law phrohibits me from so much as handling a pistol in a gun store, much less firing one. There aren't any ranges around here. I live in a small town, and we go shooting in an old quarry.

Next summer, when I buy my handgun (not my first, I had a .45 that was a private sale....I sold it, though. Low quality, jammed a lot, even with hardball ammo), I want something that I'm going to be happy with.

I know firing full power loads in a lightweight revolver is going to make follow up shots difficult. This is why I want a BIG revolver, one that's nice and heavy. I literally have to teach myself how to shoot the hangun, just as I taught myself shotgunning, so I need to take it slow. A big .44 revolver can also fired .44 spec, which is easier on the shooter. If I get a .357 Magnum, my first box of rounds through it will be .38 Special. When I'm comfortable with that, I'll move on.

I'm not, however, going to assume that anything more powerful than this or that is "too much" for me and forget about it. I'm not going to buy a 9x19mm pistol, or a .380, or a .22LR. I'm on a small budget, I can't AFFORD to go buying a huge collection of handguns, getting a new one each time I want to step up my power factor a bit. I'm not going to "start off with a .22" as some people have mentioned in the past. I can't afford to buy a .22 and a more serious gun.

I would like nothing more than to go to a rental range and try out all sorts of things. However, in order to do that, I'd have to make a good 400 mile road trip down state, and that's a touch impractical, given my current budget.

What do I care what somebody writes in a book? Acedemic, mostly. These things interest me to no end.
 
Nightcrawler, in that case get a used 586 / 686 in 6 inch (in GOOD condition!) and be done with it. After reading all your posts I (me personally, only me, not the others, me, me me) absolutely do not think you can go wrong with that choice. If this is your first serious revolver I promise you, it will be a great choice.

justinr1
 
My information could be dated, but last I heard the .357 magnum (I believe 125 gr hollowpoint) still had the best record on the street. Could be a limitation of data on newer calibers, but I don't think you could go wrong with this "old reliable".
 
Nightcrawler, in that case get a used 586 / 686 in 6 inch (in GOOD condition!) and be done with it. After reading all your posts I (me personally, only me, not the others, me, me me) absolutely do not think you can go wrong with that choice. If this is your first serious revolver I promise you, it will be a great choice.
Click to expand...

A good pice of advise given that you won't hunt with it and are on a tight budget. I would also suggest you look at and hold a 6" Ruger GP-100, stronger than the 686/586 and better balanced to boot (for me).

Kilgor
 
That's fine, as long as it is in 6 inches. You'll thank me for this latter. I'm talking range gun here. You can't do it all in one gun.

justinr1
 
Ahh you posted about the GP-100 while I was replying. Yes, certainly check one out.

Kilgor
 
In my opinion, a well handled 357 Magnum is plenty of gun for just about any situation. Just about the only thing I would want more for is large bear.
 
first handgun

nightcrawler,I strongly believe you would be wise to purchace a 22 rimfire as your first handgun ,learn to shoot while you think about your first centerfire,you will learn more in a month shooting that cheap rimfire ammo than you will in five years of shooting centerfires,
 
This isn't my first handgun.

I had a Charles Daly 1911 .45 4" for about a year, private sale, yes it's legal. I did fine with it. It was just kind of low-quality, and I never really liked a 1911 with a 4" barrel, so I sold it.

I can't afford a rimfire handgun, not if I'm going to buy a serious one too, as I've already said. Beyond that, I don't *want* a rimfire handgun. I don't want a rimfire anything. I find them terribly boring. Besides, this will likely be my only handgun for a good while. That being said, I want something I can count on to defend myself with. Unless you're planning on aiming for the eye sockets, .22 rimfire isn't really the best choice for self defense.

If it's a revolver, it'll either be a .357 Magnum/.38 Special, a .44 Magnum/.44 Special, or a .45 Colt. If it's a semiauto (possible, but not too likely), it'll be a 10mm or a .45. All of the above are available in loads ranging from docile (to start of with) to pretty darned powerful (when I'm ready).

Besides. I think light .44 Special loads out of, say, a Super Redhawk, would be plenty docile to get myself ready for more powerful rounds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top