.357 magnum smack down!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bah... I thumb my nose at this topic! LOL

45 Colt... a cartridge designed to shoot a horse out from under its rider, then shoot the boots out from under the same rider has my vote... and that's with the 125 year old 'cowboy' load.

Experience gentlemen... experience! LOL
 
It was king back when Dirty Harry and Magnum force
was in the box office.

Now there is a new king on the block .40 S&W..it will
take your head clean off :D
 
Whose gold standard? Clearly there were experts who didn't care for it or the 41 magnum/10mm/.41AE/40S&W would never have been invented.
Click to expand...

Well, it was enough of a Gold Standard that SIG and Winchester teamed up to duplicate it, as closely as possible, in a semi-auto with substantially more ammo capacity, using the same bullet weight that was most effective in the revolver round. They called it the .357 SIG, developed because LE wanted .357 Mag. "stopping power" back, and their wonder nines didn't achieve that.

There may be those who don't prefer the .357 Mag. (like me) over other cartridges, but I don't think anyone prefers the less effective street results that the other cartridges offered when compared to the 125 gr. JHP or SJHP.
 
It would take a lot of convincing to make me believe light and fast or heavy and slow are the best man stoppers. Given a choice I'll take fast and heavy anyday. In other words I'm not a believer that the .357/125's are better than say a .357/158 or a .44M. There's simply too much evidence of the big and fast being better on critters in the 200-300 lbs on up range. IMO, the main reason the 125 loads were chosen were 2 fold:

1) Lawyers got involved and worried about over penetration and
2) Even a little girl can handle the recoil of .357/125gr loads in a service revolver.

Is a .357/125 better than a .357/158 or 180gr load. Nope. Kinda hard to be king when it isn't even the most effective load in that cartridge.

LK
 
IMO, the main reason the 125 loads were chosen were 2 fold:

1) Lawyers got involved and worried about over penetration and
2) Even a little girl can handle the recoil of .357/125gr loads in a service revolver.

Is a .357/125 better than a .357/158 or 180gr load. Nope. Kinda hard to be king when it isn't even the most effective load in that cartridge.
Click to expand...

Well, according to Marshall & Sanow, the 158gr load was less effective than the 125gr load, even if they used the same SJHP design. The observation was that the 158gr load's recoil was such that many officers flinched when firing, even under stress, which resulted in a poor shot or a miss. True or not, the 125gr outperformed heavier bullets in police use.

The 125gr load was developed for 2 reasons. To take advantage of a market opened up by Lee Juras and his Super-Vel corporation and because it was found that officers could shoot (score) more accurately with the 125gr rounds due to the lower recoil.

Magnum Wheel Man No sweat. I think you and I are in violent agreement here. :p Regardless of caliber or platform, it seems to me that getting up around 500 ft-lbs is really required to ensure a destabilizing effect of a good hit. That's one reason I think the .327 Federal Mag may turn out to be a much better stopper than some people think.

They called it the .357 SIG, developed because LE wanted .357 Mag. "stopping power" back, and their wonder nines didn't achieve that.
Click to expand...
Not knocking the .357 Sig -- however it's been called a "one trick pony" because it was designed around the 125gr .357 magnum concept. Is it a potent personal defense pistol? Sure. But it's also limited by its design to anti-personnel work. It doesn't have the same broad range of application as the .357 revolver round.
 
Is a .357/125 better than a .357/158 or 180gr load. Nope. Kinda hard to be king when it isn't even the most effective load in that cartridge.
Click to expand...

For two legged critters, the 125 wins hands down. Lawyers have nothing to do with it.

Four legged dangerous critters are a different matter. I'm with you on deeper penetrating heavier bullets. So is most everyone else who's studied the subject, or, even better--actually hunted big four legged critters.:D

There are still people in the shooting world who actually don't believe the stretch cavity in bullets travelling 1400 to 1500 fps, and penetrate 12 to 14 inches, contribute to incapacitation and increases "stopping power". And they tend to be "penetration is everything" advocates. We all believe in adequate penetration--we just don't agree what that is. I'm not talking about the ability of a bullet to penetrate barriers, since that's a whole other issue.:cool:
 
Just about every study done, by both morgue monsters and jello junkies, has shown the 125gr JHP .357 Magnum, even from the 2 1.2 barrels, has one of the highest one shot stopping rates of any round.

Now we are talking 125gr JHP at 1400 fps (or close to it.)

And that was why the .357 Sig was invented, to duplicate the 125gr magnum load.

And the 6 inch will make that at least 1550 fps!

So while there are bigger guns with faster heavier slugs, for human consumption the 125gr .357 magnum load is still pretty much near the top.

Deaf
 
Since the discussion has turned so heavily to the Marshall/Sanow study, I think it might be worthwhile to discuss further their methods and why their figures are not, in my opinion, 100% reliable.

First of all, I reject the notion that Marshall and Sanow were dishonest in their reporting of data. I know some pretty vicious condemnations have been leveled against them but I see no proof that they intentionally misrepresented their data. Instead, I find it much more likely that they made some simple errors in their calculations. As far as I know, neither man was a statistician and I can see where innocent mistakes could occur. Also, Marshall and Sanow, in essence, did a case study. Someone who is familiar with scientific method knows that while a case study is useful, it is not perfect as the results are often not repeatable due to the uncontrolled nature of a case study.

Now, I don't feel that the M/S study is completely useless. I do, however, feel that attaching a solid percentage value to certain loadings is a vast oversimplification and not the best way to look at terminal performance. I think that perhaps this may not even be so much the fault of Marshall and Sanow but more a case of people not knowing how to properly interpret and use their data. For example, in the M/S study, both the Remington and Federal 125grn .357 Magnum loadings produced a one-shot-stop in 96% of the shootings documented with them while the Winchester 210grn Silvertip .44 Magnum loading produced a one-shot-stop in 92% of the shootings documented with it. Rather than saying that the 125grn .357 Magnums are 6% more effective than the 210grn .44 Magnum, I think it would be more accurate to say that both the 125grn .357 Magnum and the 210grn .44 Magnum are very effective loadings.

The reason that I don't like quoting one-shot-stop percentages is because there are a lot of uncontrolled factors which can effect whether or not a one-shot-stop will be achieved besides the terminal performance of the bullet itself. While Marshall and Sanow did try to control some of these factors to a certain degree through choosing to study only shootings that met certain circumstances, there are still far too many uncontrolled variables for their data to be a 100% accurate predictor of effectiveness.

For example, Marshall and Sanow chose to count only shootings in which the subject was shot in the torso. However, a few inches difference in shot placement can make a great deal of difference in the effectiveness of a bullet due to changing which organs are struck yet the same few inches is unlikely to be enough for the M/S study to discard the incident. Likewise, the bullet itself is not the only factor which can cause a subject to be incapacitated. The pain of the gunshot wound or the psychological effects of being shot can also cause incapacitation. Finally, the size, body type, mental state, and level of intoxication (if any) of the subject were not taken into account by the M/S study. The effect of a particular bullet on a sober, sane, 130lb individual are likely to be quite different from the effect of the same bullet on an intoxicated, insane, 350lb individual.

All of that being said, I think the M/S data on the 125grn .357 Magnum loadings are amongst the most reliable data in the study simply because of the copious amount of data that was drawn from for those particular loadings. As anyone familiar with statistics is aware, the larger pool of data which is drawn from, the less effect a statistical error or an uncontrolled variable will have on the final result. The Remington and Federal 125grn .357 Magnum loadings are drawn from a database of 1,072 shootings, nearly as many as all of the rest of the .357 Magnum loadings in the study combined (1,074 shootings). Likewise, most of the data for the more popular service calibers like 9mm and .45 ACP is drawn from fairly large pools of data and is thusly most likely fairly reliable. It is the loadings which have relatively small pools of data that are most likely to be the least accurate.

So, the question then is how should the M/S study be interpreted and used? In my opinion, the best way is not to say that loading A is xx% better than loading B but rather to look at all of the loadings which did well and see what common characteristics they share. When we look at the loadings which scored 80% and better, we find that they tend to penetrate 10 inches or more and typically show expanded diameters of .50-.80". Ironically, many of the loadings which do well in the M/S study are also loadings which did well in the FBI tests and are considered good by Dr. Martin Fackler and his associates. This is ironic, almost humorous really, because Fackler and Marshall have been known to be pretty harsh critics of each other and their theories are often on opposite sides of caliber wars.

The point at which the M/S study gives useful information that the FBI/Fackler testing does not is the area of kinetic energy. Simply put, the effects of kinetic energy on living human tissue cannot be accurately depicted under controlled laboratory conditions. Even Fackler admitted that kinetic energy, even at the levels generated by handguns, can sometimes play a significant role in terminal performance although that role is not always a reliable one. The case-study methodology of the M/S study more visually depicts the effects of kinetic energy.

The conclusion that I come to after examining both works is that the greater the kinetic energy of a bullet, the more effective it will be so long as it is not achieved at the expense of shot placement, adequate penetration, and proper bullet performance. It is unfortunate that people seem to be so polarized and dogmatic about handgun cartridges because I feel that both the M/S study and the Fackler/FBI tests offer useful information and are probably more useful when used in conjunction with each other rather than as competing and opposing theories.

Getting back to the original topic, I think that the 125grn .357 Magnum loadings are excellent choices for self-defense and that someone who chooses them is well armed. I do not, however, believe that they are the absolute best for every situation and I feel that .357 Magnum loadings with heavier bullets and loadings in other calibers can be just as good if not better under many circumstances. As always, there is no catch-all answer as to what handgun and loading is the best one for a given individual, everyone must carefully examine his or her circumstances and needs and choose and handgun and loading based on those criteria. I find that a 158grn JHP fits my circumstances and needs the best in a .357 Magnum, but your circumstances and needs may be very different from mine.
 
Is the .357 magnum 125 grain jhp full power load out of a 6" barrel revolver still king of the self defense pistol rounds?

If it is or is not still king, what round comes close to dethroning the king?
Click to expand...

It never was.

It was dethroned by the 9mm+P. The 9mm was later dethroned by the 40S&W.

At least that is the case if we look at the real world of law enforcement.

The only source for the information that the 125 gr. load of the .357 was the best for that caliber and the "best self defense round" is the work of Marshall and Sanow. But they never claimed that the 125 gr. load was the "best" self defense round or the "King", or much anything like that. One of the problems with their work and it's presentation is that many folks believe that this is what they showed or what M&S were trying to show.

There are many problems and errors with M&S's work IMHO. Webley mentioned some. I won't go into that here though because it can get lengthy and there are plenty of discussions of it on this site and others. There statistical figures are pretty much worthless, there is little to no science about much of the rest of it either. But if you take it for what it is, their recommendations, based on anecdotal evidence, aren't a bad place to start if you are looking for a self defense round. But that is all.

Their first book was published in 1992 after the .38 Spl/.357 Mag had given way to the 9mm in the hands of cops and the wondernines and shooters. In that book, they rated the best of the self defense loads for the .357 Mag as the Federal 125 gr. JHP with a 96.05 rating. The next best load was the Remington 125 gr. SJHP with a 93.96 rating. #4 was a 110 gr. load from Federal with a 90.47 rating.

If we overlook the problems with these figures (granted a big overlook but ignore it for now) than we ask ourselves, in the real world, is there any actual difference between the 96% load and the 90% and those in between? The answer has to be...not enough to really worry about.

So in the same book M&S give an 89.2% rating to the Fed. 115 gr. +P+ load of the 9mm. A rating that is better than 17 of the 22 loads for the .357 Magnum that M&S list in this book, including many other 125 gr. loads. In fact most of the 115 and 124 gr. loads for the 9mm are in a dead heat with most loads M&S give for the .357 in the 125, 147 and 158 gr. range.

In the same 1992 book M&S give a best rating of 88.37% to the Fed. 230 gr. Hydra Shok .45acp. In general the .45acp fares worse off than the 9mm or the .357 Mag.

In the 1992 book the .45acp R-P 230 gr. JHP has a 60.72 rating of one shot stops while the Winchester 9mm 115 gr. FMJ is slightly better with 60.81% of one shot stops.

In their last book from 2001 the .45acp fares a bit better beating out many loads for the .357 Mag. So does the 9mm.

So according to the guys who are more or less responsible for the .357 Magnum 125 gr. load being thought of by some as the "King" of self defense loads...it really never was. Instead the 125 gr. in general ran neck and neck with the 9mm and both bested the .45 acp. But by 2001 (9 years ago) they were all about the same more or less. In 2001 they list 2 125 gr. loads for the .357 at 96%. Two loads for the 45acp at 96%, loads for the 40S&W at 94 and 93%, and loads for the 9mm at 91 and 90%. Pretty much about the same.

The same guys figured that being shot by 9mm ball ammo was about the same as being hit by 45acp ball ammo.

I think folks ought to read their books because there is a good deal of useful information in them on bullet performance, wound ballistics, the history of ammo development, etc. But does a difference of a few percentage points in a flawed study make any real world difference? Nope, other factors are more important.

tipoc
 
Another thing comes to mind. The average criminal today in many cases is much larger than 170 lbs average man the data was based on.

If the bohemiths walking today were around then would the .357 magnum still had such a good reputation?
 
OMG , another caliber debate.
Click to expand...

A more in depth analytical application would divulge the true nature of the debate as being more of a discussion of bullet weight within the caliber and is, yet again, the 'ol heavy and slow bullet that expands little and penetrates much vs. the light fast bullet that expands much and penetrates less than some feel is necessary, but works very well on the street.:D
 
Last edited:
Webleymkv's post makes some very good points.

Especially in that Mssrs. Marshall and Sanow initially set out to "discover" if one type of load performed better than all the others. To that extent, I think they did a commendable job in ranking the available loads of the day. I think of their work on more of a 1-10 scale and anything that rates about 9 (90%) or better will do it's job if you do yours (in shot placement).

For those who aren't familiar with the work of M/S, they used actual police shootings as their study material. These were usually well documented and often had morgue autopsy information available as well. They disregarded cases where multiple shots were fired, even if the perp went down on the first shot - simply because it added too many variables. They also omitted cases of peripheral shots outside of the thoracic cavity as non-representative of standard best practices (i.e. COM shooting).

As Weblymkv correctly points out, there can be a huge difference in results between bullet impacts only an inch or two different. And if you've looked at anatomy, you can see that a perfect "X-Ring" COM shot may work when squared off, but if your opponent's body is turned 40° -45° your perfect COM shot can miss key vitals quite easily. And, as pointed out, body mass, fat index, physical conditioning, pharmacutical use and adrenaline can significantly change the outcome. Even sheer pyschological will power can do that in some cases.

re: Super-Dave's comment on the 170-lb man standard. I think that was an artifact of their attempt to qualify the performance on a "fit" man of the time. I know for a fact (6 cases in fact) where local PD officers had to shoot subjects ranging from 230 to 350 pounds and achieved single-shot incapacitation using the 125gr .357 loads.¹

Re: Tipoc's suggestion that the 9mm and then the .40 S&W replaced the .357 as "king". Only if you are suggesting as the most popular tool(s) for law enforcement. Until the late 1990's, the 9mm cartridge did not anchor combatitive subjects anything like the .357 Magnum. That is why the .40 S&W started to replace the 9mm. As yet, I'm not a firm believer in the capability of the .40 S&W round either.

The closing of the gap between calibers I think is a reflection of the advanced development of JHP ammo that reliably expands.
In the 1992 book the .45acp R-P 230 gr. JHP has a 60.72 rating of one shot stops while the Winchester 9mm 115 gr. FMJ is slightly better with 60.81% of one shot stops.
Click to expand...

Even as far back as the late 70's the R-P 230gr JHP was known to have miserable real-world expansion. The WW 115gr JHP expanded well, but the petals invariably folded back along the bullet, making it only about .43 caliber at the end. The R-P 230gr JHP had an enormous exposed lead "flat tip" with a hex shaped HP. These rarely expanded significantly in the real world due to the thick jacket and lack of pre-stressed lead areas. It was the 185gr +P load that actually expanded at velocities >1010 fps.

Does the .357 Magnum cartridge have a good reputation for one-shot stops with a solid torso hit? That's the real question. And the answer is Yes.

Is it dramatically better than the 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, .44 Special or .44 Magnum? That will depend on the particular load of each of the cartridges, of course. In today's market, the top-of-the-line JHP ammo is at least two orders of magnitude better than what was available in the 70's and 80's when M/S were collecting their data. That's the likely reason for seeing the gap between calibers closing up so much.


¹ The caveat of uncontrolled variables applies to these shootings too. In only 2 cases were the perps known to have used drugs, but it's unknown how much was in their systems at the time they became targets.
 
Webly made a very astute analysis of the subject.

It never was.
It was dethroned by the 9mm+P. The 9mm was later dethroned by the 40S&W.
Click to expand...
Hogwash. The .357 was never "dethroned" by the 9mm or the 40...at least not due to a lack of effectiveness. It was replaced due to political pressure or economic considerations (spelled overwhelming "good deals" offered to departments by Glock, etc) and the chicken-s**t decisions of administrators/lawyers who worry about lawsiuts but know little or nothing about the real world.
 
It was replaced due to political pressure or economic considerations...
Click to expand...
If we're talking about popularity for use in LE, I don't believe the .357Mag ever held top spot. Before the wondernine era began, the typical LE sidearm was a .38spl or .357Mag revolver but most often loaded with .38spl or .38spl+P, not .357Mag.

The 9mm became popular for awhile because it was very similar in performance to the most common issue caliber ammunition (.38spl/.38spl+P) but offered a lot more shots in a roughly similar sized firearm.

The most recent information I have seen indicates that .40S&W is the most popular LE cartridge with 9mm in second place.
...spelled overwhelming "good deals" offered to departments by Glock...
Click to expand...
I think it would be very hard to blame Glock for this one since the wondernine era was well underway before Glock was a major player in LE.
 
This reminds me of another age old question...hmmmm it's here somewhere....

There it is:

I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire six shots or only five?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?


I apologize in advance I have a quirky sense of humor :)
 
If I was in fear of my life, I wouldn't stop with just one round. I would want something with adequate power but light enough recoil to get multiple hits in a very short time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top