.357 Magnum vs. .45 ACP

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

alberich

New member
I'd like to hear what people think about this - namely the very experienced people who used a handgun on duty.
Is it .357 magnum and the typical firearm, 4" revolver, or semiauto in .45 ACP?

Note - i know it's about hit placement. Let's assume that the shooter can hit a COM of an assailant.

Since I'd prefer to focus on self defense situations, let's disscuss also if the capacity is a real issue.

Also, is a snubnose in .357 magnum really nonsense?
 
Well, I'm not a very experienced person who uses a handgun on duty. I do carry a DAO .45 occasionally. From a self-defense perspective, I see little difference between .357 fired from a snub-nose revolver and .45 fired from a small semi-auto. The reason is because we're talking shots fired probably no more than 8 feet away. Both cartridges are going to be quite powerful at that distance or less, and capable of dropping a large man with one or two decent shots.

Six round capacity will generally be more than sufficient to get the job done. If I lived somewhere where there was significant gang activity, I might opt for a higher capacity gun. As between a .357 and .45, the main thing I'd be concerned with would be reliability and ease of carry. Either cartridge is going to make somene very unhappy if they get shot with it.

FWIW, when a cop carries a gun, the gun is not only for self-defense - by the nature of the job, being a police officer involves offensive tactics. They might be shooting at much longer distances and using it in pursuit of a BG. Plus, open carry is not an issue. So, comparing what tools we need to protect ourselves to the tools a cop needs to do his job is like comparing apples to oranges.
 
Last edited:
The ballistics of the .357 and the 10mm are too close to declare one clearly supperior to the other. Each can be loaded hot, but neither usually come that way from the factory. The biggest difference is that the 10mm is usually fired from a closed breach - so more power is can be transfered. On the other hand, the .357 can be loaded pretty hot and a well made revolver can handle it.

It's like saying that the ballistics of the 9mm are way better than the .38 +P. If you like autos, you'll go with the 9mm. If you like revolvers, you'll go 38+P. Same as between .357 and 10mm.
 
This is a easy debate i have 2 ruger sp101s in .357 and a m&p compact .45. So the easy answer is........ BOTH! Women can have more than one pair of shoes and carry a purse. So when im on the bike i have on in the lugage and one on me.
 
alberich,

You cannot separate the cartridge from the platform.

That is the .357 Magnum is fired from DA six shot revolver and the .45 ACP from the eight shot SA 1911 simi-automatic (yes I know there are crossovers but these are what alberich is talking about.)

Both the .357 magnum, in 125gr JHP persuasion, and the .45 ACP in 230gr JHP format are very good stoppers. Either one is fine. The problem is the platform.

The DA revolver, using full powered .357 ammunition, is harder to control than a 1911 .45 ACP for fast second shots. The DA pull of the revolver is harder to generate good hits than the SA trigger of a 1911. The grip of the 1911 is also more ergonomic than the revolver. All this leads to a better chance of good hits. And it’s those good hits that count. Not only the first hit be every hit you make.

Yes I know here are some outstanding DA revolver combat shots (I said combat, not IPSC/IDPA) who will make fast repeated hits with a good .357 Magnum revolver. But it’s easier to do that with a 1911, hence .45 ACP, than the DA revolver in .357.

And that is why, if given just the two, a 4 inch L frame 686 .357 or a 1911 .45, I'd take the .45.
 
I carried a 1911A1 in SE asia. Its the perfect gun for crawling down little slimmy holes or rice paddies. Don't seem like nothing could keep it from working. HardBall WORKS. If for some reason they would take this old grunt back in the infantry, and would allow me to pick my pistol, it would be an old rattley 1911A1.

Fast forward a few years. I carried a Model 28 Smith as a cop in Anchorage. We had a unique taske of putting down moose after Vehcile Moose incounters. Plus chase moose out of peoples yards or school bus stops. I've killed several with the Model 28 using 150 or 158 grn SWC cast lead bullets. I liked the better penitration of the 357 for such task. If I was to go back into LE I'd want my Model 28.

So to answer your question: BOTH

1911A1 for soldiering
Mode 28 357 for Police Work.
 
I carried both a 6-inch and a 4-inch .357 duty gun in the mid-70's. During that time it became well known that the Remington 125-grain SJHP (semi-jacketed hollow point) was one of the best performers at stopping someone. Several methods of testing & evaluation rated it "excellent".

Shortly thereafter (late 70's/early 80's) agencies started shifting to semi-autos. One agency permitted officers to use either 9mm or .45 ACP. The .45 was favored about 2:1 initially. At this time, 9mm JHP ammo did not perform as well as today's JHP ammo. Some spectacular failures-to-stop occurred (one in which a perp was hit 13 times by three officers with 3 different brands & types of ammo - and survived to walk into court a year later. Four of the hits were "COM"). The selection of the .45 jumped to almost a 3.8:1 favorite.

The downside of the .45 auto is that it can often fail to penetrate barriers as well as the more potent .357 Magnum. In terms of its ability to cause a perpetrator to go down, the .45 ACP has a very good (but not quite excellent) record.

Since that time, however, the design, construction and execution in the making of JHP ammo has improved at least an order of magnitude. In the 70's, reliable expansion was if a round expanded more than 68% of the time. Many popular .38 and .357 rounds failed to expand more than 10% (didn't reach .40 caliber) and most deformed instead of expanding. Things were dismal in the .45 ACP realm too. JHP's expanded only about 45% of the time and usually failed to exceed a 10% expansion.

Today's ammo is much more reliable at even lower speeds than ever before. Using modern .357 or .45 ammo is a quantum leap over what was available 30 years ago (yet, lots of thugs ended up on morgue slabs regardless of the bullet design).

My preference for personal defense in popular calibers is the .45 ACP first. While it may not expand, it will certainly always make a .45 caliber hole. The .357 Magnum makes a very good alternate choice if one can shoot it well despite the intense noise, concussion wave, muzzle flash and heavy recoil.

In standard configurations, the .45 Auto holds 1-2 rounds more than the .357 six-gun. Not a serious advantage, but some. Plus the .45 is typically faster to reload. Balancing power, shootability, reloading, reliability, etc. there is no "clear winner" between the two. I know at least one pistolero who is a very good shot with his .45 Auto, but he his scary-accurate with a .357 Magnum at 75 yards.

The 2.5" snubby .357 does give up some velocity and energy. But on the whole, it is still a step up of from .38 Special. The rule of thumb seems to be that the .357 loses about 25% of its rated 4-inch barrel velocity when fired fom a 2-inch barrel. There's no reason to discount the typical 2.5" snubby or even the 5-shot S&W J-frame as "inadequate".
 
run a simple test....

Just run through a simple test. Take a 357 Magnum and then a 1911 or whatever 45ACP semi. Set up 2-3 targets and shoot it - same scenario. Now score them (time versus accuracy). A timer would be great and a simple bullseye target. For every hit not in the X factor in a time penalty.

Shoot it and score it.

You'll find out which is better for "duty" in regards to accuracy, ease of getting back on target and overall speed.
 
Another vote for both. Those are my two favorite calibers. And S&W revolvers and the 1911 are my two favorite platforms. Coincidence? I don't think so. :-)
 
The ballistics of the .357 and the 10mm are too close to declare one clearly supperior to the other
Click to expand...

Double Tap sells 180 grain 10mm ammo that is has 728 ft/lbs of energy. The 10mm (.40 cal) is also, obviously, larger in diameter.

Double Tap sells 180 grain .357 mag ammo that has 676 ft/lbs of energy.

Thats 10.75% larger diameter
Thats 7.14% more powerful


That means a bigger hole and more power. Sorry to split hairs but the 10mm is clearly supperior.
Not to mention capacity.

Now on with the .45 vs. .357 fuss.
 
.357 and .45 and honestly my two favorite calibers for pistols.

My dad uses a S&W .357 for home defense.

I use a Kimber .45.

Each will shoot a bad guy just as dead as the other. Its up to you man. A shot in the head with either will kill instantly. A shot in the leg with either won't be very effective. Its merely personal preference.
 
.357 revolver vs. 1911?? either or...

i will never own a 10mm, its a hot .40, so what, the grips on 10mm handguns are like grabbing 2x4's...not practical for everyday carry...
 
Double Tap sells 180 grain 10mm ammo that is has 728 ft/lbs of energy. The 10mm (.40 cal) is also, obviously, larger in diameter.

Double Tap sells 180 grain .357 mag ammo that has 676 ft/lbs of energy.

Thats 10.75% larger diameter
Thats 7.14% more powerful


That means a bigger hole and more power. Sorry to split hairs but the 10mm is clearly supperior.
Not to mention capacity.

Now on with the .45 vs. .357 fuss.
Click to expand...

10 mm is superior at that bullet weight. However, when you get into more common bullet weights, i.e. 150 gr range, 10 mm is a little behind. If you reload, you will note that 10mm is typically about 100 fps slower with a 150 gr bullet than a 357 mag with a 158 gr bullet.

It's a push. They're both bad ass rounds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top