Something a .357 can do that a .45 Colt cannot ...
This is the exact opposite of what the OP asked.
Not helpful.
Something a .357 can do that a .45 Colt cannot ...
I don't think anyone is trying to make the argument that .357 is better than .44 Mag and .45 Colt equivalent pressure loads in performance. It's a question of what they do that .357's not doing and it would all basically come down to hunting game of a certain size and the distances involved.Since Elmer was brought up, quoting from his Sixguns book:
"The .44s and .45s will do anything the [.357] magnum will and will do it better, with their 250 grain bullet loads at 1000 to 1200 feet per second velocity. The 250 grain slugs will cut a larger hole and will allow more haemorrhage... We prefer the .44 Special and the .45 Colt to the .357"
At the time of that writing the .44 Magnum wasn't in the cards yet.
..but you will get undersized cylinder throats and a barrel constriction in every single Ruger .45 colt blackhawk..
The .45 is more pleasant to shoot without hearing protection.
The ft-lbs of kinetic energy calculation is a standard engineering formula, and as such just calculates the kinetic energy of the projectile. Nothing, absolutely nothing, tells you how effective it will be in killing an animal, 2-legged or 4-legged. There have been various formulas proposed over the years that tried to account for bullet weight and frontal area (Taylor Knock-Out or TKO comes readily to mind), but the industry had to decide on ONE measure of a cartridge's effectiveness and they chose kinetic energy. That doesn't mean that a 223 kills as well as a 44 mag because it has similar kinetic energy, it's just something standardized that folks within the firearms industry agreed to use. But ultimately it comes down to how well the bullet kills, and while empirical evidence may not be repeatable and formulaic it does tell what works. So, typically, bigger bullets kill better.I am under the impression that the calculations used to come up with foot-pounds was discredited years ago as being biased in favor of velocity while discounting bullet weight.
The ft-lbs of kinetic energy calculation is a standard engineering formula, and as such just calculates the kinetic energy of the projectile. Nothing, absolutely nothing, tells you how effective it will be in killing an animal, 2-legged or 4-legged. There have been various formulas proposed over the years that tried to account for bullet weight and frontal area (Taylor Knock-Out or TKO comes readily to mind), but the industry had to decide on ONE measure of a cartridge's effectiveness and they chose kinetic energy. That doesn't mean that a 223 kills as well as a 44 mag because it has similar kinetic energy, it's just something standardized that folks within the firearms industry agreed to use. But ultimately it comes down to how well the bullet kills, and while empirical evidence may not be repeatable and formulaic it does tell what works. So, typically, bigger bullets kill better.
As you can see by the attached chart the SD between the two is so close as to be a moot point. Bullet construction varies by manufacturer and intended purpose so is really a moot point as well.Small light fast bullets that still have a .357 diameter are not going to have the tough construction and sectional density of the 45 Colt. Thus, 45 tends to perform better on soft targets.
However, if you were to shoot steel plates with 357 mag and 45 Colt, each having the same kinetic energy, the knock down effect on the plates would be identical.
Not sure with the not and not here, what you really meant to say ... But, In any revolver you can go as slow as you want. Of course, there will come a point where the bullet sticks in the barrel... That's too slow . Shoot, when firelapping we want the bullet to just 'clear the barrel' slow. Light load of trailboss works fine for this application.I am not sure 357 Magnum cannot go as slow as 700 FPS.