Rounds like the speer gold dot and the corbon DPX are above what any .38 special can do but doesn't reach the .357 magnum's potential, which is the point of the "magnum" ad the end of it anyway. You can get 600 Lbs out of a 4 inch full power 357 magnum revolver, but it won't be practical for most I would imagine. I'm guessing this would be where the mid level rounds would make sense. But do they really have enough of a power advantage over a 38 special +p to be worthwhile? I heard about these rounds from this article: http://hipowersandhandguns.com/can_less_be_more.htm If anyone's interested in where I'm coming from with this question. Thanks.
Are mid level power 357's worthwhile?
- Thread starter circa81
- Start date
Super Sneaky Steve
New member
My carry load is 8.0gr of Power Pistol with a 158gr LSWC. I clocked it at 1108fps out of my 3" sp101 which gives 430ft/lbs.
Recoil is much less than a full power load.
Recoil is much less than a full power load.
Sure, I would think so. As a K-frame owner, I welcome mid-power loads. "Full power" .357s are not needed for most SD circumstances, while the mids still have an advantage over the +Ps in presumably being more effective (or flexible as to circumstances) yet in defensive situations. Also, for some the ability to shoot "just".357 without the change over carbon-ring cleaning of the chambers if shooting (a lot of) .38 for practice then changing to .357, although arguably regular target rounds in .38 would still be cheaper for that function....So, since most (including myself) would continue with .38s for practice, as the article states - the primary advantage would be less recoil and blast primarily for smaller framed revolvers..and not just J's but also K's. limited (for regular use) to heavier grained .357s--or .38s (of any grain). Still, dollars aside, the ability to more easily praactice with the round you actually intend to use for SD and/or carry would seem to be an advantage, especially in small to medium-framed revolvers.
Here's how I see it: a lot of these lower-end 357 loads are about the same raw horsepower as a 9mm+P or +P+ round. Which isn't at all a bad thing.
But then the mild-to-medium 357s bring something else to the table that the 9s don't have: fatter hollowpoint cavity openings, because the revolver-centric rounds don't need to worry about feed ramp reliability.
Add in one more factor: the popularity of lighter-weight 357 guns like the 17oz Ruger LCR357, the 21oz steel-frame S&W snubs and the 26-28oz Ruger SP101s. These mellower 357s can be just the ticket.
Now...my carry gun is currently a 357Mag and is loaded maxed-out, but that's a 41oz+ monster.
But then the mild-to-medium 357s bring something else to the table that the 9s don't have: fatter hollowpoint cavity openings, because the revolver-centric rounds don't need to worry about feed ramp reliability.
Add in one more factor: the popularity of lighter-weight 357 guns like the 17oz Ruger LCR357, the 21oz steel-frame S&W snubs and the 26-28oz Ruger SP101s. These mellower 357s can be just the ticket.
Now...my carry gun is currently a 357Mag and is loaded maxed-out, but that's a 41oz+ monster.
A 158 grain LSWCHP Buffalo Bore .38 Special +P loading is the hottest .38 round I know of and for me to go higher then that I have to go all the way to full power. Thats just me but if I am shooting a Magnum round that isnt loaded to Magnum specs then I am just wasting time. Same thing in shooting a 10mm load that has the same ballistics as a .40S&W. I would rather load the nasty buffalo bore .38's then mid level .357's.
I think it depends more on the gun , and on you, than anything else.
Out of a GP100 with 4" barrel in .357 with normal magnum loads or even bear loads, the recoil is much less than KelTec PF9 or Kahr CW9 in comparison. So, it's not big deal at all to me. Same goes for a S&W 27-2.
I shoot normal .357 mag loads out of two different 2 1/2 barrel j-frame .357's, and its not a big issue to me.
However, I would be hard pressed to shoot any of these out of a .357 ultra-light, feather-light, titanium, etc. The recoil with those guns is wicked. I don't even like the same type of guns in a .38.
Out of a GP100 with 4" barrel in .357 with normal magnum loads or even bear loads, the recoil is much less than KelTec PF9 or Kahr CW9 in comparison. So, it's not big deal at all to me. Same goes for a S&W 27-2.
I shoot normal .357 mag loads out of two different 2 1/2 barrel j-frame .357's, and its not a big issue to me.
However, I would be hard pressed to shoot any of these out of a .357 ultra-light, feather-light, titanium, etc. The recoil with those guns is wicked. I don't even like the same type of guns in a .38.
warningshot
New member
Mild .357 Remington Magnums....
'Aint that called a thirty-ate something? gust guessin.
'Aint that called a thirty-ate something? gust guessin.
Gotta disagree.
There is indeed one very high-powered 38+P round by BuffBore that veers into "mild 357" territory, esp. out of a 4" tube. It's a damn good load. But it's also damned expensive. Some of the major-factory mild 357s are about as good and possibly better, and cost less.
If that wasn't enough, the BuffBore king-of-the-hill 38+P in question is a plain-lead 158. In a light enough gun, *possibly* as light as 17oz (Ruger LCR357), it might yank under recoil. Heavy lead slugs are prone to that problem when the recoil levels get up there.
Cor-Bon's 125gr 357 DPX is less likely to yank from the same gun, and is very likely at least as good a load. More energy than the BuffBore 38+P 158gr, and a higher-tech projectile that won't come unglued at speed (Barnes all-copper). Remmie's Golden Saber 125 in mellow 357 is also a good load, probably about as potent as the BuffBore 38+P and cheaper for the performance on tap.
Speer's 135gr 357Mag load is probably the mellowest "357" available. But it's a nice Gold Dot projectile with a massive gaping hollowpoint that should resist "clothes clogging", and it's the single most accurate load I've shot in my gun to date. Ballistically it'll turn your 2" barrel 357Magnum gun into a 5" or 6" barrel 38Spl shooting Speer's 135gr 38+P variant, which is almost exactly the same slug loaded a couple hundred fps slower - and it still has a superb rep out of 2" barrel snubbie 38s. BuffBore's 158gr 38+P is very likely better, yeah, but not by an overwhelming amount.
And so on.
Now, if you have a 19oz to 21oz 38Spl, or maybe as little as 16oz or so and you're willing to test the hell out of it (load five, fire four, measure the fifth for yanking - and repeat at least twice) and you want a max 38+P load? Tim Sundles at BuffBore has you covered. Absolutely.
But you'll also notice Tim himself has 357Mag loads that are extra-mild!
Jim
I understand your point I am just saying for me. I dont shoot .357 out of snubbies so I do most of all my shooting in .38 Special +p territory. My chosen load is the Speer 135 grain +p Short Barrel. What I am getting at is that to me when I shoot .357 its out of my 4" Smith 66 so when I go to a full size gun I go full power .357. If I go middle ground I just go back all the way down to .38 Special. I dont stock the Buffalo Bore load because of the price and I just see that load as to abusive to an aluminum frame snubbie. Recoil was not terrible but not pleasant either. I look at Magnums as full power loads if not then I will step all the way down to +p .38 Special, I do see your point though.
I understand your point I am just saying for me. I dont shoot .357 out of snubbies so I do most of all my shooting in .38 Special +p territory. My chosen load is the Speer 135 grain +p Short Barrel. What I am getting at is that to me when I shoot .357 its out of my 4" Smith 66 so when I go to a full size gun I go full power .357. If I go middle ground I just go back all the way down to .38 Special. I dont stock the Buffalo Bore load because of the price and I just see that load as to abusive to an aluminum frame snubbie. Recoil was not terrible but not pleasant either. I look at Magnums as full power loads if not then I will step all the way down to +p .38 Special, I do see your point though.
I agree with you. The mid-range .357 loads like Golden Saber are no better than a hot 9mm even out of a long revolver barrel. For those ballistics you may as well go to a 9mm semiauto and gain the benefit of high capacity. If you're going to carry a relatively heavy and bulky .357 revolver it makes sense to load it to its potential.
My feeling is that the first or second shot will determine the outcome of the vast majority of fights, so the revolver's advantage is to make those initial shots as powerful and effective as possible.
How they compare to a 9mm is irrelevant. It is how they compare to other .38 and .357 loads (I assume). But regarding revolvers generally, I always felt like there was quite a difference in the .44 and .45 revolvers and in the .38 and .357 revolvers. Ignoring the fact that there are large frame .38 and .357 revolvers, .44 and .45 caliber revolvers are all large frames. I am speaking only of double-actions here. Furthermore, I thought that a .45 Colt N-frame S&W with a 6-inch barrel had quite a bit of kick, as did a model 624 with a long barrel. Muzzle flip might be a better word.
Shooting 125-grain (factory) .357 loads in a S&W Model 13 was altogether different. There was kick, all right, but if there was the same muzzle flip, you didn't notice it. All I noticed was the blast. I never did much shooting with heavier bullets in .357.
In comparison, a 9mm Luger fired from a 4" K-frame had relatively little recoil and no blast worth mentioning.
Shooting 125-grain (factory) .357 loads in a S&W Model 13 was altogether different. There was kick, all right, but if there was the same muzzle flip, you didn't notice it. All I noticed was the blast. I never did much shooting with heavier bullets in .357.
In comparison, a 9mm Luger fired from a 4" K-frame had relatively little recoil and no blast worth mentioning.
OP said:
We've first got to define "worthwhile". I'm going to assume that we're talking about a self-defense scenario here, but in truth of all the rounds of .357 magnum shot each year, only a tiny percentage of them are used in an SD mode. Many, many more are shot in training, in range practice, in hunting, and in woods-cruising where self-defense is not an issue.
willmc33 said:
I don't consider range time a waste, even if I'm shooting the tiny .22LR. It's about sight alignment and trigger squeeze and building the muscle memory to do it all correctly when the scenario goes south and an adrenaline dump turns my fine motor responses into crap.
The bigger question is how much raw power is absolutely necessary? Is the bullet going to dump its energy into the target or waste all those foot-pounds on the landscape behind? What do we think we might be shooting at? Paper? Brown bears? Humans? That's the beauty of the .357 magnum. I can do it all with the same platform, from mild to wild, and I can load the cylinder with ammo suited for the purpose. Yet, when the chips are down and scenario turns south I've got the same weapons platform in my hand. In that case I probably won't hear the flash or feel the recoil anyway.
If you really want to have fun with the .357 magnum, take up handloading. I've got loads on the shelf that are plainly marked as not being suitable for the K-Frames. I'm convinced that they'll shake apart a mid-frame revolver. I've also got loads on the shelf that are tiny powder-puffs that actually lose fps when fired from a longer barrel.
BlueTrain said:
You're absolutely correct, and we could have this same discussion about the big bores. Personally, I feel that one of the most versatile loads for the big bore is a load first talked about by the late, great Skeeter Skelton. It pushes a big hard-cast bullet at about 950 fps, stronger than the standard .44 special loads, but milder than the full-house .44 magnum load. I've fired a lot of it over the years and feel that it's perfectly adequate for 99% of my big-bore handgunning. I call it Skeeter's Load and it's perfectly adequate unless I feel like I might be in bear country.
Last edited:
CarbineCaleb
New member
Naturally
Unless you think .38+P is pathetic, then of course milder .357 Magnum loads are worthwhile - they're a step between .38+P and full power magnum loads, which otherwise is a big gap. .38+P have trouble providing both expansion and penetration at the same time, but full house .357 loads are a real handful. The tamer .357 loads can be considered the sweet spot
.
All of these current .357 loads are toned down from full house, are intended for defense against bad guys, and most are recent introductions:
Unless you think .38+P is pathetic, then of course milder .357 Magnum loads are worthwhile - they're a step between .38+P and full power magnum loads, which otherwise is a big gap. .38+P have trouble providing both expansion and penetration at the same time, but full house .357 loads are a real handful. The tamer .357 loads can be considered the sweet spot
.All of these current .357 loads are toned down from full house, are intended for defense against bad guys, and most are recent introductions:
- Barnes XPB copper, 140gr @1175fps
- Corbon DPX copper, 125gr @1300fps
- Remington Golden Saber, 125gr @1220fps
- Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel, 135gr @990fps
- Winchester PDX1, 125gr @1325fps
Last edited:
Deaf Smith
New member
And Buffalo Bore makes a .38 LSWCHP load that matches that!
In my Speed Six it chronos out at 1100 fps. The LSWCHP is even gas checked.
Excellent carry load as it's the same as the FBI load but with 150 fps more velocity.
Deaf
Shotgun693
New member
IMO, you ought to carry the hottest load with the best bullet shape that you can control out of your gun. In a handgun even 50 or 100 fps more is better. If someone wants to load a .38 case up to 'Lite' .357 levels that's OK as long as the person shooting that round knows up front that they might be putting a hot load in their .38 gun. I'd rather carry a 'Lite' .357 round in a .357 gun than a really hot .38 round in a .38 gun.
So many seem to forget that for a very long time there has been the 357 110 gr. JHP; loaded in factory form it is rated at 1295 fps. for 410 ft. lbs. This is hardly scorching full energy power. Legend has it that this ammo was developed for snub revolvers.
Another thing that some of you seem to have lost sight of is that full throttle 357 ammo has a tendency to bark a huge fireball out the front and from the cylinder gap. Mid level ammo uses faster powders and in smaller quantities; combine that with good flash retardants and you have ammo that won't blind you nearly as bad at night.
Take a full throttle 357 125gr. load with a big dose of (insert your choice of slow powder here) and light it off at night. You will see a 12"+ diameter flame out of your cylinder gap. Then see how long it takes for your vision to more or less normalize enough where you can reaquire your target. Then do the same with some mid level loads.
Since many SD scenarios play out in poor light you will learn to appreciate mid level low flash loads.
Another thing that some of you seem to have lost sight of is that full throttle 357 ammo has a tendency to bark a huge fireball out the front and from the cylinder gap. Mid level ammo uses faster powders and in smaller quantities; combine that with good flash retardants and you have ammo that won't blind you nearly as bad at night.
Take a full throttle 357 125gr. load with a big dose of (insert your choice of slow powder here) and light it off at night. You will see a 12"+ diameter flame out of your cylinder gap. Then see how long it takes for your vision to more or less normalize enough where you can reaquire your target. Then do the same with some mid level loads.
Since many SD scenarios play out in poor light you will learn to appreciate mid level low flash loads.
I've actually shot quite a few 296 loads at night, sure they'll throw out a big fireball that's about as bright as a camp fire it's just not bright enough to impare your vision.
As to the OP? I'm not sure they are signifigantly better than the old FBI load, but I have a couple guns that don't like the FBI load and remington golden sabers offer a good solution for me.
Last edited:
I'd say the mid range loads are the most useful for personal defense, since they balance power and shot recovery time. They're also the most useful in medium frame revolvers.
I generally prefer the .357 magnum on medium frame guns, which aren't well suited for a .357 magnum at the ragged edge of it's capability. I also see some utility for N-frame .357 magnums with eight shot cylinders as an alternative to a semi-auto for home defense, although, in that role, I'd likely still go for a more controllable mid range load.
Otherwise, If I'm going to carry a 40 plus ounce revolver that only holds six shots or carry in the woods where I might need that kind of performance, then I'd probably pick my .44 magnum instead. Mid range loads in the .44 are just as powerful as the hottest .357 magnum with less flash, heavier projectile, and large caliber.
Generally, if I have a stretch to a caliber to the ragged edge to get the performance I need, then I'll almost always trade up for a mid range load in a more powerful round.
I generally prefer the .357 magnum on medium frame guns, which aren't well suited for a .357 magnum at the ragged edge of it's capability. I also see some utility for N-frame .357 magnums with eight shot cylinders as an alternative to a semi-auto for home defense, although, in that role, I'd likely still go for a more controllable mid range load.
Otherwise, If I'm going to carry a 40 plus ounce revolver that only holds six shots or carry in the woods where I might need that kind of performance, then I'd probably pick my .44 magnum instead. Mid range loads in the .44 are just as powerful as the hottest .357 magnum with less flash, heavier projectile, and large caliber.
Generally, if I have a stretch to a caliber to the ragged edge to get the performance I need, then I'll almost always trade up for a mid range load in a more powerful round.