This year I wanted to try handgun hunting for deer since I mainly go to enjoy the outdoors, not really caring if I put a hole in anything or not. I was going to use a 41 mag, since no one seems to question that it can easily drop a whitetail. But now I got myself interested in what seems to be the underdog in the game of things...the 357.
But the former world's most powerful handgun doesnt seem to be getting much respect these days. Much like the 30-30, which I've never been even the least bit concerned of its ability to drop a deer in wooded ranges, everyone seems to be calling the original magnum "marginal at best" on a tiny little 125lb deer. My question is why?
Now I'm not about to come into this without checking things out a bit first. I've gotten into loading my own over the last few months, so I'm learning a bit about how things really work beyond *squeeze-boom.* A quick look at Remington's site shows the 41 mag 210gr hunting load doing 1300fps and 788lbs muzzle energy. The 357 165gr hunting load is 1290fps and 610lbs at the muzzle. At ranges of 50-75 yds, sometimes less, does that little bit of difference really matter?
To me at least, it all seems like a reason for Bubba the Hunter to justify that 454 that swings over his head from recoil every time he shows off to his hunting buddies. If the 41 mag will take out an elk with relative ease, a 357 loading that's only trailing by a tad I'd think would do equally as well on a little whitey. Am I wrong? I love my 41 to bits, but now all this talk has got me wanting to prove that the world's first magnum still has a place in the world as a perfectly useful cartridge.
BTW...pistols I'd be using would be a 6.?" Smith 686 in 357 or a 7.?" Blackhawk in 41. Somewhere around there.
Randy
But the former world's most powerful handgun doesnt seem to be getting much respect these days. Much like the 30-30, which I've never been even the least bit concerned of its ability to drop a deer in wooded ranges, everyone seems to be calling the original magnum "marginal at best" on a tiny little 125lb deer. My question is why?
Now I'm not about to come into this without checking things out a bit first. I've gotten into loading my own over the last few months, so I'm learning a bit about how things really work beyond *squeeze-boom.* A quick look at Remington's site shows the 41 mag 210gr hunting load doing 1300fps and 788lbs muzzle energy. The 357 165gr hunting load is 1290fps and 610lbs at the muzzle. At ranges of 50-75 yds, sometimes less, does that little bit of difference really matter?
To me at least, it all seems like a reason for Bubba the Hunter to justify that 454 that swings over his head from recoil every time he shows off to his hunting buddies. If the 41 mag will take out an elk with relative ease, a 357 loading that's only trailing by a tad I'd think would do equally as well on a little whitey. Am I wrong? I love my 41 to bits, but now all this talk has got me wanting to prove that the world's first magnum still has a place in the world as a perfectly useful cartridge.
BTW...pistols I'd be using would be a 6.?" Smith 686 in 357 or a 7.?" Blackhawk in 41. Somewhere around there.
Randy