What's the best heavy .357 load for hunting?

I've use a SWC 158gr cast load for a few years on hogs now out of 4" GP100. Most of my shots have been inside of 40yds. For hogs, I prefer cast bullets to get the most penetration I can. I have use 158 XTP's and like them a lot but just prefer the penetration.
 
Guv, a friend of mine is a professional guide for mountain lion hunts and has agreed to take me on a guided hunt because he owes me some money. I asked him what he thought I should shoot and he recommended a bow or maybe a 22 mag. (You tree the lion with dogs and then it's a close shot.) Apparently they are not particularly tough when shot, which surprised me. I asked if I could shoot my lever action 357 and he said it would be fine but better to use an fmj because it will be more than enough and will damage the hide the least. So when I say it's overkill I'm just going with what my friend said. I don't know that independently.
 
I am the founder of Cast Performance Bullet co back when it started in Gardnerville Nevada. I and my partner later moved it to Riverton Wyoming.
As the founder, later ballistician and finally the CEO (Turned it over at the end of 1998) I have a great deal of experience with hunting handguns, what bullets work and how well, personal hunting kills in a fairly large number and I used to read letters and reports and talk to hunters by the literal thousands who had used the bullets we produced as well as a lot of bullets our competitors made too.
In my experience and in the experience of many hundreds of customers who killed big game with 357 Magnum handguns, if I were to recommend for those animals you named I would tell you that for any animal up to about 175 pounds and non-fragmenting soft point is fine and any LBT hard Cast bullet in the LFN or WFN is going to be superb. When you go up to the game animals of 250 pounds and up to elk and kudu size the bullet you want is the LBT 187 grain Wide Flat nose Gas-checked. In shooting these by the thousands in our tests against all other bullet we made and all others of different designs as well as about 15 other jacketed and solid copper bullets, the 187 grain LBT was equal to the very best in a few categories and superior in every other category.
Categories for the tests and the field reports were
#1 Accuracy,
#2 penetration,
#3 cavitation (meaning cubic inches of displacement of tissue. Also called "wound channel")
#4 Accuracy,
#5 trajectory and wind drift, and
#6 pressure and pressure curves.

I have not been involved with Cast Performance now for 17 years. So I have "no dog in the fight" now. That is important to know because when I recommend an LBT design in a cast bullet of 185 to 192 grains I have no "reward" if you do, and I am not hurt in any way if you don't. But I have personally killed several white tail deer, mule deer and antelope with 357 handguns and I have friends who have killed many more. I were to guess that number to be around 60. I have read letters and talked to at least 500 more hunters on the phone that have done it. If you throw in the 44 spl and mag shooters, the 41 mag shooters, the 45 shooters and the 454 Casull shooters that number would go up many many times.
So you can trust me when I say that a proper cast bullet of the LBT style is outstanding. I must say that a well fitted Keith bullet is very good too, and in fact one that fits your gun can come pretty close to the LBT style in the 6 categories, but if I am to recommend one above all others it's going to be the LBT hard cast bullet.
On light game a good hollow point will kill as well but when you judge over all in all 6 categories as an average, the LBT is still the best.
 
Last edited:
Wyosmith,

What's the difference between the 180gr and 187gr WFNGC bullet, performance-wise (other than 7gr of weight)? I see quite a few ammo companies loading 180gr cast bullets, but no one loading the 187gr -- not even Grizzly Cartridge themselves.

Is it the case that the 180gr is almost-but-not-quite as good, or does the 187gr have a special something that makes it a lot better?
 
The 187 was designed to fill the case to the point of allowing maximum powder capacity and the bullet was made to fit in the S&W M-27 revolver and clear the rotation by .015"
No "target weight" was considered at all. It was fitted as "a plug for a hole" to gain the best performance obtainable. A bullet simply designed to fit chamber length and throat length and diameter, and not encroach on the case capacity to a point the weight would cost penetration because after a certain point you cant use more weight without it slowing down too much to out perform a light bullet. It just came out at 187 grains.
In other words, we designed a bullet to as close to a "perfect fit" as possible in the original chamber and cylinder and then weighed it after the bullet was made.

The 180 on the other hand was designed to work in any gun including all the lever action carbines that we could get in the days it was designed (only the Marlin and the Browning M-92 back then) It was the one Federal purchased from us and loaded as their "Cast Core" ammo.

It had to come in at 180 because for the insurance they carried and the endorsement from SAMMI (which the insurance company needed to cover them)
So the 180 was as close as we could get to the 187 without running afoul of SAMMI (at the time). There was nothing at all wrong with the 187 grain and the boys at SAMMI and Federal knew that, but Federal needed something "right now" (that was 1989) and SAMMI would not finish their research and testing for at least one more year, so Federal asked us to make the bullet at 180.
We did so for them and in all honestly it was very close in performance to our 187, but averages 1.5" less penetration and when we machine rested 4 Ruger handguns and 6 S&W handguns, as well as one Colt Python, the average 50 yard groups were about 3/8 to 7/16" larger with the 180s then they were with the 187s .
Now there probably were not 10 men in the world that could have held still enough to tell any difference, but from a strictly technical standpoint I had to rate the 180 as about 97% of the 187 in total performance. Splitting very find hairs there, but the results were consistent.

As far as I know you are correct. No one loads the 187 in Factory Ammo. It's only a handloaders bullet.
 
Thanks, Wyosmith. Great info. I'll keep it in mind for when I finally start rolling my own. For now, I'll concentrate on the 180gr. WFNGC factory loads.
 
kcub
What type of weapon? That makes a world of difference. Some revolvers can handle loads that others can't.
For example, I own a Taurus M607. The cylinder is long enough for me to use a 1.725" COAL and load data for the .360 Dan Wesson. My Dan Wesson M15-2, on the other hand, is limited to SAAMI length ammo. Another example. The Ruger .357 Blackhawk cylinder and the .357 Maximum Blackhawk cylinder differ only in length. SAAMI calls for a 35 kpsi limit for the Magnum while the Maximum has a 40 kpsi limit. (I think you get my point there.) I don't think I'd use a 40 kpsi load in a K-frame S&W though. At least not very often.
Like I said, world of difference depending on the revolver. As far as the .357 Magnum itself, it's quite capable of taking down almost anything at the proper distance and with the proper loads providing the shooter has the skill.
 
Last edited:
357 vs pigs

I am of the opnion that a heavier bullet is in order.I choose either a 180 gr Remington JHP or a Lyman 358429 170 gr SWC.Either can be driven over 1200 fps from a 4in barrel and can reach the vitals from most any angle.Just my .02.
 
The LBT term is new to me, so I did some homework. If others need to know too, I found it described as having the large flat nose and much of its mass forward of the case. I found a picture of the 187 grain bullet on Midway. See "187 grain Wide Flat nose Gas-checked". LBT is an acronym for Lead Bullet Technology, a company name.
 
I'm not sure what "you use" and what "you carry" answers the question. I'm pretty sure a sample size of 1 is also pretty much useless. Statistically, none of that tells you anything. I've actually shot and killed over fifty white tail deer with the .357mag and I'll tell you what worked for me. The minimum bullet weight should be 158g and I wouldn't go over 180g. Not saying you can't kill a deer with a heavier or lighter bullet, even a .22lr can kill a deer. It's about what the bullet does on a deer in the case of a less than perfect shot. The 158g Hornady XTP HP will open very well at ranges up to sixty yards or so even on a simple pass through from broadside behind the shoulder to the other side hitting no bone at all. At further distances, it really starts to lose its ability to expand. I've posted pics on here before showing that. The 180g bullets get a bit better penetration and some expansion at longer distances, out to around 90 yards.....again, pics were posted. The heavier bullet penetrates better and will make a complete pass through more often. The lighter bullet will expand much better but usually doesn't pass through at all. I've used 158g XTP SP bullets and they will often pass through broadside at fifty yards and under. All my bullets are fired with full charges of 296/110 simply because I get the best velocity and best accuracy with that powder on both bullet weights. I've shot deer with other bullets and other weights over the last forty+ years and have gotten the deer. As stated earlier, it's all about angles, distance, and penetration......a lot like bow hunting with a bit of extension on the range.
 
I'm pretty sure a sample size of 1 is also pretty much useless. Statistically, none of that tells you anything. I've actually shot and killed over fifty white tail deer with the .357mag and I'll tell you what worked for me. The minimum bullet weight should be 158g and I wouldn't go over 180g.
Click to expand...
How many deer have you shot with under your recommended 158 grain bullets and recovered, examined to determine that they were not heavy enough? How big was your sample size?
 
How many deer have you shot with under your recommended 158 grain bullets and recovered, examined to determine that they were not heavy enough? How big was your sample size?
Click to expand...

I have dozens of bullets I've recovered in that weight. As I said, they usually don't pass through at that weight. I've never found that they weren't heavy enough, just that the 180s penetrated better at longer distances. How many have you shot with your .357mag and what were your results?
 
6" Colt Python

I killed an 8 point mule deer with it long ago. Shot in the neck with factory 125 grain ammo. I don't recall whether it was JSP or JHP. He was ± 30 yards away broadside. I probably could have taken a lung shot but I wasn't sure so I treated it like my first deer taken when I was 7 with a 222. The neck shot tends to be either a clean kill or a clean miss which was just what I wanted. It was the former, he dropped where he stood. I gave him a second up close just in case he was dazed but not dead.

Wyosmith, truly awesome post. Is the 187 better than the 200 as in less likely to tumble, more likely to drill a straight hole where you put it?

Is there any factory LBT ammo from any source (357 and others)?

How does this perform in lever rifles?

Thanks!
 
I would use such ammo sparingly in a Python. Back in the day, Colt suggested not using a steady diet of full-power Magnum ammo due to revolvers going out of time. Today, there aren't very many Python qualified gunsmiths out there; repairing one could be time consuming and expensive.
If you are set on using the old gal, I'd consider the Barnes 140gr XPB factory load. The rapid twist rate should yield excellent accuracy with the long, solid copper bullet and videos show the load delivers 20+" inches of penetration in ballistic gel even with barrels as short as 2".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top