You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
why not heavy grains for SD ammo or for whatever?
- Thread starter therealdeal
- Start date
My SW Model 65 is a fixed sight revolver that shoots dead on using 158 gr. hollow points so that is what I load in my night stand gun.
My 4 inch Python that I occasionally carry was sighted dead on for 125 gr. loads when I purchased it so that is what I load in it.
That's how much difference I think there is between a good 158 gr and a good 125 gr load there is in .357 magnum. It makes for good forum discussion but, IMHO, there is little practical difference.
My 4 inch Python that I occasionally carry was sighted dead on for 125 gr. loads when I purchased it so that is what I load in it.
That's how much difference I think there is between a good 158 gr and a good 125 gr load there is in .357 magnum. It makes for good forum discussion but, IMHO, there is little practical difference.
The 125 gr. JHP .357 magnum is an excellent self-defense round. Nobody says it isn't. However, let's look at real, verifiable data and not some fake "data" pushed to sell a book:Ignore anecdotal evidence.
Ignore LE departments that have since switched back to the .355" 125g JHP.
Ignore SIG and Federal's attempt to duplicate the 1200fps+ .357" 125g JHP.
Carry ammo that makes you feel good. That matters most.
A LOT depends on the bullet and load. Let's take at some fired into calibrated ballistic gel:
Federal, 158 gr. JHP, 1200 fps, 16.5" penetration and .50" (bare gel), 15.9" penetration and .64" expansion (clothed gel) from a 4 inch M19.
Rem. Golden Sabers, 125 gr JHP, 1200 fps, 14.4" penetration and .56" expansion (bare gel) and 20.55" penetration and .48" expansion (clothed gel) from 4 inch M19.
source: http://firearmstactical.com/ammo_data/357magnum.htm
As far as agencies going to .357 Sig to mimic the 125 gr. .357 magnum, there are a LOT more agencies using the .40 SW in the 155 to 165 gr. weights that are close to the 158 gr. .357 magnums in both velocity and energy. So what does that do for your theory?
In my post, I said I chose between two loads, depending upon the one that was most accurate for a particular revolver. Are you saying it's better to go with a pistol that shoots inaccurately just to get a few extra feet of velocity?
Straightshooter629
New member
Here's another old fart who prefers the 158. To me, it's the difference between being hit with a sledge hammer as opposed to a ball peen hammer...I'll take the sledge every time.
I am not offering theory
I am certain one can convince oneself of anything.
Like I am convinced the proper and best people-shooting choice in 357 Magnum is a 125g JHP launched in excess of 1220fps.
Or either the 135g or 155g .400" JHP at 1200fps minimum.
Or the 230g JHP of proper construction going 730fps.
Or even a 115g .355" JHP at over 1320fps, or a same-diameter 124--127g JHP at 1270fps.
Or more.
LE/military applications may require something a bit different, but still close to what I'm convinced of.
ps those "book-writing liars" were officers doing their best to save their brothers
I am certain one can convince oneself of anything.
Like I am convinced the proper and best people-shooting choice in 357 Magnum is a 125g JHP launched in excess of 1220fps.
Or either the 135g or 155g .400" JHP at 1200fps minimum.
Or the 230g JHP of proper construction going 730fps.
Or even a 115g .355" JHP at over 1320fps, or a same-diameter 124--127g JHP at 1270fps.
Or more.
LE/military applications may require something a bit different, but still close to what I'm convinced of.
ps those "book-writing liars" were officers doing their best to save their brothers
therealdeal
New member
your service will always be appreciated. thanx for the advice too- I am learning but still have a long way to go on the ammo, weshoot(as far as progressing). I grew up in new england and my college yrs were in NH(plus many camping trips). I used to visit my buddy in fairlee,VT
WESHOOT2
With the sole exception of the .45acp load you cited, all the loads you prefer are fairly high velocity.
I don't think anybody will argue for low velocity rounds, for most purposes. (Although for hunting, heavier, slower rounds tend to do the job while wrecking less meat.)
But if a 125gr at 1220fps will do the job, then a 158gr at 1220fps should definitely do the job, and should penetrate deeper. Assuming similar velocities and comparable metallurgy, expansion should also be similar.
More penetration may or may not be desirable.
But the snark wasn't necessary, nor helpful.
With the sole exception of the .45acp load you cited, all the loads you prefer are fairly high velocity.
I don't think anybody will argue for low velocity rounds, for most purposes. (Although for hunting, heavier, slower rounds tend to do the job while wrecking less meat.)
But if a 125gr at 1220fps will do the job, then a 158gr at 1220fps should definitely do the job, and should penetrate deeper. Assuming similar velocities and comparable metallurgy, expansion should also be similar.
More penetration may or may not be desirable.
But the snark wasn't necessary, nor helpful.
therealdeal
New member
mleake, I am still trying to figure out and referring to part of your post about hunting/meat- does the 125gr or the 158gr (of the ones you mentioned during your last, most recent post) do more damage to the big bad guy that gets shot during home invasion(or small guy for that matter)?
therealdeal
Two separate issues, sorry for the confusion.
125gr vs 158gr at similar velocities was the first issue; we were talking hot loaded 158, not mellow loads. Given similar velocities, the heavier bullet should expand as well as the lighter, and penetrate further (which may be good, if penetrating an arm or barrier, or bad, if penetrating a BG and traveling through the neighborhood).
The hunting comment had more to do with rifle velocities, and was kind of a sidebar. A .45-70 will make a big permanent wound channel, but tends to create less bloodshot meat around the wound channel than does a .270 or .30-06 (smaller bullet traveling around 1000fps faster).
At handgun velocities, most ballistics experts don't seem to anticipate similar hydrostatic effects.
Two separate issues, sorry for the confusion.
125gr vs 158gr at similar velocities was the first issue; we were talking hot loaded 158, not mellow loads. Given similar velocities, the heavier bullet should expand as well as the lighter, and penetrate further (which may be good, if penetrating an arm or barrier, or bad, if penetrating a BG and traveling through the neighborhood).
The hunting comment had more to do with rifle velocities, and was kind of a sidebar. A .45-70 will make a big permanent wound channel, but tends to create less bloodshot meat around the wound channel than does a .270 or .30-06 (smaller bullet traveling around 1000fps faster).
At handgun velocities, most ballistics experts don't seem to anticipate similar hydrostatic effects.
too late; exit stage left
The heavier bullet's sectional density (and normally heavier construction optimized for hunting, as their manufacturer intended) will potentially slow expansion, permitting further penetration before meaningful expansion occurs.
Yes, even Remington's S-JHP line.
See, you included the word "should", and "assuming".
The heavier bullet's sectional density (and normally heavier construction optimized for hunting, as their manufacturer intended) will potentially slow expansion, permitting further penetration before meaningful expansion occurs.
Yes, even Remington's S-JHP line.
See, you included the word "should", and "assuming".
JHP for hunting?
I usually see JSP type rounds loaded for that; guess I just tend to assume most JHP loads are designed for SD.
Also, studies most folks cite in praise of the 125gr .357 came from data collected 20 years ago. Has there been a similar study done, comparing a broad section of modern bullets?
(Assuming you are referring to Marshall and Sanow, published in 1992, but compiled in the 80's.)
Comparing 125gr JHP at .357 velocities vs 158gr using 80's bullets would come out staggeringly in favor of the lighter, faster bullet expanding better. Given that with today's bullets, a .45acp traveling at 900fps can open to over .80 inch, results probably wouldn't favor the 125gr nearly so much.
Unless you're using data that shows the heavier bullet doesn't expand as it punches deeper... using modern bullets... in which case a cite or a link would be good.
Meantime, just because we don't agree with you, doesn't mean we're choosing loads based on happy feelings and group sings of kumbaya.
FWIW, I load my .357 based on where I'm going and what I'm doing. If around town or the house, 125gr JHP. If in and around the suburban woods, 158JHP. If deeper in, where bear or boar are likely, 180gr HC Buffalo Bore.
I don't believe in a one-size-fits-all, and I take Marshall and Sanow with a grain of salt.
I usually see JSP type rounds loaded for that; guess I just tend to assume most JHP loads are designed for SD.
Also, studies most folks cite in praise of the 125gr .357 came from data collected 20 years ago. Has there been a similar study done, comparing a broad section of modern bullets?
(Assuming you are referring to Marshall and Sanow, published in 1992, but compiled in the 80's.)
Comparing 125gr JHP at .357 velocities vs 158gr using 80's bullets would come out staggeringly in favor of the lighter, faster bullet expanding better. Given that with today's bullets, a .45acp traveling at 900fps can open to over .80 inch, results probably wouldn't favor the 125gr nearly so much.
Unless you're using data that shows the heavier bullet doesn't expand as it punches deeper... using modern bullets... in which case a cite or a link would be good.
Meantime, just because we don't agree with you, doesn't mean we're choosing loads based on happy feelings and group sings of kumbaya.
FWIW, I load my .357 based on where I'm going and what I'm doing. If around town or the house, 125gr JHP. If in and around the suburban woods, 158JHP. If deeper in, where bear or boar are likely, 180gr HC Buffalo Bore.
I don't believe in a one-size-fits-all, and I take Marshall and Sanow with a grain of salt.