WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
Okay, so what do you guys think about the .357 for deer?
Does the deer have a knife, and is it after my wallet?
Okay, so what do you guys think about the .357 for deer?
Okay, so what do you guys think about the .357 for deer?
Okay, so what do you guys think about the .357 for deer?
That absolute right bullet needs to be used and placement is critical as there is no margin for error. Better for 120-lb southern does than 300+ northeastern bucks.
I'd personally argue that using a big bore handgun for small game is equally as irresponsible as using a small/medium bore handgun for large game.
How so? I wasn't aware that there were degrees of dead...
How will a small animal suffer when a large-bore revolver is used on it? It might not be pretty, but...
There's not a whole lot of animals I'd advocate killing just to chuck in a dumpster...
And to the other side of the equation there is the hunters safety and any unnecessary suffering that the animal might have to endure
Okay, so what do you guys think about the .357 for deer?
Here we get into extreme and exaggerated examples. It proves nothing but the inexperience of the person making the statement.Okay so a few more points in this fun topic
1. This forum seems fairly biased towards overkill in an overkill vs underkill (new word) debate. Whereas both of these have potential pros and cons.
IE: "I'd rather shoot a squirrel with a 500 magnum than a whitetail with a 357 magnum"
2. Point one seems to define many people's definition of the range of application for a firearm.
3. Even if you reload the 357 magnum has an absurdly more diverse component selection than any big bore handgun.
4. Versatility is entirely subjective.
I'd personally argue that using a big bore handgun for small game is equally as irresponsible as using a small/medium bore handgun for large game.
5. Everyone is basing their arguments on what the respective cartridges can do vs what they should do. If we limited the cartridges to a more average use case they're honestly about the same.
Thing to be killed:
Small---------------Medium---------------Large--
22LR. 327 Mag 357 Mag. 41 Mag 44 Mag
-----Why am I shooting this again?
460 Mag 500 Mag
Hopefully that chart turns out like I was trying for.
And while the .44 mag is better........it aint nothing magical.
Handguns are fun.
But with my change in hunting spots............its a rifle game anymore.
Just can't mess around.
YA see there was this guy named elmer and a long long time ago he did a bunch of testing with the 44spl on all sorts of critters. Well anyway to make a long story short he ended up making a bullet design that's still popular to this day and his load was +/-1200fps with the bullet he designed, namely the 429421.Here we get into extreme and exaggerated examples. It proves nothing but the inexperience of the person making the statement.
My thoughts exactly when I read this post of yours.
FACT: A .44Spl launching a 250gr cast bullet at 900fps will kill any deer that walks deader than fried chicken. It does this without expansion, from any angle and without eardrum shattering blast. I am fairly certain that this does not constitute "overkill". In fact, it will result in less bloodshot meat than a rapidly expanding, high velocity .357 load.
YA see there was this guy named elmer and a long long time ago he did a bunch of testing with the 44spl on all sorts of critters. Well anyway to make a long story short he ended up making a bullet design that's still popular to this day and his load was +/-1200fps with the bullet he designed, namely the 429421.
I'm going to have to go with elmer on this 1.
There is some controversy about this topic. Purportedly, Phil Sharpe actually designed that bullet. It started out as a 173 grain .35 caliber semi-wadcutter on a Lyman mold. He didn't put his name on the bullet when he submitted it to Lyman. Phil Sharpe was a genius, with great grasp on ballistics and bullet design. It was Lyman that attached Keith's name to the 429421 which was Sharpe's design. If you can locate an early Lyman catalog, the 429421 was not listed as the Keith bullet until sometime later (after it's inception). Not taking anything away from Elmer Keith it's just that I believe much is attributed to him that he had nothing or little to do with.
Also, Keith was not a handgun hunter and he viewed hunting with a revolver as a weapon of opportunity.