A caliber comparison question.

I can't think of a single scenario where that makes sense except in the case of more rounds vs less. Unless it's in reference to which makes a better hammer when it runs dry.

I don’t feel this is a specific enough question that a concise answer can be given. As you noted the 357 magnum can be loaded to produce much more kinetic energy upon impact, but a 45 acp pistol typically carries more ammunition. So you could argue it has more firepower.

Enhanced terminal ballistics only matter to me when there is a significant upscale in the durability of the target and that targets potential to harm me. More capacity is more important when addressing multiple targets.

The problem as I see it is the use of the word “power”? Power to do what? Power to knock over a bowling pin? Power to stop a bear? Power to deal with a few gang bangers?

I think the way it’s written, most people would assume “power” equates to energy, and in that case, 357 magnum wins.

But for practical applications, “power” or “muzzle energy” doesn’t actually mean anything, as it’s a mish mashed descriptor that doesn’t address specific wounding potential of specific projectiles at specific speeds.

Sounds like it was provided by a politician of the ilk of "I actually DID vote for the .357..... before I vote against it!"

Clearly the 357 has 312 more powers than the 45.

Well....... Until you compare the .357 to a .450. Now THAT, is a whole other kettle of fishes. Then our old champion has almost a hunert more powers!

Todd.

After reading it a few times I think it is just a wordy way of saying that the .357 is more powerful but that an automatic usually holds more cartridges.

.38 Special said:

After reading it a few times I think it is just a wordy way of saying that the .357 is more powerful but that an automatic usually holds more cartridges.

Click to expand...

That's kind of where I went too with his deliberate use of the word *individual* in one instance and *tool* in another.

From a comparative point of view, the writer himself seems to be a bit of an analytical tool as well.

Todd.

Thank god for 45. (The cartridge and the president)

Kinetic energy is not a good measure of lethality for small arms. It is an outstanding example of how psuedo science sells.

Hatcher created a simple lethality model based on momentum and added a shape factor. Cult 1911 treated it as gospel. Where are the Hatcher Index acolytes?

Blood loss is 100% lethal, and therefore, to me, a better lethality comparison between the rounds would be the size of the through holes they create, as large holes promote rapid blood loss. And if the projectile goes through some major organ, major vascular, and makes a large hole doing so, so much the better.

So, this is probably more informative on this debate:

357 Magnum

45 ACP

.38 Special said:

After reading it a few times I think it is just a wordy way of saying that the .357 is more powerful but that an automatic usually holds more cartridges.

Click to expand...

I agree. The answer in the OP is just worded poorly without well stated qualifiers, and it introduces two concepts into the answer, one of cartridge power and one of rounds on tap.

The simple answer is that the 357 magnum cartridge is more powerful than the 45 acp.

In my scientific research, I have concluded that .45 kills deer deader faster than the. 357(and therefore any other creature). Since both cartridges will pass through, it must be bullet diameter....but all of my findings are based on .45colt not .45acp. However, .45acp was purposfully designed by JMB for stopping power, so there's that.
I believe that the. 45acp is more powerfuller. Having stated that, I recently sold my excellent 1911officer and bought a .357 snub.
There you have it, I hope that clears up any confusion.

What I think it boils down to is that the answer was saying that he’d rather have a .45 pistol rather than a .357 revolver in a gun fight.

I don’t disagree. For me, the most effective .357 round out of a revolver of a size that I could comfortably carry is much less controllable than a similar package in .45 acp.

I love my little SP101, but I’m far more effective with a commander or officer sized 1911.

Caliber doesn't mean cartridge.

38 Special uses .357 caliber bullets, as do many 9mm pistols.

454 Casull uses .45 caliber bullets as does 45 Colt, 45 ACP, 45 GAP.

See the difference?

More scientific research....

Unbelievably, I am first in this thread to post 10mm
Power
10mm > 45 acp
10mm > 357 Mag (limit the revolver to a 4'' barrel which is equal to a 5'' barrel pistol)

What has more power...… is an argument nobody wins and everybody has their own claims to. Too many variables to figure in for a simple answer, this>that. Bullet weight and velocity can be used in the simplest terms, plug them into the KE equation E= 1/2MV^2. Bullet diameter, type (FMJ vs JHP) and wound channel plays into what is more powerful, and shot placement is at least as important as anything else. A.22LR between the eyes will drop someone as fast as a .45 to the chest. Heck, you can kill somebody with a .410 load of bird shot if you put it in the right place from the right distance. The argument about a big bullet at slow speed vs a smaller one hauling ass can be pertinent regarding penetration, but not necessarily lethality.

The OP only alludes to cartridge capacity, which in most case is one cartridge, perhaps two if the, generally speaking, fire arms are revolver and 1911 semi auto, loaded and carried with a round in chamber. However if the revolver is a Single Action carried in safe mode, darn guess we could go on like this............

Note however the 45ACP came into being to address an issue of caliber. Caliber is still a power factor.

Armored farmer said:

More scientific research....View attachment 903277

Click to expand...

So, are you attempting to photographically squash his theories?

Todd.

It all seems clear as mud to me. For whatever it is worth this thread has made me want to go shoot my old Dan Wesson revolver & my 1911. I don't care which is cooler or more lethal. I like them both for different reasons. Also for whatever it is worth. If I were deer hunting or woods walking where I though I might encounter a wild hog I would probably prefer to be carrying the .357. If I were in the city I would probably prefer to carry the 1911. I guess what I am trying to say is I would carry the .357 if I thought I might be in a situation where I thought more penetration might be needed. The honest truth thought is 99% of the time I carry a striker fired .40.

.357 fan since I was a spry whippersnapper.
45 ACP pistols are pretty cool and and useful. But no question 357 Magnum is more powerful.

I heavily invested in .357, then moved towards .45acp, now I'm back on a .357 kick for some reason. I dont know why. I think I am stoopid.

Define powerful? I know it can be measured and there have been multiple ways to measure it with ft lbs of energy being the most commonly used. But none have ever been very good at predicting lethality. Some use momentum, which will predict which cartridge and bullet is best at knocking down steel plates, but that doesn't tell us anything about lethality.

Without moving up to a handheld howitzer like a .44 magnum (or larger), my favorites for kick-arse would be the .357 Magnum in a revolver, and a 10mm for a semiauto. For similar powder loads and bullet style/weight, they're on par with each other.

JohnKSa said:

I'm not aware of any good single-number lethality measure for small arms. It's just way too complex to boil it down to a single number. That's true whether the number is a scientifically significant and verifiable quantity like Kinetic Energy or Momentum, or whether it's a number generated by a formula that someone like Hatcher or Taylor made up.

That said, Kinetic Energy is absolutely not, by any means, "pseudo science". It is a scientifically verifiiable quantity relating to the potential of a moving object to do work. The fact that it isn't a good measure of lethality doesn't mean it isn't scientific, it just means that it doesn't provide a good measure of lethality. One might as well say that because the weight of a firearm doesn't provide a good measure of the firearm's lethality that weight is an outstanding example of how pseudo science sells.

Click to expand...

For a time in the in print community, both momentum and kinetic energy were being used as measures of lethality, but kinetic energy won. Both groups wanted to be able to sit down at their typewriters, pull out a slide rule, and calculate lethality using the Newtonian laws of motion. Humans are always trying to find patterns to predict the future, it is just the way we are. By the way, for over a century economists have been trying to reduce economic predictions to a precise mathematical science, and they have failed. A very good reason economics is called the "dismal science". Everyone would love to have their area so nicely and neatly concise and predictable as the Newtonian laws of motion.

What you read in the popular in print press is dominated by commercial concerns trying to sell new cartridges and new guns. And they mis use mathematics and the Newtonian laws to push product. I contend that kinetic energy as a measure of lethality, won over momentum because it is easier to push a bullet faster than to increase momentum. Kinetic energy is mass times velocity squared, momentum is mass times velocity. Just increase the velocity ten feet per second and the latest and greatest cartridge is a hundred times better than the old!. Whoopee!!

Kinetic energy is real, momentum is real, ions are real, frequencies are real, crystals are real, but the tables of kinetic energy needed to kill a mouse, a deer, an elk, an elephant, that was pretty much psuedo science. And the sales pitches of cartridges, based on kinetic energy, the whole pitch was pretty much pseudo science.

If anyone wants to see how ions, energy, crystals, frequencies, which are all real things. are used in pseudo science advertisements, you need go no further than the products that Gwyneth Paltrow sells on Goop:

Wearable Stickers that Promote Healing

https://goop.com/wellness/mindfulness/wearable-stickers-that-promote-healing-really/



Jade Egg

https://shop.goop.com/shop/products/jade-egg?variant_id=25156&country=USA


ahem...

357 magnum is definitely more powerful cartridge than the 45 cap. However barrel length can alter that. 357 mag in a short barrel will not have the power as a 45 in a full length 1911.