A Complicated Want to Buy Revolver Question

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why is the .44 meaningfully better? What does it do better on deer than .357? How does it do it?
 
Why is the .44 meaningfully better? What does it do better on deer than .357? How does it do it?

Larger diameter, more velocity, bigger holes, bigger terminal effect by creating a significantly larger wound channel. While the .357 is fine for whitetail, the .44 Magnum is finer. It offers more of everything. The .357 offers little by way of margin for error.

Also, stepping up to bigger and faster calibers produces more effect even on smallish whitetail. The .454 using a good expanding bullet is a considerable step up over the .44. It's just another step up.
 
Last edited:
How much do .429" bullets expand? A .357" bullet like a Barnes 140 gr. XPB will normally expand to .7". It opens a little wider but folds back. Even if .429"'s expanded to 1", that's only three-tenths of an inch more, or 0.15" wider on each side. How does that result in a significantly larger wound channel?

There isn't always a difference in velocity between 357 and 44 Magnum. Even with a lightweight 200 grain bullet, Hornady publishes 1500fps for 44 Magnum. Certainly, the 44 achieves a velocity like that with a heavier bullet, but I don't believe we need 200 grains or more bullet weight to penetrate a little deer or even a 250 pound deer. Supposing the 44 Magnum did offer 200 fps more velocity than 357. Is that enough to make any difference?

The following are not my personal assertions. I do not personally know enough. According to some terminal ballistics experts, any additional velocity of 44 Magnum is not enough to make a difference, not on this size target where the temporary stretch cavity would still be only a small portion of the whole animal. Accordingly, we would need to have impact velocities more like 600 to 1000 fps faster than 357 before we saw a significant difference.

Could the blast, the noise, and the recoil of the bigger magnum cause people to perceive a greater effect? If we observe the effect in the animal's reaction, it's highly dependent on where the bullet impacts and the individual animal. Could it be that a person might see a deer hit with a 357 that by chance misses the vitals that would have the greatest effect and the deer happens to have a greater constitution? Subsequently, they switch to a bigger magnum and on the next deer the shot is better or the deer's constitution is weaker and they become convinced the cartridge, its different noise, and heavier recoil made the difference. They relate their anecdote to others and more people become convinced that 44 has a greater terminal effect? By what different, more objective means can all the people in this thread be convinced that 44 is "better?"

I don't simply wish to 'defend' 357 as my 'pet cartridge'. I would willingly substitute a similar cartridge like 10mm for the sake of argument or better yet, 350 Legend versus 450 Bushmaster. At 100 yards, the impact velocity of either is somewhere around 1830 to 1890 fps -- neither impact with enough velocity to make a large enough temporary cavity in a deer-size animal to cause massive wounding. Both will easily penetrate to vitals. Will the 450 simply recoil more with no other meaningful increase in effect?
 
I appreciate the sentiment, but I wouldn't consider myself an expert, but I am an enthusiast who has jumped in with both feet to find out what really works and what is nonsense (like much conventional wisdom).

Deer are particularly susceptible to high velocity and violent expansion (cats are as well). The larger projectile following this "formula" will simply do more damage than the smaller projectile following the same formula. I had full expansion on smallish does with my .500 S&W slinging 400 grain expanding pills. And bigger is definitely better. Necessary? Nope. Effective? Hell yes.
 
I do reckon. That's what makes the conversation worthwhile. I think there are two kinds of "experts": Those with laboratory results and empirical reasoning based on those, and experts with sufficient field results and observations. They both have their weaknesses and strengths.
 
So my question is this; what manufacture/style period revolver would be a good companion for my Winny that would also be suitable for deer hunting should I ever decide to try that?

That's not a complicated question at all.
The classic combination of a Winchester lever gun, along with a single action revolver in .44 or .45 caliber was the favorite for a half a century.
No reason it shouldn't still be ideal.
 
I do reckon. That's what makes the conversation worthwhile. I think there are two kinds of "experts": Those with laboratory results and empirical reasoning based on those, and experts with sufficient field results and observations. They both have their weaknesses and strengths.

Terminal ballistics is a field endeavor...JMHO. Crunching stats is no substitute for observation.
 
How much do .429" bullets expand? A .357" bullet like a Barnes 140 gr. XPB will normally expand to .7". It opens a little wider but folds back. Even if .429"'s expanded to 1", that's only three-tenths of an inch more, or 0.15" wider on each side. How does that result in a significantly larger wound channel?

There isn't always a difference in velocity between 357 and 44 Magnum. Even with a lightweight 200 grain bullet, Hornady publishes 1500fps for 44 Magnum. Certainly, the 44 achieves a velocity like that with a heavier bullet, but I don't believe we need 200 grains or more bullet weight to penetrate a little deer or even a 250 pound deer. Supposing the 44 Magnum did offer 200 fps more velocity than 357. Is that enough to make any difference?

The following are not my personal assertions. I do not personally know enough. According to some terminal ballistics experts, any additional velocity of 44 Magnum is not enough to make a difference, not on this size target where the temporary stretch cavity would still be only a small portion of the whole animal. Accordingly, we would need to have impact velocities more like 600 to 1000 fps faster than 357 before we saw a significant difference.

Could the blast, the noise, and the recoil of the bigger magnum cause people to perceive a greater effect? If we observe the effect in the animal's reaction, it's highly dependent on where the bullet impacts and the individual animal. Could it be that a person might see a deer hit with a 357 that by chance misses the vitals that would have the greatest effect and the deer happens to have a greater constitution? Subsequently, they switch to a bigger magnum and on the next deer the shot is better or the deer's constitution is weaker and they become convinced the cartridge, its different noise, and heavier recoil made the difference. They relate their anecdote to others and more people become convinced that 44 has a greater terminal effect? By what different, more objective means can all the people in this thread be convinced that 44 is "better?"

I don't simply wish to 'defend' 357 as my 'pet cartridge'. I would willingly substitute a similar cartridge like 10mm for the sake of argument or better yet, 350 Legend versus 450 Bushmaster. At 100 yards, the impact velocity of either is somewhere around 1830 to 1890 fps -- neither impact with enough velocity to make a large enough temporary cavity in a deer-size animal to cause massive wounding. Both will easily penetrate to vitals. Will the 450 simply recoil more with no other meaningful increase in effect?

Bullets must have a certain amount of sectional density in order to penetrate. The problem with your 140 gr. .357 bullet is that even before it expands, it is a bullet of relatively low sectional density (.156), and after it expands to a claimed .7", it's down to .041, assuming it doesn't lose any mass. For comparison, a 250 gr. .430" bullet, generally considered a good weight for the caliber hunting bullet, has a SD of .193.

I've killed two deer with cast SCWHP's; one with a .44 caliber weighing 243 grs. and another with a .45 caliber 265 gr. Both deer died, and I mean right now, but bullet penetration was reduced dramatically compared to the same bullets in solid form. In fact HP handgun bullets are the only ones I've recovered from game, the solid SWC's penetrating completely then bouncing off across the pasture. The single exception was a 258 gr. cast from a .44 Special that penetrated almost the full length of a whitetail buck.

Regarding minimum caliber, as I already stated, I've only used a .357 twice, both times a carbine, and wasn't terribly impressed. I know they'll work, but personally prefer a tad larger hole.
At the other end of the spectrum, I think we hunters quickly get to a point of diminishing returns with some of the firearms we use. Those of us who have killed medium game with handguns know a .44 or .45 caliber bullet in the 250-260 gr. range, running 850-1000 fps will kill 200 lb. game just fine, yet some enjoy more power, which is fine. Several years ago I shot a deer with my 35 Whelen elk load, far, far more power than required. She died no more quickly than if I had shot her with something like a .280 or .308.
There's no such thing as deader.

35W
 
Last edited:
The .357 probably looks great on paper and if that's all you shoot, I'm sure it serves just fine. However, when it comes to wild critters approaching the weight of a full grown man, a little more than "just enough" is preferable. If all circumstances are right, if you wait for perfect broadside presentation, place your shot perfectly and avoid any major bones and limit your shots to 50yds, it will do the job. It's when you start inserting and stacking exceptions to those perfect conditions that the odds start working against you. Personally, I want a cartridge that works when everything is decidedly NOT perfect. One that offers a lot more margin for error. Seems to me that the trend is using the bare minimum and declaring it adequate just because a few dead deer are on the ground.
 
That's not a complicated question at all.
The classic combination of a Winchester lever gun, along with a single action revolver in .44 or .45 caliber was the favorite for a half a century.
No reason it shouldn't still be ideal.

I hear what you are saying. What make/model gun (to keep it period) would you recommend?
 
What make/model gun (to keep it period) would you recommend?

If you want to keep it period, the Italian clones of SAA revolvers have a great reputation for quality.
If you want the Western look with a bit more functionality, a Ruger Blackhawk still has the nostalgic single action look, but is more robust and has adjustable sights.

You could split the difference and go with a Ruger Blackhawk flattop in .44 Special. That would be a great choice.
 
If you want to keep it period, the Italian clones of SAA revolvers have a great reputation for quality.
If you want the Western look with a bit more functionality, a Ruger Blackhawk still has the nostalgic single action look, but is more robust and has adjustable sights.

You could split the difference and go with a Ruger Blackhawk flattop in .44 Special. That would be a great choice.
Thanks for the advice. I am not familiar with the .44 Special. I will investigate.
 
Thanks for the advice. I am not familiar with the .44 Special. I will investigate.

https://www.google.com/search?q=taf...droid-verizon&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Click the first link by the goodrichfamilyassoc.org, it should be a PDF. Good read by Taffin. I'm not sure how to share PDFs I have a few good articles saved on my phone.

Edit:

Another Taffin article
http://www.sixguns.com/tests/tt44spec.htm

Brian Pearce article here:

Same as the first one ,click the first link that is a PDF that comes up

https://www.google.com/search?q=bri...droid-verizon&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Here's a Brian Pearce article on the flattops, scroll down again a little and use the Goodrich family link for the PDF
https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-verizon&sxsrf=ACYBGNTSXRR6Q51V6cMJt-8xAqm6Lg41GQ:1576249726429&ei=fqnzXb3cGcWQggfsjIbIAQ&q=brian+pearce+flattop&oq=brian+pearce+flattop&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-serp.3..33i160j33i299.2585.2585..2907...0.0..0.168.314.0j2......0....1.........35i39.4Ci71JLYCfM
 
Last edited:
Bullets must have a certain amount of sectional density in order to penetrate. The problem with your 140 gr. .357 bullet is that even before it expands, it is a bullet of relatively low sectional density (.156), and after it expands to a claimed .7", it's down to .041, assuming it doesn't lose any mass. For comparison, a 250 gr. .430" bullet, generally considered a good weight for the caliber hunting bullet, has a SD of .193.

I've killed two deer with cast SCWHP's; one with a .44 caliber weighing 243 grs. and another with a .45 caliber 265 gr. Both deer died, and I mean right now, but bullet penetration was reduced dramatically compared to the same bullets in solid form. In fact HP handgun bullets are the only ones I've recovered from game, the solid SWC's penetrating completely then bouncing off across the pasture. The single exception was a 258 gr. cast from a .44 Special that penetrated almost the full length of a whitetail buck.

Regarding minimum caliber, as I already stated, I've only used a .357 twice, both times a carbine, and wasn't terribly impressed. I know they'll work, but personally prefer a tad larger hole.
At the other end of the spectrum, I think we hunters quickly get to a point of diminishing returns with some of the firearms we use. Those of us who have killed medium game with handguns know a .44 or .45 caliber bullet in the 250-260 gr. range, running 850-1000 fps will kill 200 lb. game just fine, yet some enjoy more power, which is fine. Several years ago I shot a deer with my 35 Whelen elk load, far, far more power than required. She died no more quickly than if I had shot her with something like a .280 or .308.
There's no such thing as deader.

35W


If the goal was to penetrate an Elk or Bison, the 140 grain .357 hollowpoint would probably have less penetration than could be desired. But I've never heard of .357 Magnum lacking sufficient penetration on whitetail-sized game with an appropriate bullet like a copper monolithic or Hornady XTP.

If sectional density and penetration really were a concern on little deer, the .357 can be furnished with bullets of .202 sectional density with the relatively common 180 grain weight. 200 grain bullets with a sectional density of .224 can also be used if game were particularly thick. I am convinced, however, that sufficient penetration on lightweight deer can be achieved with 158 grain or (non-fragmenting, full weight-retaining, copper) 140 grain bullets. And given that penetration is sufficient, which it certainly can be with 180 or 200 grain bullets, there hasn't yet been a good explanation of how a .44 or .45 can kill a deer deader, or even consistently faster. We've agreed that it does make a very slightly (few tenths of an inch) larger hole, but if this really made a critical difference, .45 would widely be regarded as having enough difference in terminal effect than 9mm that it would consistently disable faster. We also have first-hand observations in the field by authors in this thread who report their observations that bigger bores like 44 and 45 and higher velocities like 454 do kill faster, or at least fast. It's not clear how much actual comparison is involved in their observations. Obviously we cannot shoot the same animal with two cartridges and see which time it dies faster.
 
If the goal was to penetrate an Elk or Bison, the 140 grain .357 hollowpoint would probably have less penetration than could be desired. But I've never heard of .357 Magnum lacking sufficient penetration on whitetail-sized game with an appropriate bullet like a copper monolithic or Hornady XTP.

If sectional density and penetration really were a concern on little deer, the .357 can be furnished with bullets of .202 sectional density with the relatively common 180 grain weight. 200 grain bullets with a sectional density of .224 can also be used if game were particularly thick. I am convinced, however, that sufficient penetration on lightweight deer can be achieved with 158 grain or (non-fragmenting, full weight-retaining, copper) 140 grain bullets. And given that penetration is sufficient, which it certainly can be with 180 or 200 grain bullets, there hasn't yet been a good explanation of how a .44 or .45 can kill a deer deader, or even consistently faster. We've agreed that it does make a very slightly (few tenths of an inch) larger hole, but if this really made a critical difference, .45 would widely be regarded as having enough difference in terminal effect than 9mm that it would consistently disable faster. We also have first-hand observations in the field by authors in this thread who report their observations that bigger bores like 44 and 45 and higher velocities like 454 do kill faster, or at least fast. It's not clear how much actual comparison is involved in their observations. Obviously we cannot shoot the same animal with two cartridges and see which time it dies faster.

It's not a slightly larger hole. More speed and larger expanded diameter lead to a significantly larger hole and more visible damage.

A friend shot an elk a couple of weeks ago and this was the finisher from a .454 and these are the lungs. Note the missing tissue to the right of his hand. This is what larger and faster buys you. It's more quantifiable than "a few tenths of an inch."

IMG_0229.jpg
 
Why are you shooting at deer with your handgun when you have a carbine in your hands?

Your .357 will make a fine companion to your Winchester 94. It can deliver the coup de grâce if needed, and in the lower 48 it should get you out of any trouble should your carbine go down.

You might be wanting to try something different, and that is OK, but not really required.
 
Why are you shooting at deer with your handgun when you have a carbine in your hands?

Your .357 will make a fine companion to your Winchester 94. It can deliver the coup de grâce if needed, and in the lower 48 it should get you out of any trouble should your carbine go down.

You might be wanting to try something different, and that is OK, but not really required.

Meaning what? Why shoot a deer with a rifle when you a perfectly capable handgun? Where’s the challenge in the rifle?
 
Meaning what? Why shoot a deer with a rifle when you a perfectly capable handgun? Where’s the challenge in the rifle?
Maybe one out of 50 (and I am being generous) deer hunters have the proficiency to cleanly take game with any handgun. If you are that one, then bully for you.

However, the OP is asking rudimentary questions that lead me to believe that he is, along with me, in the 49. Do you want more wounded deer that suffer unnecessarily?
 
If the goal was to penetrate an Elk or Bison, the 140 grain .357 hollowpoint would probably have less penetration than could be desired. But I've never heard of .357 Magnum lacking sufficient penetration on whitetail-sized game with an appropriate bullet like a copper monolithic or Hornady XTP.

If sectional density and penetration really were a concern on little deer, the .357 can be furnished with bullets of .202 sectional density with the relatively common 180 grain weight. 200 grain bullets with a sectional density of .224 can also be used if game were particularly thick. I am convinced, however, that sufficient penetration on lightweight deer can be achieved with 158 grain or (non-fragmenting, full weight-retaining, copper) 140 grain bullets. And given that penetration is sufficient, which it certainly can be with 180 or 200 grain bullets, there hasn't yet been a good explanation of how a .44 or .45 can kill a deer deader, or even consistently faster. We've agreed that it does make a very slightly (few tenths of an inch) larger hole, but if this really made a critical difference, .45 would widely be regarded as having enough difference in terminal effect than 9mm that it would consistently disable faster. We also have first-hand observations in the field by authors in this thread who report their observations that bigger bores like 44 and 45 and higher velocities like 454 do kill faster, or at least fast. It's not clear how much actual comparison is involved in their observations. Obviously we cannot shoot the same animal with two cartridges and see which time it dies faster.
While .357 cast bullets will kill deader than fried chicken, they are not very authoritative. The cartridge really needs expansion to be effective, especially on thin skinned game that likes to bolt and run. That expansion comes at the expense of penetration. Use a heavy enough bullet to insure penetration and you lose expansion. No, you don't need stem-to-stern on a whitetail but it helps to have a little more than necessary when things aren't perfect. What it really needs to be effective is a 180gr about 200-300fps faster than it can muster. The .357Maximum is a different story but with it comes much larger handguns. You might as well be toting a big bore. The big bores don't have to expand to be effective and they have the capacity for mass and velocity. There truly is no replacement for displacement.

I'd suggest getting out there and putting your theories to the test before arguing with those who already have.
 
Maybe one out of 50 (and I am being generous) deer hunters have the proficiency to cleanly take game with any handgun. If you are that one, then bully for you.

However, the OP is asking rudimentary questions that lead me to believe that he is, along with me, in the 49. Do you want more wounded deer that suffer unnecessarily?
Hunting with handguns is what we do.
 
Maybe one out of 50 (and I am being generous) deer hunters have the proficiency to cleanly take game with any handgun. If you are that one, then bully for you.

However, the OP is asking rudimentary questions that lead me to believe that he is, along with me, in the 49. Do you want more wounded deer that suffer unnecessarily?

That was a leap. If you want less wounded deer, talk to the rifle hunters who blow the dust off of their deer rifles the night before the season opener. I don’t know a hunting demographic outside of bow hunters who practice their craft more than handgun hunters do. I would suggest not imposing your limitations on others. JMHO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top