Hokkmike
Member
Not a lot of point in getting a .357 rifle unless you are Cowboy shooter. 44 Mag is the top choice.
.357 mag, .44 mag or .454 casull in a 20 inch rifle
- Thread starter Flabbergasted1776
- Start date
-
- Tags
- hunting
- Status
d2wing
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,420
I think the reverse is better. The .357 is powerful enough for lower 48 hunting and self defense. To me a .357 is much more pleasant to shoot and more likely to be shot accurately. And shot placement trumps power. Of course a .44 Mag is more powerful and the above post has merit. Depending on what you want to shoot at. Your call. I have said before that rifles should shoot rifle cartridges and pistols pistol cartridges but I see the point.
candymancan
member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2021
- Messages
- 210
Both are fine.. but i just like large caliber anything. So i got a 44 henry. Vs th3 357. But 44mag is much more expensive ammo... thats the only downside.
You csn also acheive even higher velocity by getting the 180 grain 44 mag.. the velocity is like 1400 fps outa a handgun vs almost 1000 using 180 vs 240.. i imagine itll be way higher ina rifle
You csn also acheive even higher velocity by getting the 180 grain 44 mag.. the velocity is like 1400 fps outa a handgun vs almost 1000 using 180 vs 240.. i imagine itll be way higher ina rifle
gotboostvr
Member
If you handload cast bullets, I'd skip the 44mag carbine and go 357, 45 or 454.
The 44mag "rifle" spec uses a slightly different bore than the handguns. As far as I'm aware it's the only cartridge to do so. With jacketed loads it dosen't make much of a difference, but with cast, it can be pretty significant.
If you don't need anything bigger than a 357mag carbine for quarry in your area, I'd stick with that. More bangs for your buck.
If you're potentially going to run into bigger and more dangerous game a 45LC or 454 would be the direction I go.
The 44mag "rifle" spec uses a slightly different bore than the handguns. As far as I'm aware it's the only cartridge to do so. With jacketed loads it dosen't make much of a difference, but with cast, it can be pretty significant.
If you don't need anything bigger than a 357mag carbine for quarry in your area, I'd stick with that. More bangs for your buck.
If you're potentially going to run into bigger and more dangerous game a 45LC or 454 would be the direction I go.
Shak3s1977
Member
I like the versatility of the 357. It's fairly cheap (especially when reloading). It's also a fairly common caliber around here, well during normal times. Don't forget those 38 specials to plink with. I shoot 158gr lrn cast bullets over 4.0gr of Unique as my plinking load. I can shoot hundreds at a time, and out of a 20 inch rifle, I don't need ear muffs. Plus my wife and kids like to shoot the plinkers.
dranrab
Member
If the OP said what he's going to hunt I missed it. I know that the 44 magnum, even with plain ole 240 grain JHP, will sail right through a deer.
You've obviously never shot something with a 357 carbine. It's closer to factory ammo in a 35 Remington than it is a 357 handgun.
44 mag also specs a different bore diameter from rifle to pistol.
I was making a decision between a 357 Mag vs 44 Mag in the early 1990s. Both are great in handguns and carbines. I already had a favorite 357 Mag revolver and a bunch of 357 mag ammo of all kinds. That helped me make my choice.
A lot of hunters were taking good size deer with 357 Mag carbines just across the line from me in Indiana and they still do.
I narrowed it down to the rifle... a Rossi Model 92. I spent a little more time weighing the pros and cons of the calibers, and in the end took home a brand new 20-inch barrel Rossi M92 in 357 Magnum. Today it holds a high place in the collection as one of my best buys. No regrets. It does everything and more I expect of it.
A lot of hunters were taking good size deer with 357 Mag carbines just across the line from me in Indiana and they still do.
I narrowed it down to the rifle... a Rossi Model 92. I spent a little more time weighing the pros and cons of the calibers, and in the end took home a brand new 20-inch barrel Rossi M92 in 357 Magnum. Today it holds a high place in the collection as one of my best buys. No regrets. It does everything and more I expect of it.
Flabbergasted1776
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2019
- Messages
- 12
It would be use primarily on small deer and hogs. The hogs are getting kinda big though...
Flabbergasted1776
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2019
- Messages
- 12
Sorry if I'm not super active on the thread, I'm just reading and thinking.
Just not sure what questions to ask with none of the velocities really breaking that 2200 barrier for hydro-static shock the bigger the bullet the better.
so 454 would seem to jump to the top, hot 45colt and go for when 454 is not needed or not available but would the increased distance the bullet would need to jump to get to the rifling affect accuracy and with the rossi unavailable I might be better off forgetting about the 454 and getting a strong rifle in 45colt.
357mag would be cheapest and easiest to get and its still pretty darn effective, and with 44mag factory ammo (normally) being expensive, there is lots
of cheap-ish (again normally) reloading supplies. And again still pretty darn effective.
Just not sure what questions to ask with none of the velocities really breaking that 2200 barrier for hydro-static shock the bigger the bullet the better.
so 454 would seem to jump to the top, hot 45colt and go for when 454 is not needed or not available but would the increased distance the bullet would need to jump to get to the rifling affect accuracy and with the rossi unavailable I might be better off forgetting about the 454 and getting a strong rifle in 45colt.
357mag would be cheapest and easiest to get and its still pretty darn effective, and with 44mag factory ammo (normally) being expensive, there is lots
of cheap-ish (again normally) reloading supplies. And again still pretty darn effective.
Roverguy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2021
- Messages
- 887
Velocity is overrated in many respects. It enabled small bore rifles to accomplish previously big bore tasks, which is good. It enables 30 cal to 40 cal projectiles to do amazing things at ridiculously long ranges when operated by the highly skilled. But in the 100 yard killing range, it simply isn’t a very important factor. Big hunks of lead, whether jacketed or not, at 1000 -1500 fps MV, will make large, very deep holes in very large, heavy boned creatures. The 44 mag, albeit best with monolithic solids, has killed the largest of creatures from a handgun. In a rifle, it will shoot through any deer and most hogs at 100 yards or less. A 45 Colt loaded sub-“Ruger Only” but above SAA levels will do the same. 240 - 300 grs of .40+“ bullet at 1200-1500 fps is a terrible thing. Personally, I don’t put the 357 mag in the same league, but it will do for hogs and deer. The 30-30 pushing 160 grs Hornady FTX at 2500 fps is also no slouch whatsoever out to 150 yards and can be had in an equally handy rifle, so too one in 35 Rem.
Barr
Member
A break action TC Encore in a .454 Casull is an absolute powerhouse. With H110 2,150 fps w coated 270 gr bullets is readily achievable. Short, light and handy. Recoil is brisk but using 2400 powder w the same bullet is a very tame 1,900 fps. .45 LC are a cakewalk at 1,500 fps.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
I haven't heard that. Even if true, it makes a better .45 than existing .45's. Faster twist, feeds longer bullets and has tighter chambers.
The 92 is stronger than the 94. In fact the 92 is the strongest applicable action extant. Only the 1886 and perhaps the Winchester 1895 are stronger but there would be no point.
I've seen this claimed on the internet quite a bit but never had a problem with my .44's. In fact, my Marlin "S" model shoots well enough that people would call me a liar.
Ranger99
Member
I have both 357 and 44 mag in lever and
single shot rifles. I can say from experience with both that you can't compare pistol
and rifle performance from either one.
I've used both 357 and 44 in lever and single
for hunting whitetail deer and have killed
deer and pigs with both.
Neither one killed more dead than the other.
single shot rifles. I can say from experience with both that you can't compare pistol
and rifle performance from either one.
I've used both 357 and 44 in lever and single
for hunting whitetail deer and have killed
deer and pigs with both.
Neither one killed more dead than the other.
d2wing
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,420
Keep in mine that in pioneer days black powder rifles killed everything in the world with lower velocities than current cartridges. It was considered sport to kill Buffalo from horseback with backpowder..36 and 44 caliber pistols from accounts of the US Calvary biographies. Wild Bill Hickock attempted to shoot a Grizzly bear with a .36 caliber Navy Colt. With modern powders and bullets I would expect either .357 or .44 to be enough and it has been since Magnum pistols were invented. I would go 30-30 in a rifle but either .357 or .44 Magnum is more useful than what our forefathers had.
Thanks for adding that. I can’t believe I forgot about that! IIRC, the bullets for .44 handgun are 0.429 and the bullets for rifle are 0.431. This is the bigger accuracy challenge than the twist rate difference I mentioned earlier.
Barr
Member
I use a 44 magnum lever gun for PCC bowling pin matches where I live. I can say with great honesty that I have used many 300 grain 44 magnum projectiles in a rifle that’s the same ones used in a handgun. Never noticed any bore diameter differences or accuracy issues.
Jack Ryan
Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2019
- Messages
- 778
I've not seen a lot of people carrying a 20 in barrel rifle in the grocery stores around here.
CoalTrain49
Member
I'm not sure why anyone would be making a case for more velocity with a 44 mag. It's true it can be loaded about 300 fps faster than a .357 using the lightest bullet available for both, but at 100 yds that isn't going to matter. The fact is if you are using either to hunt medium game you won't be using the lightest bullets anyway. Standard bullet weight for 44 mag is 240 grains and 158 grains for 357. Using those bullet weights there is only 100-200 fps difference according to my Hornady manual. I see no great advantage here. Where I do see an advantage is using a heavier bullet when hunting. Those are some low velocity cartridges and additional bullet weight is more better.
Personally, I've been a fan of the .357 since the 70's when I bought my first revolver. That was one of those early Ruger Blackhawks and I carried that for many years in the back country. I still have several .357 revolvers. I've also had .357 rifles but I don't see the point there unless someone wants to play cowboy. That would be my choice there over 44 mag. because of ammo or component prices. There are actually some reproduction lever rifles that are chambered for 38 spl. only because that's probably what a lot of people want.
If you happen to think you might be hunting more than anything else I would just buy a 44 mag and be done with it. If most of your shooting is punching paper or ringing steel at 100 yards .357 would by my choice and it would serve you well as a deer or hog rifle a few times a year. The fact that you would probably shoot it more most of the year would pay off when you went hunting. Running a rifle with iron sights is a challenge for most people who don't shoot a lot.
Personally, I've been a fan of the .357 since the 70's when I bought my first revolver. That was one of those early Ruger Blackhawks and I carried that for many years in the back country. I still have several .357 revolvers. I've also had .357 rifles but I don't see the point there unless someone wants to play cowboy. That would be my choice there over 44 mag. because of ammo or component prices. There are actually some reproduction lever rifles that are chambered for 38 spl. only because that's probably what a lot of people want.
If you happen to think you might be hunting more than anything else I would just buy a 44 mag and be done with it. If most of your shooting is punching paper or ringing steel at 100 yards .357 would by my choice and it would serve you well as a deer or hog rifle a few times a year. The fact that you would probably shoot it more most of the year would pay off when you went hunting. Running a rifle with iron sights is a challenge for most people who don't shoot a lot.
Last edited:
Charlie Martinez
Member
I have a Marlin 20" carbine in 44 Magnum that I really like. For outdoors protection and hunting I can pair it with my 44 Magnum Ruger Vaquero. I too agree that the "grizzly bear" thing in most of the lower 48's is much to do about nothing and a 357 Magnum combo is probably adequate for 99% of circumstances anyone might encounter. It definitely recoils much less and it's cheaper to shoot than the 44's.
The only thing I don't like about the 357 Magnum is shooting revolvers without ear protection. I don't use ear protection when I hunt or hike and carrying a 357 Magnum means that if I need to use my gun it will be without ear protection. 38 Special loads are tolerable but for woods use I prefer something more powerful. I can load my 44 Magnum revolvers (and rifles) with fairly hot 44 Special ammo, have almost as much power as with the 357 Magnum but be able to shoot without destroying my hearing. That is a big plus for me.
The only thing I don't like about the 357 Magnum is shooting revolvers without ear protection. I don't use ear protection when I hunt or hike and carrying a 357 Magnum means that if I need to use my gun it will be without ear protection. 38 Special loads are tolerable but for woods use I prefer something more powerful. I can load my 44 Magnum revolvers (and rifles) with fairly hot 44 Special ammo, have almost as much power as with the 357 Magnum but be able to shoot without destroying my hearing. That is a big plus for me.
I just checked again. SAAMI bore diameter spec for .44 rem mag pistol is 0.417 and for rifle it is 0.424. Take a look at bullets sold for “.44”, you will find bullets at 0.429, 0.431, and 0.432. If you think a 0.007” difference on bore diameter makes absolutely no difference I can’t help you.
Refusing to listen and learn something new is just something ignorant people do so they feel better about themselves.
philbo
Member
I have a Rossi 92 in 357 with a 16" barrel, a Ruger 77/44 in 44 with a 18.5" barrel, a Marlin 94 in 44 with a 20" barrel, and a Rossi 92 in 454 with a 20" barrel. I reload for each of them and have used all of them to take game here in Texas including deer and hogs.
The 357 is light and handy for plinking and even small game when loaded with 38's. Using 357's with solid bullets ranging up to 180 grains it has been effective on both deer and hogs. Really like this rifle and it matches well with a Ruger Bisley in the same caliber. This rifle gets shot a lot because of the low cost of components and the fact it's hard to wear out brass. Love it.
The 44's offer a little more flexibility with heavier bullets if the intent is to hunt, but offers some plinking fun when loaded down with 160-180 grain bullets at 44 special velocities. The Ruger is the go to for hunting since the lighter shorter barrel makes it a little handier in the woods.
The 454 with full power loads is lot in a small package, and overkill for most of what I want. Way more than you need for hogs and deer, but I have used to take several hogs and an elk once. Very effective. Most of my loads are reloads in the 25-30k cup range... the loads that would be pushing the 45colt to the max and be in the upper range of 44 mag loads. In the 454 these are easily tolerated by both the shooter and the rifle with mine processing hundreds of rounds over the years with no damage to either. The 454 with moderate 30k cup loads makes a great combo in my experience.
If you are a dedicated handloader with a ready supply of components at hand, any of the above would make a good choice. Given the current limitations you are much more likely to find a rifle in 44 mag than anything else... the 454's are hard to find in the best of times and the 357's always disappear like hot cakes when they pop-up new or used. Long story short, buy a rifle in any of the calibers and it will serve you well. At the end of the day my favorite at this time is a 327 magnum Henry, but that's another story
The 357 is light and handy for plinking and even small game when loaded with 38's. Using 357's with solid bullets ranging up to 180 grains it has been effective on both deer and hogs. Really like this rifle and it matches well with a Ruger Bisley in the same caliber. This rifle gets shot a lot because of the low cost of components and the fact it's hard to wear out brass. Love it.
The 44's offer a little more flexibility with heavier bullets if the intent is to hunt, but offers some plinking fun when loaded down with 160-180 grain bullets at 44 special velocities. The Ruger is the go to for hunting since the lighter shorter barrel makes it a little handier in the woods.
The 454 with full power loads is lot in a small package, and overkill for most of what I want. Way more than you need for hogs and deer, but I have used to take several hogs and an elk once. Very effective. Most of my loads are reloads in the 25-30k cup range... the loads that would be pushing the 45colt to the max and be in the upper range of 44 mag loads. In the 454 these are easily tolerated by both the shooter and the rifle with mine processing hundreds of rounds over the years with no damage to either. The 454 with moderate 30k cup loads makes a great combo in my experience.
If you are a dedicated handloader with a ready supply of components at hand, any of the above would make a good choice. Given the current limitations you are much more likely to find a rifle in 44 mag than anything else... the 454's are hard to find in the best of times and the 357's always disappear like hot cakes when they pop-up new or used. Long story short, buy a rifle in any of the calibers and it will serve you well. At the end of the day my favorite at this time is a 327 magnum Henry, but that's another story
CoalTrain49
Member
Not so fast.
Most instructors will tell you that time spent on the range will improve your ability to shoot almost anything. Time on the range means money spent for ammo.
The fact is 44 mag ammo costs about 0.30 more per round then 357 right now. I think that's always been the case. If you reload that will be maybe 0.05 more per round. OP never said he reloaded. If he did I missed it.
Do you think someone with a limited income will spend more money on 44 mag ammo or 357 ammo?
- Status
