Ammo choice...180 gr vs. 200 gr .357 Magnum?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Three points:

1) Federal often wimps out. No surprise there. Overall, I've lost all trust in Fed.

2) Some barrels "shoot faster" than others, which throws the "velocity per inch" guesstimates off. Ruger and newer S&W tubes usually shoot faster than Colts, Italian guns and vintage S&Ws. Look at Buffalo Bore's test data for their full house 357s and the pattern will be dead clear:

http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#357

It seems to hold in other calibers too but it's easiest to spot with 357.

3) Handloading to BuffaloBore/GrizzlyAmmo/Doubletap performance levels isn't for the newbie reloader. They have pressure test gear you don't have. If you ARE going to try, best to start with a strong gun: Ruger large-frame SAs are perfect as they're a 44Mag-class frame that can be set up for lesser calibers. While the Service/Security series DAs aren't "weak", they're not the platform I'd test my own thermonuclear loads with. The GP100 would be better, SA Ruger better yet. (Note: while still classed as a "mid frame" SA, my New Vaq's cylinder (357) is beefier than a GP100 and shoots Doubletap-class stuff no problemo.)
 
180 gr Castcore's do the job in a .357MAG

Harvested my first deer with my .357 mag this year using Federal Castcore 180gr out of my 6" Gp 100. It only took one and he never knew what hit him, I'd stick with the 180's in the .357. I am now hooked on handgun hunting whitetail and added a Ruger 7.5" SRH 44 Mag to my arsenal, only hope it does as well as my .357 did, don't think I'll have a problem;). Pic is of the exit wound from my .357 deer last fall, he was shot between 30-40yds and dropped where he stood.

2zygcw1.jpg
 
Here he is with his hide on, not much of a rack but has good size to him, typical MN whitetail I guess. Not a trophy hunter as you can tell, I just like to eat em!!!!!!

30azyhl.jpg
 
try and shoot those big honker loads and you might just find that 158 JSP's work better in your gun.


as far as the guy who used the 240 xtp Hornady load, which is a self defense load, not a hunting load. It is simply designed to stay inside the target, not to leave the body, so as to not kill anything beyond the target. If you tried the same load in a soft point meant for hunting you would find it works just fine. Self defense loads are very softly jacketed to get max expansion at short ranges and still open up when a bit further out. I think you could have perhaps shot that deer with many rifle rounds and not gotten an exit wound as the velocity at impact would be too high.
 
Swamp Rat,

The 180 gr. is from Boomermikey's group buy from www.castboolits.gunloads.com . They drop at 359.5 and weigh 176.6 gr. with an alloy of 10 lb pure lead, 10 lb wheel weights, and 1 lb 60/40 solder. They are also water quenched.

I didn't cast them, they were done for me by an awesome member there. Unsized, the meplat is .295", length is .713" I tumble lubed them and sized some to see which will work better. I believe this is a "bore riding" bullet originally designed for leveractions, but should work very well. I haven't gotten a chance to shoot them, as our indoor range doesn't allow magnum rounds. I have to wait until it gets nicer outside to test some out.
 
JakeH, sorry for the wise-crack, and no, I'm not a rancher, but some of my friends are. I just don't share your "bear spray is best" philosophy. My .357 might seem puny, but an upgrade is in the works as the big bears range in Montana is ever expanding. I hunt mule deer in the Bitteroot-Selway. There was a griz killed in there this past hunting season. mtmuley
 
mtmuley,

No offense taken. I guess I got a little off topic from what the original poster asked. Down in the lower rockies he shouldn't have to worry about grizzlies. And a .357 Mag would probably be sufficient to take down a black bear with proper shot placement.

We agree on one thing though, mule deer hunting. Hunting mulies is by far my favorite of all game.
 
I was thinking about a Taurus Tracker Titanium in .41 Magnum. But, I found out they are no longer made, and prices are going up. I still like the .41, but haven't looked at othe models yet. My .357 with some Double Tap will probably have to work this year. Hey Jake, where do you hunt? Have you taken any big bucks? mtmuley
 
I sometimes hunt around Cascade (MT), but usually in the foothills surrounding the Little Belt Mountains (near Stanford). I'm from Great Falls. I've taken a few 5X5's and a handful of smaller ones. The biggest had a spread of around 22", good mass, and was perfectly typical. You?
 
I'm in the Bitteroot. I drew a good tag a few years ago. (not 270) I killed a 4 point, 29 and 5/8 inches wide, scores 176 B&C. His weak fronts held him back. My buddy had the same tag, same year, and killed a 4 point with some kickers 23 inches wide, 183 and 3/8. I originally passed him up as it was opening day. Oh well. I also took a great 4 point in an unlimited area here. I have 2 good bucks from Nevada as I lived there 11 years. If I don't draw my favorite area this year, gonna head for the Breaks. Another buddy killed a 180 plus 4 point out there when I had a rifle bull tag. (Another story, kind of depressing) I was born in Shelby, and do all my antelope hunting up there. mtmuley
 
Southern Shooter,

You have done your homework well. We ride in bear infested mountains, and we carry snubbie magnums with powerful hard cast loads for defense. My girlfriend carries 180gr Double Tap as you pointed out - and in a 2.5" S&W 357. I carry 240 gr. in a 3" S&W .44 magnum.

We chose the 180gr. after some experimenting with bullet weights and recoil. 180gr was a bit more manageable in the short barrel, as I also found with the 240gr. vs. 300gr in the .44. Sometimes, when I'm not feeling so paranoid, I leave the .44mag behind and I'll put the Double Tap in a 4" S&W 686 (god I love that gun) or a 4" S&W 28.

As to velocity loss per barrel length - it varies greatly with absolute speed. You get a (proportionally, not just absolute) lot less drop in slower bullets than faster. With magnums, a good "guestimate" is 75 fps/inch. A good source to document is the speer reloading manual - they used to (don't know if they still do) give load data both in 6" and 2.5" S&W guns in their manuals. Very illuminating - no solid test barrels, just standard revolvers. I always have liked Speer's straightforward integrity and practicality.

I also really respect your choice to BOTH carry. That is what we do. It is a real peace of mind to know you have a "partner" in defense. Makes me sympathize with cops who work in pairs and trust the guy/gal next to them. Just like those folks on Reno 911!;)

You guys go have a good time. Be aware you are not allowed to carry in National Parks, though that will hopefully change this summer.
 
Be aware you are not allowed to carry in National Parks...
Click to expand...
Which is why you should walk in USFS and BLM lands instead.

attachment.php
 
This summer/fall, I’m planning a few 3-4 day weekend trips in the San Juans as well as a week long backpacking trip, covering about 45+ miles (17 or so of which will be done on two different days from 2 different base camps), so only about 4-6 miles/day with a full pack.

It’s to get familiar with an area I hope to some day hunt Bighorn Rams in – if I ever draw a tag before I die, that is. This will be something like my 10th year or so of applying, but it's for a new area (new to me).

Point is, I thought these trips would be a good time to take my “new” .357 S&W M&P 5-round, Scandium-Titanium 1/78” ”airlite” with me. I want a little protection (admittedly it’s “little”) mostly from the 2-legged predators more than anything; and maybe a chance to put a grouse or ptarmagin in the camp pot (if I go in the fall during season).

And I do want something “just in case” of the extremely rare, but not impossible chance, I manage to get a bear or lion upset at me for invading their habitat or something.

Buffalo Bore on their website states, “We don’t recommend this ammo to be fired in super light alloy revolvers as bullets may jump crimp under recoil, but the ammo itself wont hurt these super light weight revolvers. These revolvers are simply so light that the recoil is severe enough to cause crimp jump.”

So, I’m thinking I should stick with maybe 3 rounds of Win Partition Gold 180 gr followed by 2 rounds of Federal castcore 180 gr. (I haven't tested these for crimp jump yet though).

Because of the steep terrain and ambitious mileage, I need to keep things as light as possible, so I’m pretty committed to taking this “lite” gun and not my heavier ones.

But I would like to hear folks thoughts on this and especially back the original poster’s intent of recommended ammo for this short little thing, and why you recommend what ya do.

And, do you think Southern Shooter needs to worry about crimp jump too?

Also, here is a link to an article (that seems well researched) titled, ” If you meet a bear, don't shoot. Spray”

Turns out a BYU researcher put together a, “team, which included Stephen Herrero, a world authority on bear attacks, has studied 600 bear encounters in Alaska over two decades. In 72 incidents in which bear spray was used properly, the bear stopped charging more than 90 percent of the time, according to a study Smith published in the April edition of the Journal of Wildlife Management. People using guns, by contrast, stood a one-in-three chance of failing to deter the bear, according to an earlier study.”

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_8699976

Still, I don’t know if I’ll be packing bear spray too or just that “airlite” and 5 rounds of ammo that probably doubles it's weight.

Appreciate your thoughts. This is my first post to THR. Figured I should quit lurking and starting participating.
 
Whoa, I am so glad I've had statistics and epidemiology, because it keeps me from falling for crap like this:

Turns out a BYU researcher put together a, “team, which included Stephen Herrero, a world authority on bear attacks, has studied 600 bear encounters in Alaska over two decades. In 72 incidents in which bear spray was used properly, the bear stopped charging more than 90 percent of the time, according to a study Smith published in the April edition of the Journal of Wildlife Management. People using guns, by contrast, stood a one-in-three chance of failing to deter the bear, according to an earlier study.”
Click to expand...

Look, spray "used properly" vs. "using guns" is what we call "apples vs. organges." How about a gross statistic of those charged (in a real threat, not just randomly deploying a defensive tool), and of those compare those who deployed spray vs. those who were charged and used guns? How about apples to apples? What junk science - this wouldn't get out of an undergraduate hard science class. Sociology, probably, because that's not as rigorous. What junk.

As to a gun choice, a 2.5" k-frame with with rounds suggested for the task is wiser than a sub-optimal gun with marginal ammo, if you want to go "light." If I am going into bear country, I am not carrying less than a hot 180gr. hard cast lead bullet GC, and in a gun that can handle it. In my experience, that is minimally achieved with a 2.5" K frame when I feel like going "light." I am often on horseback, so a 4" L frame is my usual minimum.
 
Now, I didn't write the article, didn't even read the original one published in the Journal of Wildlife Management (which I think is peer reviewed, but not sure).

All I did was read the newspaper article and give the link here for those who might want to further investigate for themselves. Like I said, it seemed (from the newspaper) “well researched”. But newspapers usually don’t things right, so who really knows without looking at the original manuscript?

Also, “well researched” isn't the same as well thought out or a well done study as you indicate.

Personally, I think it could be worth a look at the original manuscript in the JWM to properly evaluate the methods used and then draw one's own conclusions.

I tend to question a "90% success rate” of bear spray...but think it could be worth a look just to see what was really analyzed and draw one’s on conclusions before jumping to one’s own. And if something is going to be ripped into, don’t ya think that would be the responsible thing to do?

I mean, otherwise, it’s just an opinion (like what seems to be alleged about the study to begin with) and ya know what they say about those. But I don’t have a dog in this fight so I really don’t care.

To illustrate the point I think you two are trying to make though, I could define "proper use” of bear spray as being when a bear stopped it's charge after hitting the nozzle on the spray; and then I could honestly state that bear spray was “100% effective when used properly.” But we all know that would be a tautology (and a bunch of BS) wouldn’t we? Such deceit is not a misuse of statistics, but a failure of common sense, reason and logic. Maybe the authors did something like that, I don’t know ('cause I didn't read the original). But I think it could be worth a look out of curiosity.

And as a professional biologist and lifelong outdoorsman, I can say honestly say that I've never had to shoot a bear, nor had to spray one either; but I have "ran into" many of them in my work and recreational pursuits. They all took off running save one mamma who raised up to get a better look and sniff of me, after shooing her cubs across the trail and up a tree.

Fortunately for all, there was a couple of hundred yards between us, so I just slowly backed away and left the area. Otherwise, I like seeing bears in the wild (at a distance). Note I said seeing them…and at a distance....I guess I'm one of those crazy wild men who like wild places and the wild things that make them places wild (or at least some illusion of that). But don’t we all - honestly? (don’t have to answer, but be honest if you do).

Truth be told, if I did ever find myself in a situation having to defend myself from a bear, especially griz, I’d prefer a 12 ga loaded with slugs. Wouldn’t hesitate using it either.

My only intent posting the link and the summary paragraph from the newspaper article was so others could read and decide for themselves. Nothin’ more.

Even if the study is correct, there is still the issue that 10% of the bears apparently prefer the taste of pepper with their dinner.
:what::eek:

And I wouldn't trust it for use on other critters either (like mountain lions).

One thing about using a gun, you can aim it into the wind at the target and not worry about getting hit in the face when the wind blows...
 
Last edited:
One more thing, I don't use a 12 ga when hunting black bear though. For one thing the entry and exit wounds would mess up that coat my girlfriend said she'd make me...:D
 
I have 180gr Buffalo Bores in a 3" .357 for black bear country as a last resort. From what I've read I'd be more concerned about mountain lions. I hope I never have to use it, but I have confidence in my selection.
 
I have the exact same setup for my hiking/canoeing gun (SS Ruger secirity six snubbie and DT 180gr hard casts). I keep 2 speedloaders with 158gr DT jhps on my side as well.

I think that combo is an excellent choice in NON-grizzley area's. If I was hiking in grizz territory I would add bear spray and switch to a Ruger Blackhawk in .45 colt! Again loaded with DT's +P 335gr hard casts.
 
I like my own 180 JHP Hornady XTP at 1400 fps from a 6.5" barrel, 1306 from a 2.3" SP101. I shoot 13.8 grains of AA#9 behind it. It almost duplicates the 180 grain Buffalo Bore lead 180 loads they publish at 1302 fps from a 2" gun, but costs me a lot less. The XTP will penetrate and get some expansion. The Buffalo Bore sounds like what you want, though. It's expensive, but you probably don't need, but a few boxes to sight in and carry on your trip.

Personally, though, I shoot a cast, gas checked (from a Lee mold) 158 SWC in my 4" hiking gun, a Taurus 66, that's easy on guns (14.5 grains 2400), sort of a standard load, and I've killed 3 deer with that load, 2 in a 6.5" Blackhawk and 1 in a 20" carbine. It shoots hard and penetrates. I haven't chronographed it in the Taurus, but it's pushing 760 ft lbs out of the Blackhawk, can't recall the velocity without looking it up. A warm 158 SWC us PLENTY for protection from anything I'll run into which ain't much since I'm 2000 miles from any grizzlies outside of a zoo. The 180 grain load I worked up for my Blackhawk for hog and deer hunting, but mostly with hogs in mind. It knocks 'em down about as good as any handgun. Of course, I've yet to shoot anything really big, but I don't like eating those 300+ lbers.
 
Coloradoshooter -

I think your choices of ammo seem pretty sound for that gun; I own a SP101 and haven't had to deal with jump crimping, but I know Federal will recoil less than Buffalo Bore. Another low-recoil round I've head good things about is Cor-bon's 125 gr. DPX.

BTW, I'm new here. :D This looks like a nice, very large forum with a lot going for it.
 
I've got some 180 grain XTP handloads, 13.5 grains of 296, magnum primer, but I'm only getting 1075 fps from my 4" Taurus Tracker, which seems a little low, but I'm not going to push it. 13.5 grains is max in my Lee 2nd edition book.
 
I think the 200 is pushing things a bit ballistically. I've fired both but my own chrono shows the edge to the 180, esp out of a short barrel. I would only try the 200 out of a carbine where it can build up a bit more steam. Either should have sufficient sectional density to penetrate very deep
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
Quantifiable Criteria for a "Woods" gun?
2 3 4 5
Replies
122
Views
13K
Vern Humphrey
V
R
  • Locked
Grizzly Ammo .357 mag 180 gr WFNGC
Replies
1
Views
1K
ArchAngelCD
ArchAngelCD
T
  • Locked
help me choose ammo for my new nightstand gun
Replies
17
Views
903
Feanaro
Feanaro
A
  • Locked
.357 vs .44 Special recoil
Replies
22
Views
6K
WheelgunZealot
W
P
  • Locked
WWB .357 158gr ammo unusually powerful
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
fxvr5
fxvr5
Back
Top