How come some people would carry a .357 mag

[cookekdjr]

Want one round for 48-state critters/hunting AND personal defense street or wilderness? You want a 357 or stronger wheelgun round.
Jim, your point is well-made, and reasonable. OTOH, I never get to hunt anymore, and my current needs are all about self-defense from two-legged predators. Nothing in a .357/.38/9mm-size caliber is better than my Glock 19 with a hi-cap mag. If I move up higher than 9mm +p+, my ability to stay on target diminishes greatly. But I can quickly unload (with good accuracy) 15+1 rounds that approximate the very loads I'd be likely to carry in a .357 revolver. So for two-legged critters, the G19 is a wondeful choice.
-David

 

[tube_ee]

Different scenarios result in different asnwers, no surprise there. But...

If versatility of the cartidge is the consideration, the .38 Special / .357 Magnum has got to be near the top of the list. From mild target wadcutters from a snubby, (that make a dandy small game round, and a hell of a way to practice with your carry gun), to carbine-tailored loads that get up near .30-30 performance (no, it's not equal, but within most shooter's iron-sight range, it's close enough for Bambi), these cartridges and the guns that shoot them can cover a lot of territory.

Restricting the discussion to personal defense, if you accept the premise that the advantages of auto-loader capacity are often overblown for armed citizens, and so the wheelgun is a valid choice, there's simply no comparison between the .357 Magnum and the 9mm. The .357 can do things, from an equivalently sized firearm, concealed or service, that the 9mm simply can't. That's no knock on the 9, it's a fine round. But to simply compare diameters and stop there misses the point. The difference in allowable bullet weights alone is enormous. And despite the fact that energy calculations emphasize velocity, projectile weight matters when bullet meets target.

Even when compared with the .45 ACP, the .357 Magnum comes out on top in some scenarios. Against human targets, that one's a wash, (both are about as good as it gets, for different reasons,) but in the full scope of things we use handguns for, the .357 wins.

For a general-purpose citizen's handgun, it's really tough to beat a .357 service revolver. It's the gold standard for "one handgun." There are a lot of reasons for that.

--Shannon

 

[gezzer]

9mm vs 357? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

A 357 double tap beats a 9mm double tap every time unless you are shooting 38 wadcutters!

Can't handle a 357 double tap? Practice Practice Practice some day you can.

 

[Jim March]

Put it this way. In a lot of jurisdictions, getting "another gun" for some new funky need takes three to ten days. If you have a 357 with a 4" or more barrel, you're covered for a lot of potential weirdness.

 

[jlh26oo]

Remember he asked for carry, so adjust barrel length in your guys velocity comparisons for equally concealable packages in revolver vs auto. I sold my gp100 for a 34, but it was more based on ammo cost than anything else (ie thinking 9mm even approaches .357 velocities from a 4" barrel- but no way was I concealing that thing). I want a .45acp. Someone made fun of the neanderthal mentality of "well I just like bigger bullets". That's so funny, but true. No matter how I try to convince myself that I am ok with 9's across the board- looking at that photo of channels through gel (where .40sw, 9mm, and .45acp are all about the same), or the "one shot stop" stats, where they are all the same, something deep inside tells me bigger bullet = better, no matter how obvious it is to my brain that's not the case. Because of course 10mm and .357mag owns all defensive calibers, and they are not the biggest. I have probs.

But yeah .357mag>>>9mm, but in shorter, realistically concealable packages I think its more like .357mag>9mm.

 

[Sry0fcr]

I think I understand the original poster's intent. A lot of .45 fans that I have met and chatted with admit that the .357 is a great self-defense load with the 125 HP going around 1400 fps. But then they'll say the 9mm is pathetic, ineffective, and utterly unworthy of consideration for self-defense, best left to youths and weak wristed old ladies. If you're serious, *really* serious about self-defense, they'll tell me, you HAVE to have John Moses Browning's .45.

I sometimes carry a 9mm sig, with Cor-Bon 115gr HPs going 1350 or perhaps a smidge more. Since the diameter of 9mm/.357 is virtually identical, the difference between the two boils down to 10gr of bullet weight and 50fps. I have a hard time accepting the idea that 10gr and 50fps defines the difference betweent the ultimate stopper and a mouse gun.

Seems to me that 9, 357, 45, 40, and 10mm are all great rounds. All will do the job if you get the right ammo and put the bullet where it has to go. And that applies not just here but to any kind of hunting as well. All this argument over defensive rounds is like getting all hot under the collar about 270/.308/.30-06 for hunting. The differences and trade offs are not really all that crucial.

Humbly submitted...

Well it looks like you said what I said a whole lot better.

 

[cookekdjr]

I think we all agree that .357 exceeds 9mm in power and versatility. Its just a fact. A .357 revolver can fire low-power .38 wadcutters and heavy, hard-cast, big-game killing rounds, and everything in between. But that's beside the point.
From a practical standpoint, people carrying a .357 revolver will not carry big-game ammo for personal defense (at least from two-legged creatures). Limiting to what's most practical for self-defense, its hard to beat a .38+p 158gr "FBI load", or a reduced-recoil .357 125gr load. People carrying a .357 tend to choose one or the other (not always, but typically). There is a variety of 9mm ammo that approximates both choices. So from a practical standpoint, there's no reason to avoid 9mm for most people who would carry .357 for self-defense.
For those folks who'd want to maximize the .357's power, they can stick with the revolver. Everybody wins.
-David

 

[defiant73a]

From a practical standpoint, people carrying a .357 revolver will not carry big-game ammo for personal defense (at least from two-legged creatures).

Not necessarily. The 180-grain Winchester Partition Gold is great at both roles.

Limiting to what's most practical for self-defense, its hard to beat a .38+p 158gr "FBI load", or a reduced-recoil .357 125gr load. People carrying a .357 tend to choose one or the other (not always, but typically).

I think you'd be surprised how many people carry the 145-grain Silvertip (and very few carry a "reduced-recoil .357 125gr load"--most who carry the 125-grain loads opt for the full-power versions).

While I think the 9x19 is a perfectly adequate round for personal defence, it is a rather forlong hope to attempt to cast it as an equivalent to .357 Magnum.

 

[Sry0fcr]

I think you'd be surprised how many people carry the 145-grain Silvertip (and very few carry a "reduced-recoil .357 125gr load"--most who carry the 125-grain loads opt for the full-power versions).

This was my point the 145gr Winchester Silvertips are being matched or outperformed by the hotter 9mm rounds both out of 4" barrels. When you start factoring in shorter barrels the nine (even the standard loads) really looks good in comparison. I'm don't think anyone is saying that the nine will beat the .357 every time (because obviously that's not true) but that some 9mm loads are capable of .357 magnum performance.

 

[Ben Shepherd]

OK here's my unbiased opinion:

Handguns flat out SUCK in the power dept. Even a 223 outruns a HEAVY 44 mag by a good margin in availible ft lbs. We can haggle over HOW that force is applied, but it is a FACT that there is more availble to do the needed work.

With that in mind:
I decided that I am going to carry the nastiest pistol round I could control in rapid(2 shots/sec or faster)fire in a concealable platform. This, for me, is full snort 158's out of my SP101. Could I do it in an airweight smith? Nope. Tried that. Can I shoot faster with the same accuracy with a 45, 9, or 40? Yep. Do they hit as hard as the 357? Nope.

Are you man enough to control a 41, 44, or 454 in rapid fire? Congradulations, you're stronger than me. Just choose a slug design that applies that force in the needed manner.

Boils down to the fact it's personal choice. Run what you have confidence in, be it a 380, 9mm, 357sig, 40, or 45.

Just remember that the weaker the round, the MORE CRITICAL shot placement becomes.

 

[Eightball]

.357 mag can only be used out of a revolver or desert eagle (and since I don't know of anyone who carries a DE on a regular basis, probably out of a revo).

Diameter is close to 9mm--power is vastly different. Bullets are more effective. Platform is more reliable (i.e. NEVER FAIL, if first round's a dud, go to the next, "6 (or in my case, 7) for sure", etc). That, and I will use .357 out of my .357, not .38.

My two cents.

 

[critrxdoc]

Like it or not...

the .357 is still the manstopper that all other defensive rounds are judged by. Buffalo Bore and Doubletap rounds can appoach 800FPE in a standard package and still has considerable punch in a snub nosed package that can go in your pocket. There is a lot to like about a revolver. Don't have to worry about misfires, jammomatic bottomfeeders, weak springs in the mags, etc, etc. 100% reliability. No .45, or 10mm can give you the kind of concealment you get with a snub revolver. You may decide you opt for more rounds in a bigger package, but don't sweat the decision, either is a great choice.

 

[roo_ster]

From a practical standpoint, people carrying a .357 revolver will not carry big-game ammo for personal defense (at least from two-legged creatures).

My carry load is the Win Part Gold 180gr JHP. Most accurate out of my snubby, shoots to POA at 7 yards, and is much less drama (recoil, muzzle flash, muzzle blast) than the other full house magnums in 125gr & 158gr guise.

I have also switched to it in my 4" SW686 for when that hunk of steel is pressed into carry duty.

 

[TimboKhan]

I love the .45, but I carry the .357. Here is why:

Using the Remington Ballistics table, the closest bullets available (in terms of weight) are the 185 grain .45's and the 180 grain .357. The 4 choices of 185 grain .45's have between 411 and 534 ft/lbs of muzzle energy. The single 180 grain .357 choice has 524 ft/lbs of muzzle energy. Going down, there are four choices of 125 grain .357 loads, which have between 413 and 582 ft/lbs. Generally, I think that the muzzle energy is comparable, and while there is some variance, I don't know that these number alone would be enough to convince me one way or the other. In other words, based on muzzle energy, they are both pretty good rounds.

The true reason why I choose the .357 over the .45 is velocity. The fastest .45 only hits 1140 fps from the muzzle, whereas the fastest .357 hits 1450 fps, and even the slowest .357 are still faster, if only by a tiny bit, than the fastest .45.

Now then, in reality it really boils down to preference. Yeah, the .357 is faster and at least as powerful in terms of muzzle energy as some of the .45s. Would I in any way feel undergunned with a .45? No way. It is a good round that has a ton of real-world statistics backing up the fact that it will get the job done. I own two .45's as a testament to that statement. I carry the .357 because it gives me, in my opinion, a little bit better performance. For a carry gun, I want every advantage I can get, and the .357 offers the best combination of power, physical size of the gun and my ability to shoot it well. In addition, I can also practice with .38s (and I do, although I still make sure to always shoot some of what I carry) which means that I can take a sizable step down the recoil ladder.

I dunno, I am no expert when it comes to ballistics, and I am sure that someone somewhere is pulling thier hair out at this response, but it's the best answer I can give to the question.

 

[Socrates]

This discussion REALLY needs to get down to specific guns, with specific loads, and a chronograph. For carry, barrel length, and design, become REALLY important to maintain ballistics. Often the super fast, whiz bang, light loads
loose their glitter our of a 2-3 inch barrel. This changes the discussion, big time.

Often the best loads for retaining velocity are heavy for caliber bullets. So, we start looking at 158 grain in .357, and 230's in 45ACP. Also, since velocity is down, the load you choose has to have a bullet that will expand at the lower velocity, and, this varies by different bullet maker. Again, a need to be more specific.

Finally: Recoil. Everyone says a 357 carry gun is much better, but, my 357 carry gun, 360 PD, with stock grips, recoils too much to be shootable, and, I'm no lightweight when it comes to recoil. So, the .357 ends up with Plus P Corbon, instead.

Different loadings from different companies use powders that preform differently in snubs. some work well, some need a longer barrel. Again,
specific tests are needed.

So, quit with the generalities. Too many variables for a general pattern of one over the other to emerge...
Also, comparing factory ballistics doesn't work, unless their test results are taken from the gun you are going to be shooting it out of, or, a barrel of the same length.
Gun design also comes onto play. 2 inch 357 vs. 4" 45 acp, OR VICE VERSA??



S

 

[charby]

Why I like .357

Because if you can hit 'em with the bullet, you blind 'em with the muzzle flash and deaf 'em with the report.

-C

 

[jad0110]

Let me start by saying what many others have throughout THR: To each his own.

For me, though I like semi automatics, I love revolvers. Particularly .357/.38s. I'm currently putting money aside for a GP-100, but I am always tempted to sell my only semi to buy a sweet S&W Model 60 or SP101. Oh well, I'll keep it and and save a little longer and own all of 'em!

The biggest reason I prefer a .38/.357 revolver is mainly because I can shoot them better than semi autos. I am more accurate with my snubby S&W 642 .38 with its puny 1 7/8" barrel than I am with my Springfield XD9 service. I especially like being able to grip the revolver high up on the frame (just low enough so I don't get bitten by the hammer), which allows for surprisingly little muzzle flip, even when shooting 158 grn .357 practice ammo out of my Taurus 66. It has far less flip than my 9mm XD. The sights stay almost right on target. Finally, I just like the simplicity of a revolver, the original point-and-click interface. BTW, I saw a stat (I think on the NRA webpage) that in over 80% of encounters, NO shots are fired. And when there are, more than 4 shots fired is exceedingly rare. So the revolver's only real drawback to a semi auto, lack of capacity, is not really an issue, at least for me. Plus with practice, I am able to reload my revolvers almost as quickly as a semi.

Shoot what works for you, semi or revolver, in whatever caliber you can hit the target with (and can afford to shoot)!

 

[Snowdog]

if you hate Marshall/Sanow and burn them in effigy at your klan rallies

Once again... coffee on my shirt.


I'm getting a kink in my neck from all the "head-shaking" whenever I hear the typical load of cow crud concerning handgun velocity/energy/caliber from folks who appear to give far less credence to shot placement.
I strongly suspect if one were to put a 230gr .45acp Golden Saber through the heart or lungs of a thug, I doubt there would be any detectable different in physical reactions then had the thug been shot in the same exact spot with a 145gr Silvertip .357magnum or 127gr +P+ 9mm Ranger.

I must admit, when I began CCW, I was initially concerned my G19 and Kahr K9 used a cartridge that was marginal for defense. I have no such doubts anymore; I am now completely content with my choices.

Put a decent JHP from any cartridge generally acceptable for defense in the proper place and the job's likely done, end of story. If for some exotic reason that particular shot makes little immediate impact (drug involvment, etc), I sincerely doubt a different handgun cartridge would have made any perceivable difference. That's why you have more rounds available to you....
I personally choose a 1911 .45acp for home (to augment my Mossberg 590) and a Kahr K9 for carry as I know I can do my part with both these handguns.

 

[DWARREN123]

I like what the 357 mag does and how it does it. One shot hit or spray and pray? If you can hit it with a full house 357 mag then you don't (in my opinion) need a lot of ammo.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

I respect the .357 Magnum. I love the .45. Both are proven stoppers on the street. I couldn't decide between the two, so I got a 10mm Auto and feel I have the best of both worlds--.357 Magnum energies with more velocity than the .45 but more mass and initial diameter than the .357 Mag. I can live with that. Your results may vary.

Of course, this may not be considered in the realm of this discussion, in which case I apologize in advance.

 

[TallPine]

Want one round for 48-state critters/hunting AND personal defense street or wilderness? You want a 357 or stronger wheelgun round.

That pretty much sums it up for me.

And when I step out my door, I am as likely to meet a black bear or a cougar as bad guy on two legs. Also, I can carry one snakeshot round and "dial it in" if thats what I need.


Versatility - actually I am thinking that I would be very well served by just two guns: .357 revolver and a lever action rifle using the same cartridge (though I would sorely miss my .22's for cheap plinking)

 

[Spencer]

some over even .45ACP but wouldn't trust their lives with a 9mm? Bullet diameter is .002 smaller and most of the +P & +P+ loads are about on par with the Magnum (and the .357 SIG) and in most cases even standard pressure loads outperform the .357 in short barrel guns. I've been stressing myself out over picking a good defensive caliber for what seems like no real reason. I'll take 17+1 rounds of Double Tap and the cheaper plinking ammo instead of the wheel gun. I guess I just got caught up being a caliber queen...

I think the fed firefight in 1986 pretty much proves the 9mm is ****.

 

[defiant73a]

All it really proved is don't take a handgun to a rifle fight and don't leave the body armour in the trunk.

 

[Panthera Tigris]

I'll take a .357 or a 9mm over a .45 any day. I don't like the .45. I tried it, don't like it.

 

[Spencer]

All it really proved is don't take a handgun to a rifle fight and don't leave the body armour in the trunk

it proved the feds are arrogant and mini-14s rock.