Hunting Purpose - .357 mag or .45 ACP?

[waterhouse]

Of the 2, I'd go with .357, but with the size of most central Texas deer I'd feel ethical using either if I was good enough to put the shot where it needed to go.

Why??

10mm is the autoloader equivalent of 180 grain .357 magnum.

I shoot a 1911 a lot more accurately than I do a revolver. I've read revolvers are more accurate, and they may be from a mechanical standpoint, but in my hands the autoloader wins, so given the choice I'd choose 10mm.

That is one reason why. I'm sure there are others.

 

[kmrcstintn]

my state (PA) allows anything centerfire as long as the bullets are designed to expand or fully made of lead; I do not detract from the ability of 'big-n-slow' calibers (ie: .44 spl, .45 colt, .45 acp) to perform and take medium sized game animals, but I would opt for a .357 magnum;

it is very hard to find a jacketed softpoint load or a full leadhead load in .45 acp that are factory produced; closest I've seen is Ultramax remanufactured with a full leadhead, but the powder charge and subsequent velocity are reduced as compared to fmj or jhp loads;

as far as .357 mag goes there are a variety of jsp and even full leadhead loads available that are designed for hunting purposes (eg: 158gr jsp, Federal CastCore 180gr full leadhead, Speer 170gr jsp Gold Dot)

 

[whited]

.

If "forced" to choose between .357 and .45 for hunting animals up to
deer size, I would choose the former in a legal barrel length, and shoot the
heaviest bullet I could find and get very close to my game before shooting
at it.

 

[Big Bill]

A 4" to 4 1/2" barrel is too short for hunting, IMHO.

 

[MCgunner]

I own a .45ACP. I have killed deer with my .357 Blackhawk and my .357 Rossi carbine and a javelina with a Rossi 971 in .357. .357 is perhaps the absolute best caliber for the hiker where no bigger than black bear may be encountered. It is fabulously versatile.

To 100 yards, I can hit a deer and kill it with either my carbine or my Ruger Blackhawk under ideal conditions. However, I don't have a scope on the revolver and I don't trust my eyes past 50, so I limit my 180 grain XTP handload (1400 fps) to 50 yards in that gun. Actually, the deer I killed were taken with a 158 grain gas checked cast SWC at 1470 fps in the revolver/1850 fps in the carbine. I've got to try some Hodgdon's li'l gun, though. I understand it will significantly help the carbine. I group that 158 SWC or the 180 XTP into 4" at 100 yards with my revolver when I eat my cherrios and I'm firing off sand bags. I've never owned a .45 that would do that well. Also, the .357 is 5" high at 50 when sighted dead on at 100 with the 180 grain load. That's pretty flat shooting for a handgun. A .45ACP starts dropping in the dirt by 50. The revolver is kinda running out of energy past 50 yards, so you really should keep shots not much past 50 yards, but in the rifle, I'm still pushing 650 ft lbs at 100 yards. You don't get that sort of boost from a .45ACP in a rifle due to the fast burning powder and low pressures. The .357 makes a fine combination cartridge for revolver/carbine and the Blackhawk and M92 carbine sort of go together. We could talk .45 Colt and .44 magnum, but that's not the OP.

 

[MCgunner]

I shoot a 1911 a lot more accurately than I do a revolver. I've read revolvers are more accurate, and they may be from a mechanical standpoint, but in my hands the autoloader wins, so given the choice I'd choose 10mm.

If you can't shoot accurately with a handgun, you have no business hunting with one. JMHO. It takes practice. IMO, at the range you intend to shoot, you should be able to group inside 6" from a field position. If you can't do that, take a rifle. For me, that's quite easy to do with an accurate load in a Blackhawk to at least 75 yards. 100 yards is pushing it with iron sights. I've owned 2 1911s and neither possessed this sort of accuracy. The AMT wasn't too bad, but the AO was lucky to get that at 30 yards. No, autos are not generally capable of the kind of accuracy that hunting requires, but there are exceptions. I've fired a G20 that was pretty impressive. My Ruger P90 possesses revolver like accuracy out to as far as a .45ACP can shoot. If they were to chamber a P90 in 10mm, I'd be interested.

 

[claiborne]

In my younger days....

I watched a guy shoot two common size bucks, 4 point mullies in Idaho, with a 357 revolver with two shots at about 40 yards. He only did it because it was stinking cold and the bolt on his 270 rifle was frozen.
I myself have taken game, pigs, deer and bear with a .44 blackhawk revolver. I now carry a S&W 66 with a 6" barrel and have taken nothing bigger than coyotes with it.
The 44 mag was great but bad arthiritus keeps me from hanging on through too much recoil. I am currently trying to put together a 460 rowland on a Dan Wesson PM 7. I have read good things about the round. I do not yet know if I will be able to handle that recoil so I am keeping my 357 just in case.

 

[safenate]

I believe both could be used for deer, though some may agrue a 17 HMR could scramble deer brains as good as both of them. The 357 should would make a better choice, IMHO. The Remington 165 gr or almost anything 140 grain or more, that one can put in the proper place.
FWIW: 10mm is a great round, but it isn't a 357 Magnum (it would do well for deer).

 

[Beagle-zebub]

He only did it because it was stinking cold and the bolt on his 270 rifle was frozen.

That's when you pee on the bolt, Battle of the Bulge -style.
That's why they call it "stainless."

 

[waterhouse]

If you can't shoot accurately with a handgun, you have no business hunting with one. JMHO.

I didn't say I couldn't shoot accurately with handgun. I said I shoot a 1911 more accurately than I shoot a revolver. Thus, my explanation for a possible reason of choosing 10mm over .357.

I've owned 2 1911s and neither possessed this sort of accuracy.

One of mine in .45 shoots very small groups at 50 yards. I'm having a 6" made in 10mm, which with the flatter shooting round and longer sight radius will hopefully get me out a litter farther.

 

[22-rimfire]

Here is the deal. If given the choice between a 45acp and 357 mag revolver for deer hunting, most will choose the 357 mag. With a pistol, a 10mm would be a lot better if it is legal in your state to hunt with. That is not to say you can't kill a deer with a 45 acp pistol. You can, just not as well as with the 357 mag or 10mm.

When I first started shooting handguns, I bought a 6" Colt Python (357 mag) for deer hunting and general home defense. I liked the revolver. At the time, the 180 gr solids were not available from the factory. I used 158 gr SP's. After a lot of reading, I came to the conclusion that the 41 or 44 mag would be a lot more effective for whitetail hunting. Some will choose the hot 45LC loads in a revolver. I chose a 41 mag revolver and have been quite happy with it overall. I have a number of them now. I also have a Ruger Super Redhawk in 480 as my current preferred deer hunting handgun now. The 10mm is about like a 41 mag if you lean toward a pistol.

Whatever you choose, you have to learn to shoot it fairly well for hunting. You have to learn how to deal with the recoil. I try to just ignore it (until after the shot ) Enjoy and have fun. Scopes help for handgun hunting also but you have to get used to using one.

 

[MCgunner]

Well, my favorite hunting handgun, frankly, is neither, though I've taken deer with the .357. My favorite hunting handgun is my TC Contender in .30-30 winchester. It doubles the effective range of a .44 magnum and will extend the effective range of a .454 Casull by 50 yards. It shoots flat, it carries its energy WAY out there due to superior ballistic coefficients of the Nosler Ballistic Tips I fire out of it, and it's rifle accurate. 3" groups at 200 yards are NO problem off the bench. All I need is a decent rest to shoot that far accurately in the field. And, one shot is all it ever takes. It's laying down 1000 ft lbs at 200 yards and sighted for 200, it's only 3" high at 100.

Proper tool for the job. I don't drive nails with a screwdriver.

 

[22-rimfire]

The Contender in 30-30 win is a great combination.

I find it interesting how some people diminish the effectiveness of a 30-30 in a rifle for deer hunting in favor of something like a 30-06 or whatever. But in a handgun, it is a great deer caliber. It is better than both the 41 and 44 mag. It suffices to say that handguns are handguns and rifles are rifles.

Like you said, don't drive nails with a screwdriver.

 

[MCgunner]

It's kinda like the guys that wanna hunt deer with a .223. Yeah, it can be done, with restrictions, but why not get an adequate tool for the job? Killing deer with a .357 or a .223 is more of a "just because I can" thing. They're not ideal hunting tools for this size game. They are limited primarily by range. Get close enough, use the right bullet, no problem. Texas deer, too, are rather easy to kill being smallish. .357 might be minimal in Saskatchewan, but it's enough in Texas on 100 lb jackalopes.

 

[Lon371]

I didnt readd all the post, But check your hunting regs. Some states dont allow .45 acp.

Having said that, I would still choose the .357 with a heavy bullet. As long as you know your limitaions and use good judgement you should be fine.

Lonny

 

[JWF III]

Check local game laws is the best advice I can give.

For Georgia- for a pistol to be legal for deer, it must produce 500 ft. lbs. of energy at 100 yards. I haven't really looked for it, but I doubt any factory loaded .45 ACP will do that. Most factory loaded .357 won't do that. The only exceptions being some very stout loads from Buffalo Bore and Double Tap. I don't even think Cor-Bon has any loads that will do it, but I could be wrong there. As far as the 10 mm goes, same problem as the .357. Double Tap is the only company that might make the ammo that'll do it. Heck even many .44 magnum loads will not do 500 ft.lbs. at 100 yards.

If stopped by the DNR, I would expect to have to prove what energy the load has, either in the field or in court. If it's questionable, they'll require you to prove you're legal.

for hunting I would prefer FMJ

Again, check the local game laws. Doing this in GA (and many other states) you'll be going home with a nice yellow award for this if checked. Expanding bullets required.

Wyman

 

[stana]

Deer aren't hard to kill, (I only take lung shots) but they do often run after the shot. I want a bullet that shots clear through, for the blood trail. Pick a good bullet. That said, I would pick the handgun that I could shoot the best and limit myself to the distance that I could keep "ALL" shots on a paper plate off hand. I now have a 4" S&W and a G30, both are accurate. If they were all I had and I want to go hunting I wouldn't stay home. And I'd be better armed that if "I" had a bow. (and I do bow hunt) (and If the G30 was legal)

 

[foghornl]

I would pick the .357Mag for "puttin'-Bambi-in-the-freezer" duty.

Now, be sure to check with your local Game-N-Fish guys. There may well be limits for barrel length, caliber, energy level, bullet constuction, etc.

F'rinstance, Ohio requires a minimum 5" barrel and .357 diameter.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

Tennessee regulations only state that it must be "4 inch barrel, centerfire"...the 4 inch barrel rules out anything smaller than 9mm.

 

[Mainer2009]

I would have to go with the 357, faster, harder hitting, lots of options for ammunition.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

This bullet was recovered from a deer...it is a 230 grain Remington Golden Sabre (factory 45acp load...standard pressure) fired from my 4.25" 1911.





It penetrated 18 inches...through the near side shoulder blade, blew out a section of a rib 3 inches long, went through the lungs, between the ribs on the far side, broke the front leg on the far side, and came to rest under the skin down in the front leg. (I have pics)

The bullet did separate (as Golden Sabres usually do), but only after hitting the front leg on the far side...I found both pieces of the bullet in the same place.

The shot was taken from 15 yards away and 40 feet above the deer. The deer dressed out at 90 lbs. (small buck), he dropped at the shot, kicked a few times and died.

If its deer you're hunting...how could ANYTHING work any better than that.

 

[Kaptin]

.45 all the way...357 pretty good, but it aint no 45.

When the US Army adopted the .45 ACP it was largely due to the Cavalry at the time. They liked the effects on horses. This came from an article in Guns and Ammo Handguns 2009 Annual. They tested the round on cadavers, but the live subjects had weights starting at 1200 pounds. This is said to be the real reason the Army went with the .45 over the .357 / 9mm

 

[pps]

.45 all the way...357 pretty good, but it aint no 45.

When the US Army adopted the .45 ACP it was largely due to the Cavalry at the time. They liked the effects on horses. This came from an article in Guns and Ammo Handguns 2009 Annual. They tested the round on cadavers, but the live subjects had weights starting at 1200 pounds. This is said to be the real reason the Army went with the .45 over the .357 / 9mm

The .357 magnum didn't come around until the 1930's...a little after the .45 There were no .357 magnums to test the .45 against when the army switched to the .45

 

[Kaptin]

.45 > .357 ;bigger badder hole makes bigger badder destruction, it was true 100 years ago and it has not changed

Equal bullets in both caliber offer about the same energy in foot pounds, but the .45 makes more destruction due to the bigger bore size.

 

[buck460XVR]

The clincher here is the OPs mention of using factory loaded ammo. There's way more options to .357 hunting ammo than that found in .45ACP. I have no doubt that a .45 will kill a deer, and I know for sure a .357 will. I have done it, several times with no problem.......and all were shot using factory ammo. I now roll my own, but if I didn't, Federal Fusions would be my choice when it comes to factory loaded deer rounds in .357.