The wimpiness of the .357 magnum

[USSR]

Quote:
Originally Posted by USSR
And I really like my Model 686. But, I'm not going to try to convince myself or anyone else that it's suitable for more than it really is.

Don

Did you think I was serious about Chuck Norris hunting bigfoot to extinction?

gspn,

I don't see your humorous statement about bigfoot being quoted by me, so obviously I didn't take it seriously. I was simply addressing the overall theme of this thread in which some guys seem to think the .357 Magnum is perfectly suitable for game much larger than deer.

Don

 

[buck460XVR]

Quote:
I was simply addressing the overall theme of this thread in which some guys seem to think the .357 Magnum is perfectly suitable for game much larger than deer.

Don

Actually, because of the title of this thread, I was under the impression that the overall theme was just the opposite, that the .357 was inappropriate for any thing larger than a 8X11 piece of paper. Basically, what I've seen, is folks giving examples of both extremes of the parameters of the .357. What something is capable in one persons hands in a particular scenario, regardless of the platform, does not make it capable for everyone. Back in those days when the .357 was king of the hill for hunting handguns, Fred Bear was taking down Alaskan Brown Bears with a longbow and wooden arrows. Something else that is not appropriate for most folks today considering what better options are now available. But at that time, if you wanted to hunt Brownies with a bow, you had no other option and doing so, made you a true Archer. Taking large/dangerous game with a .357 back then supposedly did the same for a handgunner. Was it wise? Maybe at the time. But since there were no other options, it was what one did. Same goes for hunting optics. Back when there were none, one used irons for those 400 yard shots on elk.......now with optics available and affordable for most folks, that is not an acceptable practice. In the hands of the inexperienced or the unethical handgun hunter, even my .460 X-Frame is not appropriate, even for the smallest deer.

Hunting is all about ethics and one's limitations. Folks need to consider and evaluate both before going to the woods to hunt with any weapon.

 

[USSR]

buck460XVR,

Reread the OP, in which he states:

...I would like to know why alot of people say it simply"doesnt have the power" when history proves otherwise.

He is clearly doubting those who argue that the .357 Magnum is a marginal deer round at best. Also,

Back in those days when the .357 was king of the hill for hunting handguns, Fred Bear was taking down Alaskan Brown Bears with a longbow and wooden arrows. Something else that is not appropriate for most folks today considering what better options are now available. But at that time, if you wanted to hunt Brownies with a bow, you had no other option and doing so, made you a true Archer. Taking large/dangerous game with a .357 back then supposedly did the same for a handgunner. Was it wise? Maybe at the time. But since there were no other options, it was what one did.

You make it sound like they were shooting bears with bows and arrow and handguns because that is all they had. No, they were doing it to push the limit and sell a product. Handgun hunting was not something that was done in the 1930's, it is a much more recent phenomenom.

Don

 

[buck460XVR]

buck460XVR,




You make it sound like they were shooting bears with bows and arrow and handguns because that is all they had. No, they were doing it to push the limit and sell a product. Handgun hunting was not something that was done in the 1930's, it is a much more recent phenomenom.

Don

No, I stated, in order to be an Archer back then and hunt with a bow, about all there was were long bows and wooden arrows. There were not a lot of archery hunters back then either, and while there were only a few that hunted with handguns, the evidence presented in this thread shows that there was a few. Back when I first started bowhunting, Archery for deer was only practiced by a few. The year I got my first buck with a bow here in Wisconsin, less than 100 deer were registered by Archers that year. That was with a re-curve and wooden arrows. Last year there was almost 90,000. When I first started hunting deer with a handgun back in the 70s, most folks laughed at me for even attempting to, even tho the firearm on my hip was a .44mag. As I said, one needs to consider ethics and their limitations regardless of the weapon they choose. Archery hunting and handgun hunting is still done by most of us to push the limit and create a challenge that is not always there if one always uses a rifle. That has not changed.

 

[rswartsell]

Native Americans killed every critter that walks the North American continent with flint knapped arrowheads and their forebears killed Mammoth. A certain number of them died trying and many wounded animals no doubt resulted.

So what?

The question seems to be what rational decision should someone make today about using .357 for North American game. I gave you my parameters, they seem reasonable to me and I don't advise anything I have not done with success. Where I suggest there is a wall with the potential I personally believe it should not be exceeded.

Often, people who wish to inform themselves, or those enamored of a different alternative exaggerate limitations as freely as those who would exaggerate capabilities. I only wish to offer objective experience based limitations that do neither.

.357 will kill a wild pig, should not however be attempted against Hogzilla, at short range it will be as effective as you are against our admittedly smaller deer. 4" circle (and the right 4" circle, know your target's anatomy), less than 100 yds. less than 250 #. All of this assumes HOT .357 and correct bullet out of a 6" or more barrel.

 

[tactikel]

A properly loaded .357 falls between a 38-40 and a 38-55 which has killed 10s of thousands of deer. My favorite load is a 168gr keith SWC over 1X.5 grs of 2400. A stout load, but also VERY accurate from my Mod 28.
IMHO you should handload if you shoot a lot of .357.

 

[Macchina]

Chuck Norris hunted the Bigfoot to extinction armed with nothing but a .357 snub and a pouch of chewing tobacco.

Seriously though…I really like my Model 586.

I don't know if that's really true. Didn't some guy in Texas just kill a Bigfoot?

 

[gspn]

I don't know if that's really true. Didn't some guy in Texas just kill a Bigfoot?

I hadn't heard that…but Chuck Norris lives in Texas…just sayin.

 

[javjacob]

Why is it so many rounds are loaded lighter than they used to be? 22mag used to be a lot hotter when it first came out... why did they tame the 22mag? I don't understand any reason for taming the 22mag.

 

[buck460XVR]

Why is it so many rounds are loaded lighter than they used to be? 22mag used to be a lot hotter when it first came out... why did they tame the 22mag? I don't understand any reason for taming the 22mag.

I wanna know why they are downloading the newer Red Ryder BB guns. Back when I had mine in the fifties, they were one of the most powerful mass produced BB guns on the market. The BBs would fly outta them at blazin' speeds and penetrate both sides of a Folgers Coffee can. Bought one for my grand-daughter here a while back and you can watch the BB barely make it outta the barrel before it bounces off the side of a paper thin aluminum soda can. Gol dang Lawyers!

 

[JRH6856]

I wanna know why they are downloading the newer Red Ryder BB guns

I don't remember the Red Ryder being all that powerful. I had a Model 25 in the fifties which was considered Daisy's most powerful BB gun (375-450fps) and powerwise, it would out shoot any lever action Daisy any of my friends or my cousins had.

 

[CraigC]

22mag used to be a lot hotter when it first came out... why did they tame the 22mag?

Huh? .22Mag ballistics never changed. A 40gr at 1910fps is what it has always been.

 

[TimboKhan]

Hello Friends,

This thread has devolved pretty significantly, and so I am closing it. Should any of you wish to complain about my jackbooted abuse of authority, consider that in a thread nominally about the .357, in the last page worth of posts we have had a couple of mentions of Chuck Norris, a mention of native americans and their flint knapped arrows, and the .22 mag has been brought up for no reason that I can discern.

Stick a fork in it.