Who needs 357 Dainty?
- Thread starter tomrkba
- Start date
For personal defense from two leg predators, and if "the worst I'm likely to come across is a wild dog or coyote", I agree with you regarding 357 Magnum. For anything larger, I would set minimum:
Caliber: 41 Magnum. Bullet 265-270 grains with .320" dia meplat. Muzzle velocity: 1100 fps.
Yeah, even 22 Hornet will kill polar bear or grizzly, never mind 357 Magnum. The point is that from moment shooter hits such large animal with 22 Hornet or 357 Magnum, it will take hours before beast collapses. In that period, wounded and enraged large bear could maul whole family. In that respect, larger caliber with heavier bullet has the edge. I am not saying that it will stop bear in its tracks, but chances for stopping attack are considerably larger with minimum 41/270/1100.
Snidely70431
Member
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2018
- Messages
- 420
The .357 was developed for law enforcement as a revolver cartridge able to defeat ballistic vests and automobile metal then being used by criminals, when before then only the Colt Super Automatic could do that. For myself, I feel that a .38 Special, or even a .38 S&W, is more than adequate for any threat I am likely to face on my home.
mcb
Member
357 Magnum, Jack of all trades, Master of none. It's bark is worst than it's bite.
Moonclips rule but 357 mag sucks on moonclips. Too long and skinny.
I use 38 Special far more often than 357 Magnum. If I think I need 357 mag levels of powder I will grab my 10mm revolver or step up to my 44 mag.
Got no use for 357 mag.
Moonclips rule but 357 mag sucks on moonclips. Too long and skinny.
I use 38 Special far more often than 357 Magnum. If I think I need 357 mag levels of powder I will grab my 10mm revolver or step up to my 44 mag.
Got no use for 357 mag.
stonebuster
Member
Or a 3" k frame S&W Model 65 or 13 357. There's a reason the FBI used them. In my neck of the woods it's not four legged predators that concern me.
Targa
Member
Ain't that the truth ! The two legged trash are unpredictable.
Last edited:
Some time around 1990, I realized that N-Frames were too big for my hands. Specifically, my index fingers were simply too short to reach the trigger, for good DA work, while I was holding in the weapon in an ergonomically-proper/healthy grip, even if my long hands did like the feel of typical N-Frame grips/stocks. I had been shooting .44 Magnum, .45 ACP, and then .41 Magnum N-Frames, from 1984 to 1990, holding them with bit off-center, with my hand scooted a bit farther along fingers’ side of the grip frame, which placed my thumb joints and bones more into the path of the recoil. (This is almost certainly a leading reason why my right hand is not aging nearly as well as my left hand!) To make a long story short, I have K/L/GP100/1911-sized hands. So, I shifted to .357 Magnum, as my main revolving-pistol cartridge. .45 ACP was, and remains, my big-bore auto-loading pistol cartridge.
Peace officering being my occupation, I was sometimes required to rush toward trouble, and sometimes required to stand my ground, so, it came to pass that I did use .357 Magnum, defensively, one time. GP100. There was nothing dainty about the result.
Notably, nothing fits my hand better than the original-pattern GP100 factory grip. While it may be possible to find a .44 Special GP100, I would rather have the sixth shot. Other brands of revolvers can fit me well, too, but not with factory grips/stocks.
I resumed using big bores, in single-action revolving pistols, in the late Nineties. .45 Colt. Since I retired, six years ago, and no longer have to follow PD rules, I can carry a single action sixgun, when out and about, if I wish. (Yes, my oath of office, and, therefore, PD policy, applied 24/7/365.) Life is good.
Peace officering being my occupation, I was sometimes required to rush toward trouble, and sometimes required to stand my ground, so, it came to pass that I did use .357 Magnum, defensively, one time. GP100. There was nothing dainty about the result.
Notably, nothing fits my hand better than the original-pattern GP100 factory grip. While it may be possible to find a .44 Special GP100, I would rather have the sixth shot. Other brands of revolvers can fit me well, too, but not with factory grips/stocks.
I resumed using big bores, in single-action revolving pistols, in the late Nineties. .45 Colt. Since I retired, six years ago, and no longer have to follow PD rules, I can carry a single action sixgun, when out and about, if I wish. (Yes, my oath of office, and, therefore, PD policy, applied 24/7/365.) Life is good.
eddiememphis
Member
At 180 grains, Buffalo Bore claims 1400fps and 783 ft.lbs for the .357, 1500/899 for the .44. That is an increase of 7 and 14 percent.
If you step up to a 305gr at 1325/1189, that is 52 percent more energy coming from a bullet that is 20 percent larger.
I am a big fan of .357 but it is nowhere near the size or power of a .44 magnum. Or a .45 Colt blackhawk load.
shanep0017
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2022
- Messages
- 53
I wasn't referring to energy numbers, I'm talking about tests of actual performance. The 357 went just as far as the 44 in ballistic gel going through the same barrier. I'll try to find the video I'm talking about.
It's kind of like the FBI going back to 9mm, the 40 is bigger and better on paper but the performance is similar. With a hardcast load the main thing we're looking for is penetration, if the 357 goes just as far and I'm able to control it better my chances of hitting something vital increase.
I like the 44 and I'm not saying it doesn't have it's place but the 357 is definitely more versatile and availability is much better.
Considering I'm in the lower 48, I just feel I'm better served with the 357. Im not saying the 44 is useless I just feel the 357 is the better option for me personally. If I were in Alaska I might have a completely different opinion on the matter. In any case the 357 is far from "dainty" and one has to acknowledge that if the 357 hadn't been developed the 44 probably wouldn't have been developed either.
I like my .44 but I'm not lugging it around unless I'm going after something larger than pigs. I do have a .44 lever that I use for short range deer. I have several .357s but shoot mostly .38s out of them. These days the 10mm is my woods gun. My 180 XTP loads have taken some nice hogs around here...
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
The 180gr .357 is comparable to a 260gr .44 and will penetrate similarly. That's a heavy bullet for the .357 but just over standard weight for the .44 and they go up nearly 100gr from there. The 355gr .44 at 1250fps will nearly double up on the 180gr .357 for penetration. The .44 also doesn't have to expand to be effective, while the .357 is heavily dependent on bullet expansion to be effective. Sorry but there is a vast chasm between the two.
The development of the .44Mag had little to do with the .357. The latter was developed primarily for law enforcement, while the .44Mag was always the sportsman's cartridge. Elmer Keith was writing of his heavy .44Spl loads before the .357 was introduced. Along with wildcatters like John Lachuk.
trackskippy
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Messages
- 3,490
Will "L" work?
Ive always got my eyes out for a 29/629 snubby too, but the 696 is a class act. Id probably go for a 69 too, but there's just something in the back of my head about them I don't like. Cant quite figure out what that is. Ah, I know. They just should have brought back the 696.
UncleEd
Member
The greatest achievement of the volume use of big
bore magnums is the destruction of hand nerves,
wrists, forearms and elbows.
Those who are wise stick to 9mm and .38 Special,
leaving the heavy duty tasks to the occasional
use of a rifle.
Now if the use of the big bore blasters is confined to
a cylinder or maybe two perhaps once each month or
six months, the dubious achievement may be avoided.
bore magnums is the destruction of hand nerves,
wrists, forearms and elbows.
Those who are wise stick to 9mm and .38 Special,
leaving the heavy duty tasks to the occasional
use of a rifle.
Now if the use of the big bore blasters is confined to
a cylinder or maybe two perhaps once each month or
six months, the dubious achievement may be avoided.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
The greatest achievement of the volume use of big
bore magnums is the destruction of hand nerves,
wrists, forearms and elbows.
Those who are wise stick to 9mm and .38 Special,
leaving the heavy duty tasks to the occasional
use of a rifle.
Now if the use of the big bore blasters is confined to
a cylinder or maybe two perhaps once each month or
six months, the dubious achievement may be avoided.
People probably get the impression that I shoot the heavy stuff all the time but I don't. I hunt with them, test them and use them when appropriate but don't particularly enjoy it. Most the time I'm shooting .22's, 9mm's or moderate big bores comparable to .45ACP.
westernrover
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,613
I see 357 exactly like 9mm -- just enough ballistic performance, provides higher capacity, and doesn't create more recoil than necessary. 357 and 9mm are essentially the same, but 357 offers more case capacity. That means it can use longer, heavier bullets and slower-burning, bulkier powders. While 357 can use bullets heavier than the 9mm's 147 grain, those bullets in the 180 and 200 grain aren't the prevailing choice for the best performance in defensive use. 158 grains is not that much more than common 9mm bullet weights and there is a lot of overlap in the lighter weights. 357 can use the bulkier, slow-burning, progressive powders to deliver higher velocities, but as with 357 Sig, it doesn't seem to be necessary. I do think the higher pressure of 357 is a necessity when considering 38 Special in barrels shorter than 6 inches. I'm not saying low-pressure 38's are ineffective from short barrels, but that they are not comparable to 9mm from a typical pistol. 357 with faster powders can easily be loaded to meet handgun ammo performance standards without more recoil than anything else. Big bore cartridges cannot do this. To meet the most popular defensive ammo standards, they will always have substantially more recoil. Besides that, I haven't seen 7 or 8-shot 44 revolvers.
Of course, I realize the original post was a troll intended in jest and I risk being a fool for responding seriously. I mean, this is a caliber debate thread. I'm sure I haven't pointed out anything new. But yeah, I like my 9mm euro-pellets for all the above reasons. Some more: it's hard to find .429 or .451 pellets that perform for defensive use without high velocity or being designed for the 45ACP. Maybe there are some obscure 44 Special bullets out there, but most of the Magnum are designed to function at magnum velocities. There are not a lot of options for 45 Colt which is overwhelmingly a cowboy action cartridge these days, not a defensive cartridge. There is good bullet selection for 45 ACP, but they don't have crimp grooves or higher sectional density that would be preferred in a double-action 45 Colt revolver.
Of course, I realize the original post was a troll intended in jest and I risk being a fool for responding seriously. I mean, this is a caliber debate thread. I'm sure I haven't pointed out anything new. But yeah, I like my 9mm euro-pellets for all the above reasons. Some more: it's hard to find .429 or .451 pellets that perform for defensive use without high velocity or being designed for the 45ACP. Maybe there are some obscure 44 Special bullets out there, but most of the Magnum are designed to function at magnum velocities. There are not a lot of options for 45 Colt which is overwhelmingly a cowboy action cartridge these days, not a defensive cartridge. There is good bullet selection for 45 ACP, but they don't have crimp grooves or higher sectional density that would be preferred in a double-action 45 Colt revolver.
Lol. so true.
I saw the title and assumed it was some kind of "Hans and Franz" type, overcompensating for...... something.
Last edited:
Rock185
Member
I tried carrying a 29 for a while. Nope, not for me. One of my fellow officers carried either a 6" or 6 1/2" 29 off duty in a shoulder holster..
PistoleroWadcutterGANG
Member
For comedic value and good laughs with friends. At the store A guy asked how the Desert Eagle carried. I was wearing elastic waist shorts at the time. I slipped it into the front pocket where it proceeded to pull mah shorts down; showing tighty whites. It was a great laugh for all involved. Good friends now gone.
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
I agree as I am proof of this statement. What’s funny is I had a few older gents tell me I should be careful years ago. I laughed. I was bullet proof.
edwardware
Member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2010
- Messages
- 4,424
Oof. . . that kind of stung. . .
Until I noticed you stopped shy at .44 RemMag.
Not man enough for the .45 Ruger Only loads? My 350gr cast .45 Colt loads would knock that tender touchy feely Smith action out of time in a box or two.
It'll also blow out any loose eyebrow hairs you haven't plucked.
adcoch1
Member
Isn't 44 kind of the bottom end of big bore cartridges?... the 44 mag s&w 29 was my first revolver, and I wore it out never understanding why anyone would want a lesser 357 "baby magnum". It took 20 more years before I finally took a serious look at 357, and mostly to widen the playing field of 38 special handguns. I love 357 in a rifle, and it makes sense in a rifle/handgun pairing more than most of the bigger revolver cartridges. But it just ain't a 44 magnum, even with boutique ammo. Luckily I can have both... hard to beat a k frame Smith, even with a model 29...
Yep, Add me to the list of "deaf as a post" aged shooters with two thumbs up (if I could get my arthritic, frozen in place thumb joints to work!)
Best Regards, Rod
