physical issues and choice

Bezoar · May 25, 2014, 12:45 AM

Ill bite here, if a nice 6" barrel on a 357 can deliver penetration and accuracy with a nice heavier bullet and not push someone physical handicaps past followup shots.

why the heck should that person feel maligned or be made to feel like a fool because they didnt get the 41 mag or the 44 magnum loaded with heavy keith type 44 special?

fdf · May 25, 2014, 07:17 AM

"Ill bite here, if a nice 6" barrel on a 357 can deliver penetration and accuracy with a nice heavier bullet and not push someone physical handicaps past followup shots.

why the heck should that person feel maligned or be made to feel like a fool because they didnt get the 41 mag or the 44 magnum loaded with heavy keith type 44 special"

Buy and shoot what you are comfortable with. I don't worry about what other folks think. Not all folks like heavy recoil, I do not.

In each of my trucks there is a work pistol, there are 357 revolvers with 6" barrel.. There is a set of hearing protectors in each truck and I use them.

I had a 44 Mag and sold it, too much noise and too much pain.

I have other calibers, but the 357 fits my needs most of the time.

Folks buy the really large calibers to be macho, I am to old to be macho.

603Country · May 25, 2014, 08:08 AM

I feel the same way. The 357 works fine for me. Don't need a 44 or 454.

The 158 gr Keith bullet in my 357 does a fine job on hogs. The 125 gr JHP wasn't so impressive on hogs.

Brian Pfleuger · May 25, 2014, 08:53 AM

Because it's the internet.

Such a person would never (or almost never) be maligned in The Real World.

On the internet, animals can only be hunted with rifles that have "Magnum" in their names or handguns that start with .4 and have "Magnum" or "Casull" in their names.

Welcome, to the not real world.

jmr40 · May 25, 2014, 09:17 AM

A 357 mag with heavy bullets was killing almost every animal on the planet before the 44 magnum was invented. The 2 most important things are bullet placement, and penetration. With good bullets the 357 will equal the penetration of the bigger guns. A bigger hole is nice, but not as important as some believe. If you find you are more accurate with the 357 than a 44, then it is a better choice for you.

I have no argument with someone who prefers the 357, but I simply prefer the 44's. I rarely shoot full power loads, but if I choose to do so I can beat 357. Just because you have a car that will do 150 mph doesn't mean you always have to drive it that fast.

I've found mid range 44's to be every bit as effective as full power 357. And they do it with LESS recoil and blast. They are simply more comfortable for me to shoot. Despite internet talk, there is virtually no difference in size between full size 357's and 44 revolvers. I can also buy 44 mag ammo cheaper than 357. Once again so much for internet myths.

fdf · May 25, 2014, 09:51 AM

"A 357 mag with heavy bullets was killing almost every animal on the planet before the 44 magnum was invented."

I am old and I can remember when the 357 was the most powerful handgun cartridge a person could buy.

Accuracy is more important and also not having fear of the recoil when pulling the trigger.

I was at a gun shop with a gun range. Guy comes walking in with a .44 Mag and says he wants his money back, he had just bought it. He lays the pistol on the counter with his left hand.

Owner says nope, not going to happen.

The guy is a very small framed man..

He picks up his right arm with his left hand and sets his wrist on the counter top. He says I shot it once (one handed), it broke my wrist. I am a lawyer and I know my rights.

Owner said would cash be okay.

Art Eatman · May 25, 2014, 04:19 PM

Mr. Broke-wrist had no justifiable claim against the owner, but whatever little money loss he incurred saved a ton of stupid hassle.

Naw, Bezoar, from the standpoint of the shooter's accuracy limits with an iron-sight handgun, the old .357 Maggie will do just as well as a .41 or .44.

FWIW, back some sixty years ago a one-armed guy showed up at a deer lease. My father said the rancher was a bit off-put at the guy's idea of hunting deer with a revolver.

So the guy stood at the shooting table and cranked off a five-inch group at 100 yards. K-38; .38 Special.

The rancher nodded, grinned, and said no more.

My father said the guy killed a pretty decent buck. Neck-shot at 40-ish yards.

Bezoar · May 25, 2014, 09:50 PM

normally it always gets boiled down to

use a big 45 ounce 45 colt or 44 magnum revolver loaded with standard pressure 44 special or 45 colt using a 250-300 grain bullet. it just 'goes through everything lengthwise" and the meplat diameter and so forth.

then it turns into ".357 way to noisy..." then i chime in with "hearing protection"

bullets is still main issue. to easy to get crap bullets.

shortwave · May 26, 2014, 10:34 AM

Funny how over the years, we have let 'slick' marketing con us into thinking we need much more horse power to kill an animal then we really need.

While I may own and have hunted with a 357mag, 41mag, 45lc, 44sp., 44mag. or a 475/480 linebaugh , rest assured a 357mag with the right load will kill just as dead as the others with proper shot placement( which is true of any cal.) and should never be looked down upon for using.

Far as that goes, for deer hunting, a well placed .22 will kill a thin skinned deer with proper placement.
NOTE: before all the bs feedback...not condoning using 22's for deer hunting. Just stating a fact.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here but we all know it boils down to:

knowing the firearm
knowing our limitations with the firearm
choosing the right load for the job at hand

Anything else is just a bunch of internet/marketing 'hoopla'.

Quote:

Folks buy the really large calibers to be macho

Maybe some...but not all.

Some just like a variety of hunting tools. I usually make my mind up what I'm going to use a couple months before season comes in and start practicing with that firearm. Same with BP season. I like to hunt part of our , insanely short ml season with one of the caplocks then switch to an inline.

But know what you mean about getting old. Thinking of giving up the 475/480 due to Arthur in the hands and even find myself downloading the 44mag closer to the 44sp. loads more every year as well as loading the lighter 45lc loads.

Hey, it just dawned on me. Shortly, I may be viewed as one of those 'maligned' hunters using my 357...oh well...I've been called worse for less.

jeager106 · May 26, 2014, 12:23 PM

Frankly I LIKE the .357 magnum in both handgun & rifle.
I have 2 Marlins in .357 & my 14 year old loves his .357 rifle.
(have probably 8 .357 reolvers too)
Since Ohio allows rifles for deer that use straight walled ctgs, the .357, .44 mag, & .45 Colt Henrys have been flying off dealers shelves.
Some Ohio Big Buck club record was set by a farmer in S. Oh. using a 6" .357 magnun handgun with factory 158 grain h.p. ammo.
Distance was a sensible 30 yards, the buck topped over 200 pounds field dressed.
Like the .357? Then shoot well & use it.
I feel the .357 round is most versitle indeed & so does Ken Waters in his book "Pet Loads" as must read for all of us.
Th .357 in a rifle gains at least 400 fps over any handgun and is absolutely deeer worthy out to 100 yards.
Fact is the .357 in a rifle with 18 or longer inch barrel is on par with the "original" 30-30 loads of days long gone buy.
Thousands of deer were taken with the original 30-30 of a hun'ert years ago.

hartcreek · May 26, 2014, 03:47 PM

I carry and shoot from a .22 to a .44 Magnum BP too and yes I have an Automag too.

Guns are tools you pick the right tool for the specific task at hand that you can handle.

ZeroJunk · May 26, 2014, 06:49 PM

Try not spending any time worrying about what somebody else thinks about it.

reynolds357 · May 26, 2014, 07:07 PM

You all must have missed the memo that a minimum of a 500 S&W is now the mandatory minimum for deer hunting. Through evolution, Whitetail deer have recently evolved Kevlar panels over their vital organs.

DavidAGO · May 27, 2014, 04:17 PM

Far as that goes, for deer hunting, a well placed .22 will kill a thin skinned deer with proper placement.
NOTE: before all the bs feedback...not condoning using 22's for deer hunting. Just stating a fact.

If you could somehow make an ACCURATE tally of ALL the deer killed with firearms I bet you would find that more were killed with a .22 than any other caliber. Poachers all across the south have been jacklighting and killing deer with a relatively quiet .22 for decades. Note: I also am not condoning it, have never done so, and would not do so.

A .357 is more than enough round if shot placement is there. A .44 is not near enough of a round if shot placement is not there.

David

g.willikers · May 27, 2014, 04:35 PM

Hoo Boy, here it comes again:
"The Gun is the Least of it."

Art Eatman · May 27, 2014, 07:01 PM

Rather than "the least", I think I prefer "just part of the deal".

Which is beside the point of the question about the efficacy of the .357--which seems pretty well settled.

May 25, 2014, 12:45 AM	#1
Bezoar Junior member Join Date: October 19, 2004 Location: michigan Posts: 578	physical issues and choice Ill bite here, if a nice 6" barrel on a 357 can deliver penetration and accuracy with a nice heavier bullet and not push someone physical handicaps past followup shots. why the heck should that person feel maligned or be made to feel like a fool because they didnt get the 41 mag or the 44 magnum loaded with heavy keith type 44 special?

May 25, 2014, 08:53 AM	#4
Brian Pfleuger Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 25, 2008 Location: Austin, CO Posts: 19,578	Because it's the internet. Such a person would never (or almost never) be maligned in The Real World. On the internet, animals can only be hunted with rifles that have "Magnum" in their names or handguns that start with .4 and have "Magnum" or "Casull" in their names. Welcome, to the not real world. __________________ Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley

May 25, 2014, 09:51 AM	#6
fdf Senior Member Join Date: August 27, 2013 Posts: 117	"A 357 mag with heavy bullets was killing almost every animal on the planet before the 44 magnum was invented." I am old and I can remember when the 357 was the most powerful handgun cartridge a person could buy. Accuracy is more important and also not having fear of the recoil when pulling the trigger. I was at a gun shop with a gun range. Guy comes walking in with a .44 Mag and says he wants his money back, he had just bought it. He lays the pistol on the counter with his left hand. Owner says nope, not going to happen. The guy is a very small framed man.. He picks up his right arm with his left hand and sets his wrist on the counter top. He says I shot it once (one handed), it broke my wrist. I am a lawyer and I know my rights. Owner said would cash be okay. Last edited by fdf; May 25, 2014 at 10:03 AM.

May 26, 2014, 03:47 PM	#11
hartcreek Junior member Join Date: April 22, 2014 Location: Washington Posts: 1,549	Shoot what you can handle. I carry and shoot from a .22 to a .44 Magnum BP too and yes I have an Automag too. Guns are tools you pick the right tool for the specific task at hand that you can handle. Last edited by hartcreek; May 26, 2014 at 03:47 PM. Reason: typo

May 27, 2014, 04:35 PM	#15
g.willikers Senior Member Join Date: September 28, 2008 Posts: 10,442	Hoo Boy, here it comes again: "The Gun is the Least of it." __________________ Walt Kelly, alias Pogo, sez: “Don't take life so serious, son, it ain't nohow permanent.”

May 25, 2014, 07:17 AM	#2
fdf Senior Member Join Date: August 27, 2013 Posts: 117	"Ill bite here, if a nice 6" barrel on a 357 can deliver penetration and accuracy with a nice heavier bullet and not push someone physical handicaps past followup shots. why the heck should that person feel maligned or be made to feel like a fool because they didnt get the 41 mag or the 44 magnum loaded with heavy keith type 44 special" Buy and shoot what you are comfortable with. I don't worry about what other folks think. Not all folks like heavy recoil, I do not. In each of my trucks there is a work pistol, there are 357 revolvers with 6" barrel.. There is a set of hearing protectors in each truck and I use them. I had a 44 Mag and sold it, too much noise and too much pain. I have other calibers, but the 357 fits my needs most of the time. Folks buy the really large calibers to be macho, I am to old to be macho.

May 25, 2014, 08:08 AM	#3
603Country Senior Member Join Date: January 6, 2011 Location: Thornton, Texas Posts: 3,998	I feel the same way. The 357 works fine for me. Don't need a 44 or 454. The 158 gr Keith bullet in my 357 does a fine job on hogs. The 125 gr JHP wasn't so impressive on hogs.

May 25, 2014, 09:17 AM	#5
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,805	A 357 mag with heavy bullets was killing almost every animal on the planet before the 44 magnum was invented. The 2 most important things are bullet placement, and penetration. With good bullets the 357 will equal the penetration of the bigger guns. A bigger hole is nice, but not as important as some believe. If you find you are more accurate with the 357 than a 44, then it is a better choice for you. I have no argument with someone who prefers the 357, but I simply prefer the 44's. I rarely shoot full power loads, but if I choose to do so I can beat 357. Just because you have a car that will do 150 mph doesn't mean you always have to drive it that fast. I've found mid range 44's to be every bit as effective as full power 357. And they do it with LESS recoil and blast. They are simply more comfortable for me to shoot. Despite internet talk, there is virtually no difference in size between full size 357's and 44 revolvers. I can also buy 44 mag ammo cheaper than 357. Once again so much for internet myths.

May 25, 2014, 04:19 PM	#7
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	Mr. Broke-wrist had no justifiable claim against the owner, but whatever little money loss he incurred saved a ton of stupid hassle. Naw, Bezoar, from the standpoint of the shooter's accuracy limits with an iron-sight handgun, the old .357 Maggie will do just as well as a .41 or .44. FWIW, back some sixty years ago a one-armed guy showed up at a deer lease. My father said the rancher was a bit off-put at the guy's idea of hunting deer with a revolver. So the guy stood at the shooting table and cranked off a five-inch group at 100 yards. K-38; .38 Special. The rancher nodded, grinned, and said no more. My father said the guy killed a pretty decent buck. Neck-shot at 40-ish yards.

May 25, 2014, 09:50 PM	#8
Bezoar Junior member Join Date: October 19, 2004 Location: michigan Posts: 578	normally it always gets boiled down to use a big 45 ounce 45 colt or 44 magnum revolver loaded with standard pressure 44 special or 45 colt using a 250-300 grain bullet. it just 'goes through everything lengthwise" and the meplat diameter and so forth. then it turns into ".357 way to noisy..." then i chime in with "hearing protection" bullets is still main issue. to easy to get crap bullets.

May 26, 2014, 12:23 PM	#10
jeager106 Junior member Join Date: November 24, 2006 Location: N.E. Oh. Posts: 527	Frankly I LIKE the .357 magnum in both handgun & rifle. I have 2 Marlins in .357 & my 14 year old loves his .357 rifle. (have probably 8 .357 reolvers too) Since Ohio allows rifles for deer that use straight walled ctgs, the .357, .44 mag, & .45 Colt Henrys have been flying off dealers shelves. Some Ohio Big Buck club record was set by a farmer in S. Oh. using a 6" .357 magnun handgun with factory 158 grain h.p. ammo. Distance was a sensible 30 yards, the buck topped over 200 pounds field dressed. Like the .357? Then shoot well & use it. I feel the .357 round is most versitle indeed & so does Ken Waters in his book "Pet Loads" as must read for all of us. Th .357 in a rifle gains at least 400 fps over any handgun and is absolutely deeer worthy out to 100 yards. Fact is the .357 in a rifle with 18 or longer inch barrel is on par with the "original" 30-30 loads of days long gone buy. Thousands of deer were taken with the original 30-30 of a hun'ert years ago.

May 26, 2014, 06:49 PM	#12
ZeroJunk Senior Member Join Date: August 14, 2006 Location: Browns Summit NC Posts: 2,589	Try not spending any time worrying about what somebody else thinks about it.

May 26, 2014, 07:07 PM	#13
reynolds357 Senior Member Join Date: December 10, 2012 Posts: 6,165	You all must have missed the memo that a minimum of a 500 S&W is now the mandatory minimum for deer hunting. Through evolution, Whitetail deer have recently evolved Kevlar panels over their vital organs.

May 27, 2014, 04:17 PM	#14
DavidAGO Senior Member Join Date: October 7, 2008 Location: Magnolia, AR Posts: 340	Far as that goes, for deer hunting, a well placed .22 will kill a thin skinned deer with proper placement. NOTE: before all the bs feedback...not condoning using 22's for deer hunting. Just stating a fact. If you could somehow make an ACCURATE tally of ALL the deer killed with firearms I bet you would find that more were killed with a .22 than any other caliber. Poachers all across the south have been jacklighting and killing deer with a relatively quiet .22 for decades. Note: I also am not condoning it, have never done so, and would not do so. A .357 is more than enough round if shot placement is there. A .44 is not near enough of a round if shot placement is not there. David

May 27, 2014, 07:01 PM	#16
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	Rather than "the least", I think I prefer "just part of the deal". Which is beside the point of the question about the efficacy of the .357--which seems pretty well settled.