The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 28, 2010, 05:43 AM   #26
WESHOOT2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,270
I am not offering theory

I am certain one can convince oneself of anything.

Like I am convinced the proper and best people-shooting choice in 357 Magnum is a 125g JHP launched in excess of 1220fps.
Or either the 135g or 155g .400" JHP at 1200fps minimum.
Or the 230g JHP of proper construction going 730fps.

Or even a 115g .355" JHP at over 1320fps, or a same-diameter 124--127g JHP at 1270fps.
Or more.

LE/military applications may require something a bit different, but still close to what I'm convinced of.



ps those "book-writing liars" were officers doing their best to save their brothers
__________________
.
"all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"
WESHOOT2 is offline  
Old September 28, 2010, 05:54 AM   #27
therealdeal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 627
your service will always be appreciated. thanx for the advice too- I am learning but still have a long way to go on the ammo, weshoot(as far as progressing). I grew up in new england and my college yrs were in NH(plus many camping trips). I used to visit my buddy in fairlee,VT
__________________
NRA Distinguished Life Member

"Abraham Lincoln freed all men, but Sam Colt made them all equal." (post Civil War slogan)
therealdeal is offline  
Old September 28, 2010, 06:29 AM   #28
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
WESHOOT2

With the sole exception of the .45acp load you cited, all the loads you prefer are fairly high velocity.

I don't think anybody will argue for low velocity rounds, for most purposes. (Although for hunting, heavier, slower rounds tend to do the job while wrecking less meat.)

But if a 125gr at 1220fps will do the job, then a 158gr at 1220fps should definitely do the job, and should penetrate deeper. Assuming similar velocities and comparable metallurgy, expansion should also be similar.

More penetration may or may not be desirable.

But the snark wasn't necessary, nor helpful.
MLeake is offline  
Old September 28, 2010, 06:46 AM   #29
therealdeal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 627
mleake, I am still trying to figure out and referring to part of your post about hunting/meat- does the 125gr or the 158gr (of the ones you mentioned during your last, most recent post) do more damage to the big bad guy that gets shot during home invasion(or small guy for that matter)?
__________________
NRA Distinguished Life Member

"Abraham Lincoln freed all men, but Sam Colt made them all equal." (post Civil War slogan)
therealdeal is offline  
Old September 28, 2010, 07:12 AM   #30
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
therealdeal

Two separate issues, sorry for the confusion.

125gr vs 158gr at similar velocities was the first issue; we were talking hot loaded 158, not mellow loads. Given similar velocities, the heavier bullet should expand as well as the lighter, and penetrate further (which may be good, if penetrating an arm or barrier, or bad, if penetrating a BG and traveling through the neighborhood).

The hunting comment had more to do with rifle velocities, and was kind of a sidebar. A .45-70 will make a big permanent wound channel, but tends to create less bloodshot meat around the wound channel than does a .270 or .30-06 (smaller bullet traveling around 1000fps faster).

At handgun velocities, most ballistics experts don't seem to anticipate similar hydrostatic effects.
MLeake is offline  
Old September 29, 2010, 05:14 AM   #31
WESHOOT2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,270
too late; exit stage left

The heavier bullet's sectional density (and normally heavier construction optimized for hunting, as their manufacturer intended) will potentially slow expansion, permitting further penetration before meaningful expansion occurs.
Yes, even Remington's S-JHP line.

See, you included the word "should", and "assuming".
__________________
.
"all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"
WESHOOT2 is offline  
Old September 29, 2010, 05:48 AM   #32
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
JHP for hunting?

I usually see JSP type rounds loaded for that; guess I just tend to assume most JHP loads are designed for SD.

Also, studies most folks cite in praise of the 125gr .357 came from data collected 20 years ago. Has there been a similar study done, comparing a broad section of modern bullets?

(Assuming you are referring to Marshall and Sanow, published in 1992, but compiled in the 80's.)

Comparing 125gr JHP at .357 velocities vs 158gr using 80's bullets would come out staggeringly in favor of the lighter, faster bullet expanding better. Given that with today's bullets, a .45acp traveling at 900fps can open to over .80 inch, results probably wouldn't favor the 125gr nearly so much.

Unless you're using data that shows the heavier bullet doesn't expand as it punches deeper... using modern bullets... in which case a cite or a link would be good.

Meantime, just because we don't agree with you, doesn't mean we're choosing loads based on happy feelings and group sings of kumbaya.

FWIW, I load my .357 based on where I'm going and what I'm doing. If around town or the house, 125gr JHP. If in and around the suburban woods, 158JHP. If deeper in, where bear or boar are likely, 180gr HC Buffalo Bore.

I don't believe in a one-size-fits-all, and I take Marshall and Sanow with a grain of salt.
MLeake is offline  
Reply

Tags
.357 , 125gr , 158gr , handgun , revolver

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.07961 seconds with 7 queries