November 19, 2012, 12:28 PM | #76 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 4,114
|
Let me make a couple of points here for consideration.
Different loads for the .357 have substancially different purposes. Good loads for the .357 vary from hunting to lighter loads intended to be shot from snubbies with differing bullet weights. Some loads are intended for large frame revolvers and for most folks work best from those guns and some meant for J frame CCW guns. Some make different levels of noise and muzzle flash. This noise can vary with the length of barrel used. It can effect how well someone shoots in a dark enclosed space. It makes sense for folks to take these and other factors into consideration when choosing what gun and what loads best suit a specific application. Of great importance is how well you shoot a particular load out of a particular gun. In my experience the .357 mag is a much more versatile round than most of those shot from semis. It's a decent hunting round with the right load and bullet and does well from a levergun. It can be more powerful than the 9mm or 45acp. Most such loads though are not so useful in an urban self defense scenario. tipoc |
November 19, 2012, 02:44 PM | #77 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Quote:
Quote:
That power is what makes it a magnum.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
||
November 19, 2012, 02:58 PM | #78 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
|
Quote:
The CHP has used the .40 S&W for 20+ years. It has had excellent officer involved shooting results. There is no way of getting around that fact, or the fact those results are better, than previous results with their old .357 magnum weapons using 125 gr bullets. Semi autos are never going away, LE agencies are never going to carry the .357 Magnum revolver again. The 9mm/40 S&W have proven themselves to be effective. They're here to stay for the foreseeable future.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ (>_<) Last edited by nate45; November 19, 2012 at 03:12 PM. |
|
November 19, 2012, 03:09 PM | #79 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 517
|
They have used 40 S&W for 30+ years?
That is an impressive feat considering.
__________________
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin |
November 19, 2012, 03:12 PM | #80 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
|
Sorry, hit wrong key.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ (>_<) |
November 19, 2012, 03:15 PM | #81 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Quote:
There's no disputing that any round regardless of caliber has the potential to cause hearing damage. There's no disputing higher DB levels have the potential to cause more damage form shot to shot. If you don't believe me go talk to a ENT because I have seen several. There's no disputing the .357 magnum is significantly louder than modern 9mm or .45 etc... i.e. the potential to cause more damage from shot to shot compared to a lower pressure round. There's enough information out there to support the 9mm or .45 as a viable choice as a self defense round. Therefore using a 9mm or .45, which are perfectly viable options for a self defense round, yet have a significantly lower DB level than the .357 mag, can minimize the degree of hearing loss you may suffer form shot to shot. There is enough information out there to support this, period. |
|
November 19, 2012, 04:21 PM | #82 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 517
|
Quote:
As for the OP's question, 125 for 2 legged threats and 158+ in the woods. The excess penetration of the heavier rounds is a waste and extra liability. The 125's provide plenty of penetration on a human torso and, in general, will open up more quickly and do more damage.
__________________
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin |
|
November 19, 2012, 06:48 PM | #83 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
|||
November 19, 2012, 09:04 PM | #84 | |||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,446
|
Originally posted by nate45
Quote:
Originally posted by Webleymkv Quote:
To classify this as an absolutist statement is taking it out of context. These were hypothetical statements made to illustrate a larger point rather than claims on my part. Nowhere in my post did I claim that a .357 Magnum is, beyond shadow of a doubt, more effective than 9mm, .45 ACP, or any other cartridge. In fact, I went to great length to explain that there is no consensus about which cartridge is most effective. As for this, Originally posted by nate45 Quote:
Quote:
That statement I will stand by. With a modern bullet like a Speer Gold Dot, the .357 Magnum is capable of substantially deeper penetration in both bare and clothed gelatin than other common service cartridges like .38 Special, 9mm, .357 Sig, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP. Here's the data from ATK (the parent company of both Speer and Federal): http://le.atk.com/wound_ballistics/l...omparison.aspx Likewise, older .357 Magnum loadings with semi-jacketed hollowpoint bullets were fairly well known for shedding fairly large shards of their jackets with the lead core attaining penetration depths in the 11-13" range with retained weights of 60% or more. This is unlike fragmenting semi-auto bullets because they normally fragment to a greater degree and give penetration depths in the shallower 8-10" range. Unfortunately, much of the gel test data for older loadings has been taken down from various websites and/or was published in out-of-print publications. As such, I've not yet been able to find a link which gives penetration, expansion, and weight retention for these sorts of loadings but if I do, I'll post it here. In any case, the point is that while we cannot conclusively say that the .357 Magnum is better, worse, or equally effective to other cartridges, we can at least say that with at least some loadings it behaves very differently. Originally posted by Dragline45 Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Look at it this way, if one cartridge is louder, but also more effective than another, which cartridge is a better choice for self-defense? Obviously it could be argued that the quieter, less effective cartridge is the better choice so long as it's still adequately effective, but it could also be argued that the louder, more effective cartridge is the better choice because it will more likely resolve the SD situation with a smaller number of shots and thus expose the user to fewer ear-damaging gun shots. Quote:
Like you, I've also done a good amount of reading on the subject and drawn my own conclusions. I've come to the conclusion that, with careful load selection the .357 Magnum does have the potential to be somewhat more effective than the more common service cartridges like 9mm and .45 ACP. I also reject the notion that every single loading of a given cartridge generates the same dB levels. I believe, instead, that the dB level charts are overly simplified in order to may them more easily understood by lay people. The .357 Magnum loading which I've chosen do not seem to be nearly as loud as other common loadings. I also notice that the loadings I think are most effective in 9mm and .45 ACP seem to be among the loudest for those cartridges. Because of this, I've doubt that the difference in dB levels between my chosen .357 Magnum loading and my chosen 9mm and .45 loadings are as great as the various handgun dB charts would suggest and thus the difference in hearing damage that they would cause is probably smaller as well. These statements about effectiveness and hearing damage are, however, my own personal conclusions and opinions and should be taken as such. I am not an authority on such matters, though I do base my opinions on the work of people who I consider to be reputable authorities on such things, so someone looking for guidance on the subject should do his or her own research and come to his or her own conclusions as you and I have done. I guess my real issue was that you appeared to present your statements as proven facts rather than personal opinion. |
|||||||||
November 19, 2012, 09:24 PM | #85 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 475
|
My daily carry is a .357 and I prefer the 158 gr. projectile. I'm not a student of ballistics but I would rather hit you with the biggest rock that I can throw at you. As far as the report of the round is concerned, I don't think that would be of primary concern to me in a self-defense situation. No scientific reasoning...just plain old personal preference.
|
November 20, 2012, 12:03 AM | #86 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Webleymkv
I agree with everything your saying, there really is no way to tell how much more damage one round causes compared to another. Since that information is not available I can see why some may not think it's worth choosing a caliber based on how much damage it may do to ones hearing, especially if they never suffered damage to begin with. Since I already suffered some hearing damage my logic is to go with a lower pressure round to potentially prevent as much damage as possible in the future. I too am not an authority on such matters, the best I can do is draw a conclusion based off what information is out there and choose what suits my needs the most. |
November 20, 2012, 10:18 AM | #87 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 3, 2011
Location: Vernon AZ
Posts: 1,195
|
I no longer carry my 357 mag for defense. It has been regulated to a hunting carry and used for dispatching the odd varmint around the property.
For self defense I duplicate the load carried by my local LEOs. See the threads in the legal portion of the forum for a complete discussion of this position. My hunting load is a 146 grain speer JHP propelled by __ grains of WW296 with a heavy roll crimp. The load was developed by a La Highway Patrol Sgt and served him well in 4 fatal encounters in line of duty. The round has taken some 20 white tail. ( I do not hunt but they were used by friends who do) Note: The actual weight of the propellant exceeds the limits in most current reload manuals. If you would like it send me a private message. For practice I developed a 38spl 148 grain wc load which has the same impact at 25yds as does the 146 grain load. Have shot the load for over 35 years and have complete faith that I will hit the target and put the varmint down. My last statement is probably the critical reason I have stuck with the round. One should chose a round which works for you. |
November 21, 2012, 04:44 PM | #88 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 540
|
Quote:
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data".
__________________
QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION |
|
November 24, 2012, 12:34 AM | #89 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,888
|
My hiking gun is a Ruger Sec. Six w/a 2.75" barrel for this I load 158 XTP/FP with the correct amount of Accurate #9.
|
November 24, 2012, 04:48 PM | #90 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Quote:
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
|
November 30, 2012, 10:26 PM | #91 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 540
|
Quote:
Testing in such mediums (gelatin, water) yields measurable, recordable, repeatable data (not anecdotal heresay) such as average expansion, penetration depth, and amount of tissue damaged in the wound track which are indicators of performance and effectiveness. After that, what that particular bullet design hits is what matters and that cannot be predicted.
__________________
QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION |
|
December 1, 2012, 04:02 PM | #92 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Quote:
I generally use the same ammo I did 20 years ago, it worked then It will work now.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
|
December 1, 2012, 06:18 PM | #93 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 540
|
Quote:
__________________
QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION |
|
December 2, 2012, 11:51 PM | #94 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,888
|
Here is a interesting read,
http://www.gunblast.com/RKCampbell_StoppingPower.htm Nanuk, I look forward to hearing your thoughts. |
December 3, 2012, 03:04 PM | #95 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Quote:
Case in point; in my post retirement part time job one of the young guys wants to buy a 10mm as his first duty gun because it is so much more effective than the 9mm or 45 (his words). He has never fired a handgun before, so needless to say I am attempting to get logic to overrule emotion. Shot placement is always the most important aspect, in real life it is also the most elusive aspect because the BG does not want to get shot either. To safely deliver that shot you will probably be diving/running for cover in the dark or semi dark and may have already been shot or shot at.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
|
|
|