.45 and .357

[Nightcrawler]

Just out of curiosity, I have a question. (I'm enjoying one of my few days off).

Many shooters here prefer M1911-style automatic pistols, chambered for the .45ACP cartridge. Many prefer .45 to 9mm, .40, 10mm, etc.

Many of these same shooters swear by .357 Magnum in their revolvers, even though large-bore revolvers are available.

If you're one of these people, my question is this: what is it you like about your favorite pistol and favorite revolver? If you like .45ACP pistols, why get a .357 revolver over one of the available .45 models?

Conversely, if you like .357 Magnum, why not choose an autoloader in a catridge that more closely mirrors .357's performance? (10mm comes to mind, and .357 Sig more or less duplicates the ballistics of many factory 125 grain .357 Magnum loads.)

I've been something of a big bore "loyalist" who's probably going to get muliple .357s when I return to the US. I'm also considering picking up one of several available .45 revolvers, and was wondering how others felt on the matter.

Plus, it's my day off and I've got some time to kill. (Not much, though. If I want to get a full night's sleep I've got to be asleep in three hours. 0300 comes early. I'll be glad when I'm no longer on the morning shift...)

[ACP230]

To be a well-rounded shooter you need .45s and .357s.

My first centerfire pistol was a Model Of 1911 US Army. My second was a Ruger Blackhawk .357. I still have both and still enjoy each.

Both have served for protection, hunting and competition shooting. Both have been used as plinkers when nothing more serious was going on.

I reload for both, and good loads were easy to develop in each caliber.

I wouldn't want to get along without either.

[AirForceShooter]

I'm the guy your'e talking about.
1911 Springer and mod 689 Taurus .357.
My reason for this choice is simple to me. They're both proven rounds.
Both are very accurate and fun to shoot. The 1911 is my CCW.
I don't need a .454 wheel gun that punishes me.
I'm sure others will have other opinions but that's what makes it fun.

AFS

[Boats]

For me its all about platforms.

I have my 1911A1s because they are a happy medium of cartridge and fit. I have a Ruger GP-100 because I find it to be lefty friendly and about the same size package in terms of weight and concealability as a 1911.

I think the .357 Magnum gives up nothing to the larger bores in terminal effectiveness against people. Why carry more weight than necessary to get the job done?

This is not to say I don't like larger bore revolvers. I am angling for one of those new Ruger Alaskan snubs in .45LC/.454 Casull. Like the N frame Smiths though, I will probably never try and conceal it due to the size of the cylinder. Those are belt guns.

As far as 10mm, almost all of the currently produced auto platforms suck rotten eggs for a variety of reasons. The only one I like was made by Colt, and they are rare. I might like the 10mm more in a Dan Wesson, but I have never even seen a DW 1911 as I don't frequent gun shows.

[cslinger]

Yep I'm also that guy.

Part of it is the rounds history proven both in documented cases and lots of mythic lore.

Part of it is the ease of finding ammo.

For the revolvers I find .357 to be just about the most versatile round out there. You can shoot anemic, super light .38 special target loads all the way up to crazy butt stomping 180 grain super magnum cruise missile rounds....well sort of but you get the point.

As for .45 I just like the soft push of the recoil, the fact that the bullet is the size of a small thumb and that most .45s are single stack and fit my girly sized hands well.

Chris

[shermacman]

Me too! S&W .357 wheel gun that makes me grin with the recoil. ParaOrdance 1911 in .45 that also makes me grin with the recoil. I love 'em both. I love the wheel gun for its absolute mechanical reliability. I love the 1911 for its lots of ammo discharge ability. Both guns for their historical references. I wouldn't be able to choose one over the other at gun point. :D

[Richard.Howe]

The both are proven, available, and established.

They are well-suited to their respective platforms -- I will never own a 45 auto wheelgun, nor a .357 mag autoloader. It just doesn't make sense.

[Werewolf]

Wellllllll... Why do some folks have more than one car or some guys (lucky dogs) have more than one girl? Huh? :evil:

I mostly shoot for fun. I like variety too. My 686+ with 5" bbl and red dot is a fun gun to shoot. So is my S&W 1911 target. :cool:

I have fun guns and tool guns. Sometimes they fill both functions (like my CZ75B SA).

Why limit one's self. Buy what you can afford, what you like and what you'll shoot. Hoooray for variety - it is indeed the spice of life. :D

[Delmar]

A question to you, Nightcrawler. Why would you want to stick to one caliber for both platforms? Kinda boring......

[saltydog452]

For me, it was sorta 'evolutionary'. Interests change over the years. I've had some good guns come and go. Fortunately, I was able to hang onto a few 'keepers'. A 2 1/2" Python, Mdl 13s, Mdl 27, Detonics 'Combat Master', Clark Ball 45, a couple of 22s, PPK, Colt Cobra, Lew Horton 3" 44 Spcl, and a 'Tunerized' Officers Model.

The ones that I have been able to keep have been aquired over the years and are mostly fairly small and easily held. Since shoulder surgery, I tend to wave heavier guns at the target rather than hold and squeeze. Newest guns have been light weight revolvers and 9mm semiautos.

As I said, interests, eyesight, and physical abilities change. My sidearms have too. I regret trading off a couple of SAA Colts, a Clark Gold Cup, 1926 44 Spcl, and a couple of others, but I couldn't hang onto em' all. Gave each of the kids a 45, and a 357 revolver when they moved out on their on. Whatever is left they will have to argue over if I don't trade those off to pay for trivial things like groceries and utilities.

salty.

[cratz2]

I kinda see where you're coming from. Most of us that have been fortunate enough to not have been involved in a shooting have mostly conjecture and second hand information to go on... Some well founded, some not so well founded. This conjecture tells us that 45 is one of the most effective rounds in pistols and the 357 is one of the most effective rounds in revolvers.

In pistols, generally we get to choose between high capacity 9mms, low capacity 45s and moderate capacity 40s. A lot of folks absolutely swear by the 45 and for a long time, I did as well. In revolvers we get a larger selection but it still basically comes down to 38, 357, 44 and 45.

Now, it's always seemed to me that if one believes that a slower projectile that is larger in diameter is more effective in pistols, then that would carry over to revolvers but that just doesn't seem to be the case of most American shooters. Why? Lots of gun articles influencing (right or wrong) generations of those American shooters. Maybe...

To be honest, I grew up with 1911s. I carry a CZ PCR in 9mm now and completely trust the gun and the round. I think in an ideal world, I would open carry a 1911 in 45. If I open carried a revolver, it would be a 4" or 5" 357 Magnum. Pure gut instinct.

[Vern Humphrey]

The question is, what do you want the gun FOR?

If it's a carry gun for self defense, a .45 revolver is quite a hunk of steel -- much wider than the .45 ACP. I don't have any .45 Colts that I consider suitable for concealed carry.

If it's for general all-around woods loafing, to me it's a tossup between the .22 LR and the .357 -- with the latter usually loaded with .38 Special wadcutters.

If it's for hunting critters about the size of deer or larger, then the .45 Colt (especially in a Ruger Blackhawk) comes into its own.

[Kramer Krazy]

Interesting. I've never actually thought about it, but you are right. I prefer my 45ACP and my 357 Mag. Just kinda works out that way. To me, the Colt 1911 and 45ACP are an American icon. I've just always liked the 1911 and prefer shooting the 45ACP. The 9mm is anemic to me. For autoloaders, I have 22s, 9mm, and 45ACPs. For revolvers, I have a Colt Python in 357 and a Colt Anaconda in 44 Mag. For me, all autoloaders get compared to the 1911 in 45 and all revolvers are compared to my Python.....Just kinda works that way.

[MrMurphy]

They are proven performers and work well.

The .357 has enough power, and a good range of bullet weights. I've seen people get shot by .32, .380, 9mm, .40 and .45, .38 Special and .357, and generally, with proper bullet placement, all of them work. The .45 and .357 however generally work as long as the target is hit in the upper body, period from what I've seen in the limited amount of shootings I have seen with these calibers.



The .45 is a big fat bullet. I like big fat bullets. I'll take a 9 or .40 if it's what I have, but I prefer bigger rounds.

The .357 is a good all-around package (big enough round with LOTS of power). I'd prefer a .44 Special or .45 Colt but finding one in a decent sized revolver with a good barrel length (3 or 4") is hard at times.

[Vern Humphrey]

There you have it -- the .357 is highly versatile, while the M1911 is concealable and effective. That's what makes them so popular.

[Cosmoline]

I prefer the .357 because it's so versitile. With the .45 ACP, you cannot stray too far from the standard 230 grain RN. With a .357 I can load up a .38 Special shotshell for mice all the way to a 200 grain hardcast slug for bear. And everything in between. For backwoods use, the .357 revolver wins hands down over a .45 ACP semi. Using a .45 ACP revolver is kinda neat, but ultimately you're still limited because the cartridge itself lacks flexibility. Especially given the amazing new rounds coming from Buf. Bore and others, I see the .357 Magnum as a better choice overall. The 158 gr. load generating 763 ft. lbs., for example. No .45 ACP is going to match that.

As an added plus, the .357 gains leaps and bounds of power out of a levergun. The .45 ACP does not.

As far a the .357 Sig loads, it just duplicates the 125 grain loading. It cannot cope with 180 or 200 grain hardcast slugs, nor can it throw medium size .38 Special wadcutters, or shotshells for that matter. It's limited.

I must admit though that the 10mm is an awesome round, and if you're talking about a wheelgun in 10mm, you're speaking my language! Sadly you are not speaking my wallet's language :uhoh:

[Vern Humphrey]

Don't underestimate the M1911 and the .45 ACP.

My Kimber and my Argentine M1927 both will digest anything I feed them -- from 185 grain semi-wadcutters to 250 grain heavyweights. By going to a heavy recoil spring and proper brass, you can shoot .45 Super, which nearly equals the .41 Mag. (The spring you want is 28lbs, about $10 from Wolffs, with matched firing pin return spring. As a bonus, an M1911 set up with a 28 lb spring will still cycle full charge .45 ACP loads.)

You can also load shot cartridges that cycle the action -- Ed Harris designed the dies, and you make the cartridges by using .30-06 or .308 brass as the basis.

Add a conversion kit (I have both a Ciener and an old Colt Service Ace) and you can shoot .22 LR.

[Rob96]

I, at one time, was that guy. I had my two Colt 45's, a Glock 19 and two Ruger 357's. I had been shooting my Glock and 1911's so much though, I lost my revolver proficiency, and did not like the recoil of the 357 anymore. The Rugers went towards another Glock 19. I am still sticking to one type of trigger pull, but in two different platforms. For me the 45 is at its best in a 1911, and I love the 9mm GLOCKS.

[michiganfan]

Nightcrawler are you missing the Michigan snow? Take good care of yourself.

[Peter M. Eick]

Why not get them all?

I shoot 10mm in my semi-auto's. Mostly 1911 formats, it is a good fit for purpose caliber.
I shoot 357magnum in my N frames, Colts and Dan Wessons. The 357 is great in the N frame and Dan Wessons, but at times I think it is a bit hard on the Pythons in a hot load.
I shoot 45acp out of a 1911, 97b and an N-frame Pre-25.

So why pick just one or the other? Just start collecting and shooting them.

My favorites are 10mm Les Baer 1911 for an autoloader and the 357 magnum in a "Registered Magnum" for the revolver (but really I like my 38/44 outdoorsman in 38 special more then the registered...)

[Standing Wolf]

Trust my life to an auto-loader? No, thanks.

[Bulldozer]

I only own two guns these days. At one time, my collection was well over 100 handguns.

My two:

1.) Smith & Wesson Model 66-2 3-inch
2.) Colt Series 70 Combat Commander

Either one is a constant companion from getting dressed in the AM until I crawl into bed in the PM.

In my mind, the 357 and 45 are just about perfect for any scenario I'm likely to encounter. Both can be handloaded in a wide array of weights, speeds, and bullet styles.

[MrMurphy]

Just about everyone who packs a pistol these days around the world packs an autoloader, so..... you're in the minority about trusting them. While I like wheelguns, any decent auto is going to be just as reliable.

[Vern Humphrey]

Quote:
-------------------------------
Just about everyone who packs a pistol these days around the world packs an autoloader, so..... you're in the minority about trusting them. While I like wheelguns, any decent auto is going to be just as reliable.
-------------------------------

You're right -- it's only a myth that revolvers are more reliable. Under bad conditions, revolvers tend to fail pretty regularly.

[Bill B.]

I like both the 45 and the .357 and shoot & reload each. Some days I prefer to shoot one over the other. In the 45 ACP I have both a 1911 and a S&W 625 Mountain Gun. I also own a couple of revolvers in 45 LC. If I could only own one handgun it would be be my S&W PC 8 Times .357 mag. Simply fits me perfectly and most important I hit what I shoot at when using it.

[ducktapehero]

There are 2 theories to handgun stopping power. "Small and fast" and "slow and heavy". Might as well have the best of both worlds. :D

[Rob96]

You're right -- it's only a myth that revolvers are more reliable. Under bad conditions, revolvers tend to fail pretty regularly.

Not only that, if a revolver jams up, it's locked up. At least with the auto, you can do the tap, rack, bang drill.

[Vern Humphrey]

We've had a lot of posts in this forum about revolvers packing up -- broken transfer bars, bolt stops, and so on, along with bullets creeping out of the case, primers backing out, crud under the ejector star, and so on.

It's no accident that virtually all armies now use automatics -- and that even elite units which can pick any weapon they want don't pick revolvers.

[lbmii]

The best from both the 357 as well as the 45 is the 40 S&W.

[Bandit01]

The way that I see it, they're all great calibers but the bigger issues is,what do you want to do with them? I'm a reloader; therefore, I have the luxury of creating a wide variety of of ammo for the different calibers. As far as favorite calibers, my top three is: .357; 10MM and .45
Without getting into the specifics of grains and bullet weights, I'm very accurate with my S&W 686 .357 Magnum. Personally, I can shoot that gun all day. The 10MM, in my opinion is superior to the .45 (if your ammo is made properly). Again, I'm more accurate and it hits harder.
I have 2 .45's S&W 4516 and CZ 97. As far as reloading, I think that the .45 caliber is more difficult to make than any other round that I've tried.
For defense, If I'm ever in a gun fight, I would prefer the 10MM over the .45 any day of the week.

[ducktapehero]

It's no accident that virtually all armies now use automatics -- and that even elite units which can pick any weapon they want don't pick revolvers.I heard that SEALs will sometimes use a Smith 357 if the mission is expected to be in a nasty environment. If I'm wrong don't castrate me. :D

[Vern Humphrey]

Quote:
------------------------------------
I heard that SEALs will sometimes use a Smith 357 if the mission is expected to be in a nasty environment. If I'm wrong don't castrate me.
-------------------------------------

I've not heard that -- although a SEAL might choose such a handgun for some reason or other. "Nasty environment" to a SEAL usually involves passing through the surf zone, which would not be good for a revolver.

[Z_Infidel]

I own and like both the .45 ACP and .357 Mag platforms. In fact, the handguns I started out with were one each of those chamberings. These days I prefer shooting the non-magnum big bores over the .357, but I still think it is a great choice for many purposes.

I have several auto-loaders in .45 ACP as well as a S&W 625, which is a great revolver to shoot. I also enjoy shooting .44 Special and it has become more versatile with some of the currently available commercial loads.

I keep my .357 Mag revolvers now mainly because of my Marlin 1894C lever gun. The .357 really shines in a carbine, and since it is the rifle I shoot most often I just think having at least one matching revolver is a good thing.

[rockstar.esq]

I too have wondered about this duplicity of reason. I think the main reason the .357 revolver is so popular is that it represents the upper limit of snort and snuff from a concealable sized gun. The cylinder size of a .40+ sized chamber becomes somewhat ungainly. The 1911 however is a flat and mostly inoffensively shaped gun when you imagine it pressed against your side. Other than these characteristics, you're back to the same old arguement of icepick or sledgehammer. I have a .44 mag revolver which shares the .357's ability to serve as a "dual caliber" gun and I find that easy shooting .44 special loads are lots of fun. But for making furry things dead, I prefer the full house loads.

[R.H. Lee]

It's no accident that virtually all armies now use automatics -- and that even elite units which can pick any weapon they want don't pick revolvers.
OTOH, the application is different with armies than with a personal defense weapon. Armies have other armed people close by to neutralize a threat. Personal defense means you might be there all by yourself with no backup. An auto does require more maintenance, is more vulnerable to the vagaries of mag springs and lips, lubrication, carbon fouling, etc. Plus you've got to stay on top of the manual of arms for an auto. Where is the safety, do I pull the hammer back or rack the slide first? A revo can sit in a drawer or carried daily and be good to go in .05 seconds. Aim, squeeze and bang.

[Boats]

The revolver hung on for quite a while in a very serious military--ours.

When we didn't have enough 1911 autos to go around in the trenches of France in WWI, Colt and S&W stepped up with the M1917 revolver in .45ACP. There aren't any historical horror stories about them.

The Smith Model 10 M&P hung on well into the 1980s until the M9 & M11 replaced everything but some elite units' 1911A1s. I remember them being issued to flight crews and saw them on the Air Police guards at the gates of Hickam AFB in Hawaii. No SAO ND problem with those revolvers is my personal theory about why they were still in use that late in the day.

Then again, how could an auto as excellent as the 1911 not replace most revolvers in US service? That particular pistol is that good.

Looking abroad, when one surveys the revolvers that most of them had, one I daresay, would almost rather have almost any autopistol instead. Nevertheless, the British Webleys were common in WW2 and everyone else's service revolvers were so gawdawful that their pre-WW2 replacement by the High Power, Lugers, and Walthers was all but inevitable. I am almost certain that the Soviets were using anything that banged given their extreme circumstances between 1942-43.

[Vern Humphrey]

Quote:
-------------------------------
OTOH, the application is different with armies than with a personal defense weapon. Armies have other armed people close by to neutralize a threat. Personal defense means you might be there all by yourself with no backup. An auto does require more maintenance, is more vulnerable to the vagaries of mag springs and lips, lubrication, carbon fouling, etc. Plus you've got to stay on top of the manual of arms for an auto. Where is the safety, do I pull the hammer back or rack the slide first? A revo can sit in a drawer or carried daily and be good to go in .05 seconds. Aim, squeeze and bang.
-------------------------------

Let me take this up from experience. My first tour in Vietnam, I brought two personally-owned weapons, a M1911 (not an A1) with a little customization, and a Colt Model 357. I mostly carried the .357 and used it seriously twice. My second tour, I carried an issue M1911A1. I also saw a lot of .38 Special S&Ws carried mostly by aviation types.

Generally, revolvers faired worse than automatics in a combat environment. In the case of my OWN revolver, of course I babied it -- something Joe Tentpeg is unlikely to do with his issue sidearm.

The shortcomings of automatics are matched by the shortcomings of revolvers -- for example, a backed out primer will not tie up an M1911, nor will a bullet that jumps crimp under repeated recoil. An M1911 will shrug off the amount of crud and grit that will take a revolver out of action (especially if it gets into places like the ejector star.)

Manual of arms issues are critical only if you are untrained, or handle a bewildering variety of handguns. Yes, it takes a bit more training to handle an automatic (although I would argue it takes more training and practice to shoot a revolver double-action in a combat or defensive situation.)

And you can leave a loaded automatic OR a loaded revolver in a drawer for years -- either will function when pulled out. And people have carried automatics daily for years (I've carried one for over 40 years on that basis) and they shoot just fine.

When arguing which is best in theory, we have to take into account the environment (the scenario in a theory.) When we plug in a realistic environment or scenario, the automatic seems to fare better -- which is why the revolver is not nearly as popular in either armies or police forces these days.

There are plenty of uses for revolvers -- I actually own more revolvers than automatics -- but I don't claim they have more reliability than an automatic.

[Black Snowman]

I'm not that guy :) I like big bores. After doing much research and looking into the information on the subject places like here (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html) and here (http://www.firearmstactical.com/) my criteria for a "good round" changed quite a bit.

I sold my Taurus 669 6" 357 so I could buy a Taurus 455 Ti in .45 ACP. My 669 was, and still is, a great gun and a great shooter but I wanted something that made a bigger hole.

I also sold off my only 9mm. If I get another it will be purely a range gun. For a handgun I choose the biggest round I can get in the platform I use well. Right now that means my CZ 85 Compact in .40 S&W. I'd rather have .45 ACP +P or 10mm but I don't shoot the guns I have in those calibers as well as I do the CZ so it wins.

My priorties for a defensive weapon:
1) Reliability
2) Placement
3) Penetration
4) Everything else is gravy.

[R.H. Lee]

Wound ballistics tables and theory are interesting, and I've read them til my eyes bled. They are also somewhat inconclusive. Bullets do strange things. We all agree shot placement is #1, and COM is the target. If you create an entrance AND an exit wound COM, you've likely also punctured a lung and created a 'pneumothorax' effect; the person shot cannot draw a breath. That alone should end the fight real quick. Not to mention blood pressure drop.

Some say a bullet should stop inside the target, thereby dumping all its energy; others say an exit wound, 'two holes for the price of one' is more effective.

[Dr.Rob]

Easy answer.

While I really like my 1917 Colt .45 ACP revolver, its cylinder is a half inch wider than my 6 shot .357 Magnum Carry.

You cab put six rounds of .357 into a much smaller package than 6 of .44/45.

Mind you I prefer shooting the big 1917, even with its pre-war grip gap and heavy wieght, makes it a pussycat. Now a FACTORY chopped "Fitz" Special will only set you back few grand, and is about about as ugly as a weapon can get. But a lot of 'serious' folks carried those big bore Fitzed revolvers.

Shooting full house .357's out of that Magnum Carry is a little spooky... feels like the trigger will cut your finger. These days you can get a svelte Scandium or Ti revolver that makes my little Colt seem like a brick.

Both are GOOD calibers. The .357 is a really versatile platform, if your wheel gun and you are up to the task.

It's not that we don't like big bores, but they do have some limitations.

[bobby68]

I own a 357 revolver and i'm glad for the 38/357 interchangability. I've also wanted a 45 but i went for the 357 because i'd bought the same for my wife (her first and only defense weapon) which i bought for many reasons including simplicity, reliability, stopping power, and interchangibility.

Oddly, i knew they existed but never thought to buy a 45 revolver. Now i want one of those too.

I've avoided the 45 auto because of the cost of the ones that i want (colt,kimber) and the rumor that the glocks are blowing up.

I wanted a 10mm delta they first came out when i was younger but i talked myself out of it in my youth. I still don't know whether i made the right choice but i still sure would like to have one of those also.

[Clean97GTI]

I have always been of the belief that bigger is better...bigger magazine that is. :neener:
Make mine double stack 9mm or .40. I'll add 10mm to that list after the holidays.

That being said, I'd have no problem carrying a .45auto or .357mag provided it was reliable AND the only thing I had. I made due with my Makarov in .380 for quite some time as my sole carry gun. She went bang every time and I was fairly accurate with it. That is the key my friends.

Put the rounds where they do the most good.

[Checkman]

I can trace it back to my father's influence. He always told me trust your life to either the .357 or the 45acp. During his 23 year career as a cop he carried the S&W M28, M65 and finally the S&W 4516. I was a kid and I looked up to my dad (still do). Now I'm a cop and I carry the Sig 220 in 45. It's a good round and it works. No it isn't perfect, but it's a proven performer. I wouldn't have any problem with carrying my 686+ as my duty weapon either. The round also has a proven history.

Now I own mostly 45's and .357 revolvers not only because I prefer them, but also because of economics. I reload 45 and I can get 38 special ammo for a very reasonable price. Isn't it nice that the .357 shoots the 38?

I've played with the idea of getting a 44 but I don't hunt or shoot shilloutte and ultimately it dosen't hold my interest like the .357 or 45. However I do own a Hi-Power just because I've always liked that model. Plus the 9mm is pretty affordable as well.

[mack69]

I'm one of those!!! My 2 favorite guns are my Ruger GP100 4 inch 357 and my Dan Wesson PMA-S 45... Superbly accurate, fun and cheap to shoot. Proven calibers for all purposes needed. Regarding why the 357?? Though I love big guns...I don't feel the need to hurt myself with something else. And I can very comfortably and accurately shoot either the 45 or 357 from a dead sleep. mack

[shermacman]

Allegedly, mack69 said:

"And I can very comfortably and accurately shoot either the 45 or 357 from a dead sleep."

:what:

I am sure that there are more details to follow!

[Vern Humphrey]

Quote:
-------------------------------
"And I can very comfortably and accurately shoot either the 45 or 357 from a dead sleep."
-------------------------------

That would explain the bullet holes in the bedroom ceiling. :p

[pezo]

I like and will one day perhaps own a .45 acp revolver. however I am a .357 magnum revolver freak. :)

[moxie]

The S7W and Colt M1917s and S&W 625s have been mentioned for shooting .45 ACP if you like that round and like revolvers too. I love my 625, but it is too big for concealiblility and really for all day carry. But as a house gun and fun for target shooting it can't be beat.

If you like the .357 but are a die-hard auto fan, no has mentioned the Coonan .357 auto. Based on the 1911, it was a wonderful pistol but is, alas, out of production.

[Smythe77]

Here in Canada all we civies can do with h/guns is target shoot. So natch a .22 like High Standard Victor or Trophy are to my liking though I like the few S&W 41s some of our members have.

Now into center-fire that is where I like my two Full House PPC revolvers of 38Spl for with all the mods done to them THEY is darn accurate. Be it with 148 gr WC or anthing from 150 to 162gr SWC.

Still I have two Custom make Browning Action 45s. One made by the pistolsmith & second one again made by him only to my specs. Deadly accuracy & like one chap back a bit mentioned using a cast 185gr SWC to 200 to 230 grn.

Fact is I have the idea to have the same pistolsmith churn out ANOTHER 45 for me though do not have it all figured out what I want in all parts & how I want the gun made though my two PPC revolvers & two 45s have proven to be trouble free for far longer then one would expect & are used constantly two days a week & of every week of the year.