Better manstopper 357 Mag or 45 ACP?


PDA






Doggieman
August 18, 2006, 07:48 PM
Did a F'in Search and was surprised to see very little mention of the differences between 357 and 45 as manstoppers.

Given the same number of rounds (say 6), which would you rather have as a manstopper on the street vs a standard sized bad guy coming at you with a machete at 15 feet? You can load it with whatever ammo you may want.

The reason I asked is because I shot a 357 for the first time recently and found the recoil only slightly worse than my 38 with +P. One handed was a breeze and so much fun with a single action.

Thx!

If you enjoyed reading about "Better manstopper 357 Mag or 45 ACP?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
dodging230grainers
August 18, 2006, 08:33 PM
Given the same number of rounds (say 6), which would you rather have as a manstopper on the street vs a standard sized bad guy coming at you with a machete at 15 feet? You can load it with whatever ammo you may want.


Remington classic 125gr SJHP @1400-1500fps.

If six don't do it, god wants you dead.

ccw007
August 18, 2006, 08:39 PM
I am going to go out on a limb and call them about equal. The only advantage I can see would go to the 45 for quicker reloads.... With that said I carry each depended on how I am dressed.

Edit to add
When I say equal I am saying stopping someone, and not necessarily ballistics numbers

Bob79
August 18, 2006, 08:44 PM
I voted .357 all the way.

A 230 grain JHP going 850FPS=369 ft lbs energy

A 158 grain JHP going 1200FPS=505 ft lbs energy

Plus the JHP in .357 WILL open up, the 45acp is doubtful.

.357 is the winner, NO CONTEST:neener:

ArmedBear
August 18, 2006, 08:46 PM
With equal projectiles, it'd be hard to argue for one or the other, as a manstopper. A good bullet in 9mm will work, too, at defensive ranges, though I suppose that a big .45 or a slam-bang .357 will do better as a stopper if your attacker is hopped up on PCP or something.

The caveat: a lot of .45 ACP out there is FMJ, vs. .357 which often is softpoint or something, even in cheap practice ammo. FMJ is inferior, in the numbers I've seen. To do a fair comparison, you have to be talking about each cartridge using effective, modern defensive ammo. .45 ACP will certainly expand, but only if you're using truly good bullets.

P0832177
August 18, 2006, 09:13 PM
It matters not the caliber or cartridge. What matters about having a known effective round so to speak in a platform to launch them and place rounds on target. Case in point, Fed 357 125gr JHP (a known fight stopper) in 2.5"bbl gun vs some Win 230gr FMJ out of a Colt Officers model? Choosing the proper combo is important, matched to the abilities of the shooter.

Lou22
August 18, 2006, 09:32 PM
I voted for the .357 as overall a better manstopper. However, if I were to choose, I'd prefer the .45 for the softer recoil allowing faster followup. Also some of the hottest .45 loads are close to the .357 in foot-pounds. I carry with Double Tap 185gr rated at 616 ft/lbs. Double Tap also has a 165gr load rated at 643 ft/lbs! Of course that load may well have .357-like recoil.

Lou

mnrivrat
August 18, 2006, 09:33 PM
I can't decide !

Maybe we should look for volunteers for a double blind study ? :D

Leadbutt
August 18, 2006, 09:38 PM
6 of one half dozen of the other..

In 357 mag the only way to fly is 145 grain Winchester Silvertip

45ACP 230 grain Golden Sabers, both do the job very well

1 old 0311
August 18, 2006, 09:41 PM
The .357 wins in EVERY type of test EVER done.

_N4Z_
August 18, 2006, 09:49 PM
.357mag > .45acp imho.


The reason I asked is because I shot a 357 for the first time recently and found the recoil only slightly worse than my 38 with +P.

What were you shooting?

There are a myriad of different loadings for 357mag. I find CCI Blazer 158's to be the mildest of the factory offerings, and they are great plinkers.

Buffalo Bore, CorBon and several other kinds may change your opinion of 357 recoil though, especially comparing it to .38+p. I use off brand Independence ammo for plinking alot also, and if I don't mind my grip they will take skin off of my trigger finger. Not super bad recoil, but you know they're there.

Deer Hunter
August 18, 2006, 10:00 PM
Haha, thanks man. I got a kick out of that one. :neener:

I voted .357. Either will do the job if the shooter does his part, so my basis was ballistics and theoretical use.

PennsyPlinker
August 18, 2006, 10:02 PM
Well I voted for the .357 six rounds, but my S&W Airlite carries seven! And, I have a speed loader for another seven if I would need it, but hopefully I will be a good enough shot that I won't need the last five of the first cylinder. ;)

ugaarguy
August 18, 2006, 10:14 PM
Whichever one the gun you shhot best is chambered in. Using equal quality loads with equaly good shot placement the bad guy will be equaly - DEAD. Quickly. The gun you quickly shoot best under stress is how you decide which caliber is best.

KINGMAX
August 18, 2006, 10:23 PM
just one man's opinion = .45 acp :) / or how about :rolleyes: .45 Long Colt in Silvertips = BIG OUCHIE :evil:

Doggieman
August 18, 2006, 10:29 PM
What were you shooting?


I was shooting a short barrel SP101 with factory Fiocci FMJ flat-noses.. forget the bullet weight.

Really very pleasurable, even with one hand. I alternated 38+Ps and 357s in the chambers and could tell the difference, but if someone were to simply load the gun with all of one type I don't think I could have told which one I was firing without looking.

orionengnr
August 18, 2006, 10:29 PM
...in my collection, given equivalent (carry) size, my .45s are more point-able, more accurate, easier to follow up with and more quickly reloadable.

This assumes that concealed carry is the subject here...if not, my bad... pause/rewind/reset.

That said, my nightstand gun is still a .45acp, although I have .357(s) available in my safe....

Rinspeed
August 18, 2006, 10:44 PM
Neither, both are handgun rounds and will stop someone about half the time even with a good shot.

steelhead
August 18, 2006, 10:44 PM
In women's tennis I always root for the heterosexual.



Splitting hairs, flip a coin, pick an action type you prefer.

Harley Quinn
August 18, 2006, 10:46 PM
But that does not mean it is not good. One is a revolver cartridge and the other is pistol.

Both are designed for different jobs. The 357 is a better hunter, and the 45 is supposed to be better for war:what: Or so says the Goverment. They also like the 9mm.

The 357 in the "Desert Eagle" is a killer, according to the Israel Army.

I believe if I had my choice of one or the other, for home defense. I'd have to go for the 45 cal. in my Astra 80. Not to big and holds 10 rounds in the mag and 1 in the chamber.

HQ :)

MCgunner
August 18, 2006, 10:48 PM
Recoil in the .357 ain't as bad as some would have you to believe, well, until you shoot one out of a 12 ounce J frame. LOL! Also, if you're talkin' out of sub 3" barrels, things get really close between the two calibers. And, it is load dependent. .45 hardball is notoriously weak except when compared to .38 or 9mm hardball or some other weak load. A 185 or 200 grain +P hollow point is pretty effective, though. But, my money would go on the .357 125 grain JHP out of 4" or better barrel loaded to 1400+ fps.

I would use the .45 as home protection in favor of the .357. I don't like the flash/bang in the dark indoors, disorienting to say the least. The .45 performs at lower pressures with less flash/bang. Also, I ain't worth a flyin' toot with speed loaders and readily admit it. I can do quite well with speed and tactical reloads in an automatic.

If I'm outdoors hiking or doing something in the wilds, I'll take the .357 every time. I'll pack along some wadcutters if I wanna use it for small game and some 180 grain fire breathers if I'm worried about bear or other four legged vermin. My Blackhawk has rifle like effective range, out to 100 yards anyway, with that load. If I'm in the concrete jungle, I must admit I'd rather be packin' a .45 IWB with a couple of spare mags.

There's more to firearms choice than a straight up comparison of effectiveness of loads, let's just put it that way.

Erich
August 18, 2006, 11:01 PM
Is this a joke? Really . . . this particular question is such a cliche that I have to wonder if someone's really having fun with this poll. :D

MCgunner
August 18, 2006, 11:01 PM
Also some of the hottest .45 loads are close to the .357 in foot-pounds. I carry with Double Tap 185gr rated at 616 ft/lbs. Double Tap also has a 165gr load rated at 643 ft/lbs! Of course that load may well have .357-like recoil.

It might also drastically shorten the life of your autoloader if you fire many in it, especially a 1911. That level of load, even a 22 lb recoil spring seems weak. I had a 22 lb spring in my AMT 1911 shooting handloads that are about modern +P equivalent, pretty hot, 500+ ft lbs. They would smash a recoil buffer absolutely pancake flat in one range session. :what: I started to notice a little flairing on that gun's slide, too, where it contacts the frame on recoil, so i stuck 'em back for VERY limited use.

I've put a 16 lbs 1911 spring in my P90 Ruger (fits, but is preloaded) and it works great with light or heavy loads. It's a stiffer spring than what came in it by a good margin. I don't think those +Ps bother it much, but still, I've only fired a small number out of it. My carry loads in that gun are 200 grain Speer JHPs at 950 fps, plenty enough for the job. That's about 400 ft lbs. What I really like about that load is the amazing accuracy.

possum
August 18, 2006, 11:02 PM
They would both be plenty enough for any job, but i voted .357 for the intimidation factor, you wouldn't even have to get off 6 rds i am sure they would tuck there head and run, well that is if they were smart. Especially if it is a snubby, with some hot loads like my dad loads up, it's like a mini flashbang going off. One of the greatest feelings when shooting is feeling the repercussioun when that model 19 of his goes off!:)

coastguard
August 18, 2006, 11:56 PM
Shot placement always wins regardless of caliber.

BergaminoCAV
August 19, 2006, 12:18 AM
depends on the shooter, either way the target is going down

gbran
August 19, 2006, 12:32 AM
My ex wife shot her boyfriend 5 times in the torso/chest area at physical contact range. She was using my my 4 inch barelled revolver with 125 grain JHP's. She claims he was trying to take the gun away from her so she emptied thy gun in fear he'd get it and shoot her. She also claims that he didn't die instantly and stayed on his feet struggling with her past the last shot. He died fairly quickly, but it wasn't instant and none of the rounds knocked him down. He may have been on drugs.

He sixth shot hit my refridgerator and it did die instantly. She got off on self defense and I divorced her. This 15 years ago. We were already separated, but she still came by the house. This happened in my kitchen while I was at work.

MCgunner
August 19, 2006, 12:35 AM
My ex wife shot her boyfriend 5 times in the torso/chest area at physical contact range. She was using my my 4 inch barelled revolver with 125 grain JHP's. She claims he was trying to take the gun away from her so she emptied thy gun in fear he'd get it and shoot her. She also claims that he didn't die instantly and stayed on his feet struggling with her past the last shot. He died fairly quickly, but it wasn't instant and none of the rounds knocked him down. He may have been on drugs.

He sixth shot hit my refridgerator and it did die instantly. She got off on self defense and I divorced her. This 15 years ago. We were already separated, but she still came by the house. This happened in my kitchen while I was at work.

Uh, moral of story, don't p--- off your ex-wife????:what:

possum
August 19, 2006, 12:54 AM
Shot placement always wins regardless of caliber.

That is the truth!:)

shark40sw
August 19, 2006, 01:06 AM
I wouldn't feel under powered with either round but would have to give my vote and the slight edge to the .357. Mostly because it gives me the widest choice in ammo.
It's also nice to see someone else has the same taste in women. :banghead:

cslinger
August 19, 2006, 01:12 AM
Most tests and actual results show the .357 to be the more effective stopper. It can also be loaded with bullets weights that make it a real crazy buttstomper round.

That being said I think .45ACPis a more practical round as it also has a long history as a proven stopper but is much easier to handle and is much easier on the ole' auditory system.

My two favorite calibers bar none though .45 and .357 so I have all my bases covered. :D

jlh26oo
August 19, 2006, 03:10 AM
Wow I'm surprised even 30% are choosing .45acp.

Did anyone read bob's post? lol

Doggieman
August 19, 2006, 03:43 AM
Correct answer: .45 ACP

Foot-pounds of energy don't kill, big holes in the right places kill. And the only thing that kills *right now* and stops someone dead in his tracks is luck. The 45 makes bigger holes. Today's .45 loads like the Golden Sabre and the Ranger/Talons are as likely to expand as anything in a 357. And to the folks who always write "placement counts," yes we KNOW, now answer the question.

Frontal area ((D/2)^2*pi):

.357 = 0.10 sq. inches
.45 = 0.16 sq. inches

Unexpanded, the hole a 45 makes is 1.6 times or 60% larger than the 357's. Holes baby, not energy dump, not nothin else, just holes man.

The best strategy in the case where someone is closing fast is to pop off a couple of rounds, run, and continue firing if need be. Time is on the side of the person with the fewest holes in him. To expect an instant stop is playing roulette.

Cousin Mike
August 19, 2006, 05:40 AM
I voted for the .357 Magnum.

Although, for clarity, I must admit that my .357 Magnum holds the same number of shots as my .45's - so I have 8 rounds on tap instead of 6.

I wouldn't feel inadequate with either round in a fight.

jlh26oo
August 19, 2006, 05:58 AM
Correct answer: .45 ACP

Foot-pounds of energy don't kill, big holes in the right places kill. And the only thing that kills *right now* and stops someone dead in his tracks is luck. The 45 makes bigger holes. Today's .45 loads like the Golden Sabre and the Ranger/Talons are as likely to expand as anything in a 357. And to the folks who always write "placement counts," yes we KNOW, now answer the question.

Frontal area ((D/2)^2*pi):

.357 = 0.10 sq. inches
.45 = 0.16 sq. inches

Unexpanded, the hole a 45 makes is 1.6 times or 60% larger than the 357's. Holes baby, not energy dump, not nothin else, just holes man.

Oh, I get it now. I don't know why I was thinking energy lol. Yeah, the proof is right there in the surface areas you computed.

So performance wise, a .357 mag, despite having more energy, is still no better than a .38spl, since each work out to be the same .10 sq inches surface area. Both of which are obviously FAR superior to say a .223 rifle, which is laughable in comparison to most handguns:

.357 = .10 sq. inches
.45 = .16 sq inches
.223 = .04 sq inches

For some reason I got confused and thought more energy meant you could accelerate heavier grain bullets to higher velocities... but I don't know where I was going with that lol. Thanks, doggieman.

ugaarguy
August 19, 2006, 06:49 AM
I think we should all read thru at least the first page of this thread http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=1615465#post1615465. In particular, post #21 has quite a bit of insight including such gems as;

rifle bullets can do truly massive amounts of damage, since the force they exert radially outwards exceeds the tensile strength of tissue.

As a general rule, however, pistol bullets do not exert enough force to tear tissue to any degree; even ultra high-energy fragmenting rounds like a Glaser. http://www.firearmstactical.com/imag...m%20Glaser.jpg

In fact, most pistol rounds don't even exert enough force to crush tissue with their entire width; a bullet that expands to .75" may very well only make a hole that's .5" wide or smaller.

In other words, if X bullet makes 3" wide tears in gelatin, then X bullet shot into a pig's butt will stretch the muscle tissue out 3" for a fraction of a second, then the muscle will bounce back and the remaining hole will be, at most, the diameter of the bullet, and probably smaller.

Summation is that until you hit 44 Mag and up energy levels handgun rounds simply punch holes. The energy behind them allows for a combination of expansion and penetration. Now if someone wants to go to JE223's site, www.brassfetcher.com, and calculate overall wound size from his expanded bullet diameter and pentration depth and then give us a comparison of average wound size for 45 ACP and 357 mag we'll have a more quantitative means of comparison. I'm too tired to calculate it right now. Honestly there are more way more variables, but a larger wound will lead to more rapid blood loss and hence a more rapid stop. All that considered I'm confident that either 357 Mag or 45 ACP with premium expanding ammo will punch a plenty big enough hole to the job equally well for all practical purposes.

jlh26oo
August 19, 2006, 07:07 AM
Nope, sorry. Just holes lol. Find the area and you have your answer, no more complex than that.

rustymaggot
August 19, 2006, 07:28 AM
Doggieman,

"The best strategy in the case where someone is closing fast is to pop off a couple of rounds, run, and continue firing if need be. Time is on the side of the person with the fewest holes in him. To expect an instant stop is playing roulette."

awesome quote.

far as the debate, both get thru bodies well, its which gets thru bone the best that would sway my vote. i dont know the answer to that one. would the 45 deflect less than the 357?

bpisler
August 19, 2006, 08:34 AM
I doubt one is really better than the other when
using proper defensive ammo.That being said
i voted for the 357mag but i wouldn't be scared
to carry a 45 either.

Doggieman
August 19, 2006, 08:52 AM
So performance wise, a .357 mag, despite having more energy, is still no better than a .38spl, since each work out to be the same .10 sq inches surface area. Both of which are obviously FAR superior to say a .223 rifle, which is laughable in comparison to most handguns:

.357 = .10 sq. inches
.45 = .16 sq inches
.223 = .04 sq inches

For some reason I got confused and thought more energy meant you could accelerate heavier grain bullets to higher velocities... but I don't know where I was going with that lol. Thanks, doggieman.


No dear, the reason the 357 is usually better than the .38 is because its extra energy allows it to make a bigger HOLE since it uses that energy to mushroom and penetrate whereas the 38 will tend to stop or not mushroom. The 45 generally has enough energy to penetrate fully, and modern bullets mushroom more than bullets of yore, generating larger HOLES.

The .223 is a beaut because it shatters within the body and creates a big ass HOLE (*SOMETIMES*).

So sure, energy is necessary or there won't be HOLES at all, but let's face it have you heard much about under-penetration with 45s in humans? Prolly not, 45s have enough energy to do the job, so the question ain't about energy but about how big a HOLE the thing is goingn to make in the guy.

It's still all about holes baby. :)

MCgunner
August 19, 2006, 12:25 PM
So, just forget the ol' 1000 ft lbs rule on deer for deer hunting and go with a .45 hardball for those 50 yard shots. :rolleyes: Whatever, energy DOES matter. Shock DOES matter. Hunters know this.

I dare say a .357 from my Blackhawk pushing a 180 grain JHP to 1400 ft/second (regardless of frontal area) is a better deer stopper than ANY .45ACP on the market or that you could possibly handload to safe levels, period, no argument, just the truth and nothing but the truth. I have killed deer quite dead at 80 yards with a 158 grain SWC, not an expanding bullet, a hard cast SWC from a .357 revolver, the Blackhawk. That deer went 20 feet and collapsed, probably took all of a half second with a LUNG shot! The hole had 3" diameter of destroyed tissue around it through those lungs, I presume from the pressure wave, but it was destroyed never-the-less, whatever the energy transmitting vehicle. That sort of performance certainly couldn't be expected from any .45ACP load.

From experience in the great outdoors, there is no comparison in power of the two calibers, .357 wins. I don't hunt with the .45ACP and won't, not enough energy. If I hunt with a .45, it'll be the Colt. Now, you're steppin' up the energy ladder quite a bit, 1000 ft lbs at the muzzle from a 7" barrel.

Some of the theorists here need to get out and shoot something. You can read all you want and believe what you want, but my experiences say the .357 is a good deer caliber. I can't say that for the .45ACP past maybe 30 yards with the hottest load possible.

The only reason there are 17 votes here for the .45 ACP is there are lots of 1911 freaks here that just won't listen to anything, closed minds, Jeff Cooper is GOD.

Rinspeed
August 19, 2006, 12:36 PM
You can read all you want and believe what you want, but my experiences say the .357 is a good deer caliber. I can't say that for the .45ACP past maybe 30 yards with the hottest load possible.



And I would say it's a very poor deer caliber.

MCgunner
August 19, 2006, 12:39 PM
Quote:
You can read all you want and believe what you want, but my experiences say the .357 is a good deer caliber. I can't say that for the .45ACP past maybe 30 yards with the hottest load possible.




And I would say it's a very poor deer caliber.

Based on what? Have you ever killed deer with it? How many here have hunted with the .357 and killed deer? Maybe I need to start another pole thread. :D Nah, what's the point in that?

I've shot two deer with the .357, one at 60 and one at 80 yards and both died quickly. I'm thinking of hunting with it this season using my 180 grain load. I have shot a good half dozen deer with a contender in .30-30 Winchester. What's the frontal area of a .30 cal bullet? I know it's makiing about 1200 ft lbs at the muzzle and about 1000 ft lbs at 150 yards. That makes it a good deer caliber in my book. But, then, I don't know if anyone has ever killed a deer with the .30-30, not enough frontal area.

Ohio Rifleman
August 19, 2006, 06:57 PM
My dad, an ex-cop, told me the three most important things you need to remember in a defensive life-or-death shooting situation.

1. Bullet placement
2. Bullet placement
3. Bullet placement

According to him, it is possible to shoot an attacker with a .22 and drop him instantly, or to shoot the same attacker with a .44 mag, and not even slow him down. All in the placement.

ugaarguy
August 19, 2006, 07:02 PM
So, just forget the ol' 1000 ft lbs rule on deer for deer hunting and go with a .45 hardball for those 50 yard shots. Whatever, energy DOES matter. Shock DOES matter. Hunters know this.

I dare say a .357 from my Blackhawk pushing a 180 grain JHP to 1400 ft/second (regardless of frontal area) is a better deer stopper than ANY .45ACP on the market or that you could possibly handload to safe levels, period, no argument, just the truth and nothing but the truth. I have killed deer quite dead at 80 yards with a 158 grain SWC, not an expanding bullet, a hard cast SWC from a .357 revolver, the Blackhawk. That deer went 20 feet and collapsed, probably took all of a half second with a LUNG shot! The hole had 3" diameter of destroyed tissue around it through those lungs, I presume from the pressure wave, but it was destroyed never-the-less, whatever the energy transmitting vehicle. That sort of performance certainly couldn't be expected from any .45ACP load.

From experience in the great outdoors, there is no comparison in power of the two calibers, .357 wins. I don't hunt with the .45ACP and won't, not enough energy. If I hunt with a .45, it'll be the Colt. Now, you're steppin' up the energy ladder quite a bit, 1000 ft lbs at the muzzle from a 7" barrel.

Ok, a 185gr. Silvertip in 45 ACP produces 411 ft. lbs. muzzle energy, a 180 gr. Partition Gold in a 357 Mag produces 587 ft. lbs energy. Both figures are from www.winchester.com. Double Tap loads a 45 ACP 165gr XTP to 643 ft. lbs. They also load 357 Mag with: 200gr Hardcast @ 640 ft. lbs; 180gr hardcast @ 676 ft. lbs; 158gr Gold Dots @ 688 ft. lbs. So how does your 1000 ft. lbs. energy arguement apply in this case? Neither 45 ACP nor 357 Mag. produce anywhere close to 1k ft. lbs.

Yes energy does matter but only when you get to a high enough energy level that the bullet is exerting force radially along is path, not just linearly, thereby vastly increasing the size of the permanent wound cavity. Its commonly refeered to a hydrostatic shock, but it doesn't occur until a round reaches somewhere in the neighborhood of 1000 ft. lbs. of energy. 1000 ft. lbs. of energy out of a hangun starts in 44 Mag and hot 45 Colt territory. Hence hydrostatic shock doesn't apply to 45 ACP vs. 357 Mag arguement since neither produce the muzzle energy for the effects of it to produce permant wounding. At this point we're back how much wound volume do we have to produce blood loss.

I haven't voted on this because I believe the 45 ACP and 357 Mag are equally useful on humans. I'm not a closed minded Jeff Cooper wannabe either - I believe 9mm and 38 Special are just fine for self defense too. I apologize for bringing quantitative evidence instead of anecdote into the debate. :fire:

Edited to fix a few grammatical errors.

MCgunner
August 19, 2006, 09:29 PM
My 180 grain load uses the Hornady XTP loaded to 1400 fps produces 785 ft lbs from my 6.5" .357 mag. I won't load the .45 over 550 ft lbs for any of MY autos, too punishing on the guns. My 158 grain load, a load that has taken a couple of deer leaves the Blackhawk's muzzle at 1520 fps/769 ft lbs. I cannot get that sort of exterior ballistics from the .45 ACP. My .45 colt will make 1000 ft lbs from the 7 inch barrel of my Contender. Go back and re-read the 1000 ft lb reference. I was not talking about the .357.

These loads aren't on any Winchester site, they were recorded with my chronograph 15 feet from the muzzle of the gun, ten shot strings averaged. I believe to equal my hand loads, you can buy Buffalo Bore ammunition. That stuff is pretty hot.

The reference to the 1000 ft lb rule on deer is an old standby, 1000 ft lbs on target for a good deer caliber. I find that down here in Texas where the deer aren't exactly gigantic, that's not really true, but it might hold true in Canada or on Mulies or something. A good buck down here will dress out maybe 150. That's a big deer. A big doe is under 100 lbs. I just mentioned the old rule because seems to me I wouldn't have heard this all my life if energy didn't matter. I think pressure waves and energy does apply to handguns. I've seen it in the field first hand and I've read about it right here written by people a lot smarter than me. I never was a physics wannabe. I was a biology type and was danged happy to get a BS.

I apologize for bringing quantitative evidence instead of anecdote into the debate.

What quantitative evidence? All I read was yet another opinion and they're like....well, we all have one.

OhioPaints
August 19, 2006, 10:43 PM
I think a .357 has the velocity to penetrate AND expand. .45s are less likely to expand. Therefore I suspect that a .357 will expand and make as big of a hole as a .45.

Ken

ugaarguy
August 19, 2006, 10:56 PM
What quantitative evidence?
Temporary wound cavity vs. permanent cavity. The volume of a wound can be measured or quantified, if you will, using standardized ballistic gel testing. While ballistic gel will never fully replicate a live mammal it is the best standard we have. By using a standard we can measure and compare on an equal ground. While the wound in gel may not exactly the wound in flesh, a round that wounds gel better will also wound flesh better. Until we get a better method I'll trust the gel tests.

My 180 grain load uses the Hornady XTP loaded to 1400 fps produces 785 ft lbs from my 6.5" .357 mag. I won't load the .45 over 550 ft lbs for any of MY autos, too punishing on the guns. My 158 grain load, a load that has taken a couple of deer leaves the Blackhawk's muzzle at 1520 fps/769 ft lbs. I cannot get that sort of exterior ballistics from the .45 ACP.
These loads aren't on any Winchester site, they were recorded with my chronograph 15 feet from the muzzle of the gun, ten shot strings averaged. I believe to equal my hand loads, you can buy Buffalo Bore ammunition. That stuff is pretty hot.

Well Clark Custom will ream out the 45 ACP chambers on S&W 625 to 460 Roland. That tells me that a 625 will take 45 ACP loads that are hotter than what an auto will take. How much hotter? I don't know. Maybe a good handloader, like I dunno, that McGunner guy, will find out for us. ;) If we open the debate to handloads change the charecter of it. Now if I can beat this sinus headache I'll go to JE223's site and get us some wound volume calculations.

Hey look kids, we've got ourselves a THR caliber war! YAY! :evil:

10-Ring
August 19, 2006, 11:19 PM
I would feel equally protected w/ either...6 round of one or 9 of the other. Really, since my risk level is not that high, I don't seem myself in a running gun battle.

SSN Vet
August 20, 2006, 12:31 AM
I couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with my government .45 (not to mention all the stove pipes)

sold it off and used 2/3 of the proceeds to buy my med. frame .357

Now I can't miss!

LightningJoe
August 20, 2006, 12:38 AM
If the difference were large, it would be obvious. If it were obvious, there would be no debate. The differences between a revolver and an autoloader are almost certainly greater than the differences between these two cartridges. The .357 Magnum contains the word "magnum", which is very nice. The .45 ACP is a big cartridge and has killed some Nazis and Viet Cong, also nice.

Arcticfox
August 20, 2006, 01:03 AM
"If six don't do it, god wants you dead"

LMAO Dodging!

Ugaaarguy is right! What ever you shoot best if the right one for you. The French special forces use the .357. The Swat team uses .45. who is right?

Personally, I would take a .45 because of the knock down power. They will both cause pain, but the .45 should put anyone on the ground. Especially, a
Drugged up perp.

Troggy
August 20, 2006, 01:11 AM
I say between the two, I would pick the GUN you like best. If some one said "Im gonna shoot you with a 45acp or a 357mag ,which one ya want"? I'd say "none of 'em", 'cause why would I want to get shot? Then Id say "man, what a silly question".:)

RustyShackelford
August 20, 2006, 01:13 AM
The 125gr JHP load for the .357magnum is rated at around 96% for a 1 shot stop. The .45ACP/230gr load is rated around 65%. New ammo designs for the .45ACP have improved the power levels but for most uses the .357magnum is considered a better "manstopper".

RS :cool:

Sir Aardvark
August 20, 2006, 01:18 AM
Just to jump in on this one....

For Real-World consideration -

For CCW purposes (because that's when I most likely have my gun) I would be terrified of the overpenetration that a .357 magnum represents!

Hey... You'll most likely kill the bad guy with the .357, but you're gonna wing about 3-4 innocent bystanders too.

So... as you are in the process of losing your house due to the million dollar plus legal bills, you might think back to when you decided to leave your .45 at home for the extra "lethality" that the .357 offered.

Now, if you're talking about killing Zombies or something like that, then sure, the .357 would be on my hip while I'll be slipping slugs into my 12 gauge.

ugaarguy
August 20, 2006, 01:22 AM
Personally, I would take a .45 because of the knock down power. They will both cause pain, but the .45 should put anyone on the ground. Especially, a Drugged up perp.

Sadly "knockdown power" is a mythical being. Again, let's look at physics; "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." If the bullet alone impacts with enough force to knock a person down then enough force must generated during firing to knock the shooter down. Now if it barrels in and breaks the hip or pelvis then they're going down; 357 Mag and 45 ACP are both capable of this.

I think you kindly for agreeing with me that what you shoot best is what's best for you. Shot placement is most important, but a good cailber is the next best thing. I don't think we'll ever end the debate of "which handgun round is best for self defense." So go with a proven caliber that you shoot well. I doubt there are two calibers more proven than 45 ACP and 357 Mag for SD. LightningJoe said it best:
If the difference were large, it would be obvious. If it were obvious, there would be no debate.

ugaarguy
August 20, 2006, 01:26 AM
The 125gr JHP load for the .357magnum is rated at around 96% for a 1 shot stop. The .45ACP/230gr load is rated around 65%. New ammo designs for the .45ACP have improved the power levels but for most uses the .357magnum is considered a better "manstopper".

According to what source? If you're talking the Marshal-Sanow index forget it. Do a search on the topic here and you'll see why it's been debunked. See LightningJoe's comments above and pick the caliber based on the handgun you shoot best.

jlh26oo
August 20, 2006, 01:47 AM
No dear, the reason the 357 is usually better than the .38 is because its extra energy allows it to make a bigger HOLE since it uses that energy to mushroom and penetrate whereas the 38 will tend to stop or not mushroom. The 45 generally has enough energy to penetrate fully, and modern bullets mushroom more than bullets of yore, generating larger HOLES.

Aaahh, so energy DOES matter after all?!

BRASSM
August 20, 2006, 02:09 AM
On ocassion I do carry a S&W 13 as my CCW with four extra speed loaders. With Silvertips. The only problem is it is bulkier then my Browning. But I'm confident that It will stop a mountain lion of a black bear. As for a humans, Shot Placement. As for being undergunned, this is self defense not a fire fight.

Moon
August 20, 2006, 02:11 AM
Here is an interesting take. For the the past four weeks, I've been working with a crime scene investigator. He is helping me fingerprint about 50 people in preparation for a large regulated corporate transaction (I'm an attorney). His "day job" is to investigate crimes on the West Bank of New Orleans/Jefferson Parish, which routinely includes homicides.

While working on the transaction, I had a lengthy conversation with him about the differences in the terminal ballistics of handgun calibers. His opinion is that among the centerfires, there is none. Sure, we've all heard this before (shot placement rules theory). But this is a guy who sees the end effect of what happens when you shoot a person with a handgun ALL THE TIME. So, take that perspective for what it is worth (a lot to me) in this discussion of 357 v. 45.

Coincidentally, he had three other observations that I think are worth mentioning:
- At indoor distances, a shotgun blast "leaves nothing left." I infer this to mean that shotguns are effective (duh - we already knew this).
- The deputy did not seem to be impressed with .223 caliber assault rifles. I found this to be curious. His rationale seemed to be based on upon his opinion that a .233 does not did not shoot through cover as good as other calibers.
- On the other hand, he thought the 7.62x39 was very deadly. This opinion was based upon a shooting that he investigated recently where a guy shot through a ballistic shield and partially through a vest with an AK-47.

Anyway, I thought I would pass on the opinions of someone that is seeing the empirical results of the theoretical concepts that are often discussed on this forum. My take on all of this is that what happens in a gunfight is less influenced by ballistics/science than situational factors (shot placement, luck, physical characteristics, etc...).

boomstik45
August 20, 2006, 03:13 AM
I like both rounds. To me, they serve different purposes. If all I'm concerned with is 2 legged critters, then the .45 is my choice. Mainly because I can carry more rounds with a faster reload and I can shoot quicker/more accurately. Besides, .45 is a fine defense round with good weight and momentum. Yes, momentum, so many people forget about that because they're hung up on speed, muzzle energy, "shock", etc. Not that any of these things should be ruled out (when they actually make a difference). A good mean .357 round is harder to control and is bad in low light conditions due to muzzle flash. I'd feel better with it than the .45 out in the woods, though. It is a good performer against several kinds of 4 legged critters with the right loads. Although, when getting to the nastier ones like Hogs, I think a .44 magnum or hot .45 Colt is a better choice. But like I said, I could carry either one and would take either rather than no gun at all. I notice that some people want to use deer hunting as a way to prove an argument. I'm not trying to stir anybody's dander, but here's one problem with that: People, when shot, tend to fall down or stop doing what they're doing because they figure they are supposed to. It's a mental thing. Or, they may have a completely different reaction. Animals do not have this issue at all. Their main goal is SURVIVAL and nothing else. How else do you explain a charging hog taking a .45-70 bullet right through the shoulder/neck and not stopping? It might already be mostly dead but doesn't know it yet. Deer have taken .30-.30 , .270, aught-six, and several other rounds and gone on for several yards. Again, animals are about survival. They don't stop because they think " omigosh, I've been shot." They stop when their bodies refuse to function. So comparing animals to humans in shooting situations is not really a good test medium. Humans will give up sometimes, and for different reasons. Sometimes not. Animals almost never give up until they just can't go on.

RustyShackelford
August 20, 2006, 04:26 AM
The "source" of the 125gr JHP .357mag 1 shot stop record is based on around 400 documented LE(law enforcement) shootings. Many US LEOs used the 125gr JHP in Federal/Remington/CorBon/etc for several years. I don't think the 1,000s of US police officers, state troopers, deputies who used DA revolvers in .357magnum day in and day out would take issue with the 96% number.

RS

S&Wfan
August 20, 2006, 06:26 AM
I own both calibers. No one would want to be shot with EITHER!

Both should do the job quickly.

The key is to shoot what you feel most confident with . . . and what you shoot best.

Snowdog
August 20, 2006, 07:46 AM
I'm not one to jump into a flaming caliber war; I fully expect everyone to have their opinions. It should be expected for some to vehemently defend their position, regardless of any introduced "evidence". As we all know, the definition of "evidence" is almost always subjective.

However, I tend to take interest in cited sources, particularly when percentages are mentioned to enhance one's point. Shady statistics sans credible sources cited are definately among my greatest pet peeves.

I noticed statistics were tossed in to the can of worms in a previous post.
Let's look at these numbers, shall we?

125gr JHP/SJHP .357magnum = 96% effectiveness
230gr (no bullet configuration mentioned) .45acp = 64% effectiveness

Without speculating where these statistics are from, I will point out that one source I am aware of found very similar findings:

IIRC, 96% OSS for the .357 is practically on-par with Marshal/Sanows finding in their Handgun Stopping Power publication when "formulating" the OSS of the 125gr JHP/SJHP.
This .357magnum load is considerd by many as the most effective available for the caliber and considered the best possible choice for defense.
The 64% OSS listed for the .45acp also appears on par with the finding of Marshal/Sanow.
However, this OSS rating is listed for the 230gr FMJ, the least effective round available for the caliber and considered the worst possible choice for defense by most.

Putting aside any disrepute of the Marshal/Sanow publication, I find myself wondering if these percentages listed were intentionally comparing the best of one caliber offerings against the worst of another in attempts at a "fair" comparison.
If this is the case here, well... it certainly doesn't lend to one's credibility. :(
As transparent as this deceptive method tends to be, you'd think folks wouldn't choose to employ these means of convincing.

That said, if the percentages in question are indeed from a credible source, it would be tremendously helpful if this source is cited. However, if they cannot be cited, what's the point?


To answer the question, I voted for the .357magnum. However, with the proper JHP ammunition that's designed to be used for defense (such as the 230gr Remington GS or Hornady 200gr XTP, my two favorite), I wouldn't say the .357magnum has an abundant edge in stopping power against humans, but perhaps just enough to hold the crown.

BoomBoom25
August 20, 2006, 08:50 AM
I beleive the 45. is the winner hands down, for 1 main reason ballistics perfermance. Sure the 357.mag has more muzzle energy but that also makes it more likely to over penetrate the object your shooting at. That may be fine at the range while shooting at paper or steel targets, but when your life is on the line I for one would prefer a bullet that wouldnt over penetrate. Of course you shouldnt count on shock value or penetration power alone to stop an attacker you should aslo have some marksmanship abilities as well. I mean a gun any gun for that matter is only as good as its shooter. If you cant hit your target than any gun is as good as the other and as far as recoil is concerned, yeah sure the 357 for me at least kicks a whole lot less than the 45acp. I have a Ruger sp101 in 357.mag with a 2 1/2 barrel i believe it is and it kicks the same as when I shoot any 38spl load through it. My 45 on the other hand while it doesnt kick tremendously it is a lot mor noticable than my 357. it by the way is a colt defender xse. I guess it all boils down to you should pick the gun gun that fits you best and practice, practice, practice.

Pistol Toter
August 20, 2006, 01:09 PM
If so many of you feel that the .357 is so much the better then explain to me why in another poll on this forum concerning what was the popular carry carlibre, the low precentages of the .357. a small 9.04 % chose the .357 compared to 25.3% favoring the .45acp. IMHO I wouldn't turn my hand over for the difference in a defensive situation. As is well known the handgun is not the best of defensive weapons, only handy. I would like to add that when I voted on the other poll I chose both the .45 acp and the .357 BOTH because I carry them equally, alternating, and consider them probably the best of the lot. One is SMALLER and FAST the other BIG and SLOW; it's the same old argument fellows. It's Marshall & Snaow vs Fracker or whatever their names are. It's not the gun and it's not necessarly the calibre as S.C. H.P. Officer Coats shot the perp with his .357 and the perp shot him with a .22. The perp lived and Officer Coats, died. No, I don't subscibe that the .22 is better than a .357. Indeed there is some wisdom to be applied here. but apparently it's placement (bullet) and timing (presentation of the weapon)and cover (your on) that wins the fight then the calibre and platform.
Here below are the results of the other poll:
9x18 Makarov 3 0.90%
380 APC 31 9.34%
38 Special 55 16.57%
357 Mag 30 9.04%
9mm 90 27.11%
40 cal 43 12.95%
10mm 10 3.01%
41 Mag 3 0.90%
44 Mag 6 1.81%
45 ACP 84 25.30%
45 Gap 0 0%
Something less than a 38/380 6 1.81%
Something More than a 45 0 0%
Other (not listed) 15 4.52%

Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 332. You may not vote on this poll

NOTE: the .380acp and the .38 spl both beat out the .357 which I did some head scratching over. The .40 cal is a bit more understandable. The two ghighest number go to the 9mm and the .45 ACP. I don't have any regard for the 9mm or the .380 and the poor ole .38 spl while it was the LEO arm far so many years, has a poor record. To me it's either .357 (125gr because the 158 may over penetrate), .40 (so - so - ok), 10mm (which will probably over penetrate), the .41 mag and .44 mag have definite potential for onver penetration, the .44 spl which has not been mentioned actually maybe one of the better choices and the .45 ACP which has been doing the job for 100years.
Gentleman, I can't vote; they're equally highly effecient rounds!!

Cousin Mike
August 20, 2006, 01:18 PM
You guys who say that the .357 magnum kicks less than the .45ACP... I want to know what you guys are smokin' :what: :D :evil: ;)

Seriously though, this just goes to show how subjective things like recoil are. I think .45ACP, in almost any application, is just as easy as 9mm or .38Spl to shoot... and easier to shoot than most other .355"+ calibers.

On the other hand, there's a pet peeve I have that has been addressed a few times in this thread.

Overpenetration... :barf:

Gimme a friggin' break already!

I would MUCH rather have a round that overpenetrates than one that does not penetrate enough... Overpenetration doesn't kill people, and even LEO's admit that overpenetration is much more of a concern than it should be most times. Police have to worry about it because they often have to diffuse crazy situations in VERY public places. If someone attempts to mug you on the street, they're not going to do it in front of 100 people on a crowded street in broad daylight.

Overpenetration is something you always hear talked about, and almost NEVER see realized. One time I saw a round overpenetrate and strike an LEO in the leg. She was standing literally ~3 ft.~ DIRECTLY behind the guy that her partner was shooting at. Classic stupidity... The 2 officers were literally aiming at eachother through the same person.

Other than that, I've never heard of anything happening due to a hollow-point round overpenetrating in a civilian SD shooting... Actually, I have no idea what the LEO's in that video were using, in terms of ammunition. Using JHP's, no common SD caliber is going to come out the other end of a person w/enough momentum still attached to kill someone a mile away.

Missing kills innocent bystanders. Not overpenetration, IMO.

If someone has information to prove me wrong, I would LOVE to take a look. I've just never heard of overpenetration being a problem in a CCW-type shooting scenario.

steelhead
August 20, 2006, 02:20 PM
NOTE: the .380acp and the .38 spl both beat out the .357 which I did some head scratching over. The .40 cal is a bit more understandable.

No mystery. Most people understand their own limitations and therefore carry/use what they are most proficient with. Also, you need to take into account concealability. It is a lot easier to conceal a .38 or .380 (P3AT) than a handgun chambered in .45 or .40.

I would rather shoot with the person who knew they were competent, with a .380, versus the person who carries .357/.45ACP because they heard how great and manly it was.

FrogClan
August 20, 2006, 02:52 PM
A ditto on Steelhead's observations regarding Pistol Toter's summary of what people are carrying. Lots of explanations that have nothing to do with what people think is the most effective round... more prefer semi-autos over revolvers so go with .45 vs .357... more prefer small, easy concealed frames over large heavy ones so go with .380 or .38; etc.

As for overpenetration... just how much penetration do you guys think the 125 grain SJHP .357 gets? Is it 15.5" of 10% geletin? You think that is "over penetration"? Serious question.

The 64% OSS listed for the .45acp also appears on par with the finding of Marshal/Sanow.
However, this OSS rating is listed for the 230gr FMJ, the least effective round available for the caliber and considered the worst possible choice for defense by most.

Good catch. The numbers for a 230 grain JHP .45 are 94%.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm

.357 magnum
August 20, 2006, 04:57 PM
I agree with Rusty. On the street the .357 w/125 gr jhp is a proven manstopper.
So my vote went to the .357 mag. [what a suprise eh?] By the way I think the .45acp is a great caliber. Well I better go mow the lawn or the wife will shoot me!

Seriously-- practice and shot placment are so important! You are far less likely to panic with a gun you know you can shoot.

Oh- I did an edit because I forgot the .45 acp when you are using a 230 gr hydra-shok also gets a 96% one stop performance. Sooo it comes down to the one you are more comfortable with and shoot the best. Hey we could get a real caliber war going here-- did ya know the .40 sw has three different cartridges that have 94% and 93% effectiveness on the street. The 165 gr golden saber-155gr federal hyrashok-155 gr speer golddot-all hp of course. These are actual shooting on the street reported by LE. So this thread may go one for a while.

MCgunner
August 20, 2006, 08:40 PM
Well Clark Custom will ream out the 45 ACP chambers on S&W 625 to 460 Roland. That tells me that a 625 will take 45 ACP loads that are hotter than what an auto will take. How much hotter? I don't know. Maybe a good handloader, like I dunno, that McGunner guy, will find out for us. If we open the debate to handloads change the charecter of it.

Why shoot .45ACP in a revolver the size of a .44 magnum? But, you could likely load the ACP up hotter in an N frame. Heck, you can SHOOT the hot stuff in an auto, I just don't see why I'd want to abuse my gun like that. I've got more powerful weapons for outdoor uses that are more accurate at longer ranges. I'm not that stuck on the .45ACP. There are other calibers that are better for certain things.

I'm perfectly happy with my defense load at about 400 ft lbs in the .45. I never said it wasn't a good self defense round. I actually prefer it to the .357, much easier on the eyes and ears in a dark room at night and if I'm going to carry a big gun IWB, it's going to be an auto 'cause I can reload one in FAIRLY short order. I'm five thumbs with speed loaders. I just can't get used to 'em. I watch Jerry Miculek do those speed loads and my jaw hits the floor in amazement. MY GOD, how DOES he do that!?!?!?!?:what:

But, I'm always up for a handloading project. I sorta get off to it. Some folks like crossword puzzles (okay, I do that, too) and such, I like a good reloading project. I've been thinkin' I need a .41 magnum to start another project. You can (according to published data) load that little fart up to near .44 mag level. I need an Ohler with a strain gauge, though, to upgrade working my projects. :D I can just never justify spending that sort of money for such. And, I had an N frame .45, but it wasn't the strongest. It was one of those surplus 1917 war horse things. It was kinda neat, but I sold it. Was a little shot out and wouldn't shoot cast bullets worth a flip. It was nowhere near as strong as a 625, either.

If so many of you feel that the .357 is so much the better then explain to me why in another poll on this forum concerning what was the popular carry carlibre, the low precentages of the .357. a small 9.04 % chose the .357 compared to 25.3% favoring the .45acp.

Ummm, perhaps the platform, maybe. :rolleyes: Quick reloads and high firepower are not my concern in the deer stand or out in the woods. Therefore, I almost always will be found with a revolver, many times a .357 magnum revolver, single action even. Well, I'll sometimes be totin' a single shot in .30-30, but that's another story.

However, I like autos for self defense. I do carry a revolver now and then, but most of the time it's an auto. I just shoot faster and reload MUCH faster with 'em. Besides square flat guns and square flat reloads tote easier concealed.

boomstik45
August 20, 2006, 10:22 PM
Cousin Mike, you hit the nail on the head. Read FBI's report by Urey Patrick on terminal ballistics. Everything you said has been said there. Safe to say that they know what they're doing.

Glock_10mm
August 21, 2006, 12:47 AM
Well the .357 has the penetration advantage. Short of that, either will do just fine.

PS - I carry the ballistic twin,Ever consider the autoloading capability of the 10mm?

ugaarguy
August 21, 2006, 02:03 AM
These are actual shooting on the street reported by LE.

Would you care to cite your source?

Jomax
August 21, 2006, 02:49 AM
The ballistics reviews I've read seem to endorse the .357 Magnum as the ultimate self-defense round. I don't own or shoot a .45ACP but the .357 I do own and shoot seems more than adequate for the task.;)

Pistol Toter
August 21, 2006, 04:43 PM
Hey guys, just so you know, I was not defending or coming out for, or against any particular caliber or platform or gun. I thought that both the polls were interesting, and to lay them side by side was even further interesting. I came up with some reasoning as to gun sizes and weights, taking into consideration guns costs, munnitions costs and the Ti Sc materials of modern revolvers. When I chose what I wanted to carry, I picked a SP101 loaded with 125gr Golden Sabre and a Glock 21 loaded with 230gr Golden Sabre and they both work for me. You are just as apt to fnd me carrying one as the other. I like both, can conceal and hit the target equally, and have absolutly nothing against any of the other offerings. Shoot what you can control, hit with, and are able to discretely carry. I can't belive that I ever did it, but I carried a .38 derringer for years,:eek: what a dummy as was!!! Have a good day fellows.:) Pistol Toter

JCB1911
August 22, 2006, 12:10 AM
I carry taurus 357 in my pocket and a 45 of some flavor on my sind in Mr. milt sparks

bruss01
August 22, 2006, 09:19 PM
I have tremendous confidence in the .357 - I have no doubt that anything I deliver a good solid hit with it is going down. I KNOW it's 100% reliable, as in it has never failed in any way, every single blessed time I pull the trigger it goes BANG and there is very little to go wrong with it... ever.

Now, having said that, it has it's drawbacks with regard to the platform. I only get six shots, it's slower to reload, and I DO have to think twice about my hearing before using it indoors for defense.

That's why my .45 is my primary go-to gun for the nightstand. I have *almost* as much confidence in the round, and slightly less in the gun (it's very reliable, but it's awfully hard to beat 100%). But do I really have any doubts it would send the fur flying in a home invasion situation. Nope, not at all. And that big BIG hole in the end? VERY intimidating. With the +P's I keep it gassed up with, I don't think a bad guy will ever know the difference.

RustyShackelford
August 23, 2006, 02:37 AM
This is part of the point I made;

If 1,000s of sworn LEOs(federal agents, sheriff's deputies, police officers, state troopers, etc) used .45ACP pistols with 230gr FMJ or 230gr JHP rounds would the .45ACP have a better record in documented LE shootings? YES!

BUT, most US LEOs have used the 125gr JHP loads for duty use. They used S&W model 19s/66s and Ruger GP-100 .357magnums for years so this is where the 96% number comes from. KE, power levels, ballistics, etc may show that the .45ACP 230gr or 200gr JHP may be an improvement over the 125gr .357magnum JHP rounds but the LEOs did not use/carry these .45acp loads as much as the 125gr JHP .357.

Rusty ;)

Oregongundude
August 24, 2006, 12:53 PM
Actually, you can hot load .40 S&W almost to the level of the .357 Magnum in balistics, and energy as well. The .45 acp is a great self defense handgun as well. I voted for the .357 magnum because I like the options available for that gun. I know the CHP in California moth balled the .357 and now are going with the .40 S&W as there main defense handguns. Now compare the 10 mm loads to the .357 magnum and you may be up against the wall a bit. 10 mm loads are more powerful with a lot more energy than both the .357 magnum and the .45 acp. And God forbid if the 10 mm magnum would have ever caught on.

:)

mpmarty
August 24, 2006, 03:43 PM
Agreed wholeheartedly Oregondude! I like the .45 so much when I won a gun at the GSSF match I picked a model 30. I like the 10MM so much I'm ordering a KKM 10MM barrel for it. Now I have a choice of packing my Witness full size 10MM, a G30 in .45 or a G30 in 10MM (like a G29) or my tried and true Taurus PT145 mil pro. All things considered, overpenetration is more a concern for CCW self defense than for police officers. I believe this because it is likely a police officer will take a shot at a perp who is firing at his partner and be aiming at the right or left side of the perp whereas in a pure self defense situation you are shooting at a perp who is facing you. The energy argument needs to be refined to explain that any projectile that exits the body of the perp does NOT deliver its foot pounds of energy to the perp in total. All it dumps is the energy equivalent (sic) of the difference of its entry velocity minus its exit velocity. Also interesting is the windshield penetration and deflection values of the various loads where the .45 acp seems to win hands down.

James T Thomas
August 24, 2006, 07:12 PM
Does anyone know of a test where tenthousand rounds of 357 were fired through four layer denim, and the frequency of failed expansion? As a statistician can affirm, a dozen or so gelatin tests, does not make a reliable statistical sample, when the "population" is as large as it is.

For all down to earth, reality purposes, the 357 is an unknown! It is.

Seriously, though, just my hunch, but with the expansion of even the high energy 357 being not a "sure thing," I have more confidence in the round that is not a fast 38, that is the nearly sixty percent greater surface area bullet, and that is not considering it expanded -the 45ACP.

Arcticfox
August 26, 2006, 01:01 PM
I wanted to add the view of Bill Jordan, an expert in firearms, and a Federal officer for 30 years.

In his book, "No Second Place Winner," I will quote his opinions in the matter. This book was written in 1965:

Although the .357 Magnum is a close approach, in my opinion, the ideal caliber...is not presently available in a suitable loading. The ideal, when presented, will be the 41 caliber loaded to between 1200, and 1300 FPS, with a 200 grain semi-wadcutter bullet.

Ironically, the .41 magnum, which matches those specifications, came out the same year of his writing.

He continues:

The .357 is presently the best cartridge available. with the 160 grain bullet in 4 -inch barrels it delivers slightly over 1200 f/s in the factory loading and an authoritative 500 plus foot/pounds of energy. while a little more shock power would be desireable, no other available cartridge is so near the ideal for police work.

Although I personally would prefer the .45ACP, Bill Jordan says they are realatively ineffective with factory loadings and full metal jackets.

Just wanted to share the opinion of a man who knows about gun fighting first hand.

dragongoddess
August 26, 2006, 01:26 PM
Somehow I always thought my leggs were Man Stoppers.

fastbolt
August 26, 2006, 08:48 PM
Somehow I always thought my leggs were Man Stoppers.

Like your comment and your handle ...

Most interesting posting in the thread ...

.357 Magnum v. .45 ACP? Been there, done that.

Which one does someone most accurately shoot, most consistently?

Which one offers the best compromise when it comes to recoil management and controllability?

How about which one comes in a platform most comfortable and familiar to the user/owner, and most easily presented and used, especially under potentially stressful, live-threatening situations?

Which one comes in the platform most suitable to the individual needs and desires of the user/owner regarding lawful concealment?

It's just a handgun, and either caliber can be considered one of the many popular personal defensive calibers available in the last 100 years.

Even when the .357 Magnum was a fairly common choice in 4-6" service revolvers, and the 125gr load was becoming commonly seen, there was still disagreement and contention regarding whether the 125gr JHP was really 'better' than the 158gr JHP (or one of the 140/145gr JHP's, for that matter). You wouldn't think so when reading some of the magazine articles in those days, though. There was even some disagreement whether it was 'better' than the .45 ACP (albeit mostly in FMJ, or a couple of the early JHP loads) back then, too.

Like it matters ...

I see this sort of subject as an occasionally interesting topic of casual conversation, for gentle distraction, but not nearly as relevant as some folks would like to think ...

Funny how the CHP has reportedly stated that they've enjoyed better 'success' with the 'lowly' 180gr .40 S&W than they did with their Magnums ... and I had a friend who was a weapons officer with the CHP for many years who agreed with that sentiment. He didn't miss his 6" revolver loaded with 125gr .357 Magnum ammunition at all after he started carrying a M4006. Of course, he especially didn't miss also carrying the W-W 110gr +P+ loads, at one point, either.;)

FWIW, I'm issued a full-size .45 ACP pistol for uniform use and an optional compact .40 S&W for plainclothes use ... and I carry the compact .40 S&W virtually all of the time. However, I'd be perfectly comfortable carrying a .357 Magnum revolver once again ... or an issued 9mm, for that matter.

It's just a handgun ...

I didn't vote in the poll, BTW. I'd have to go find a coin to toss to pick one.

I look for shooter skills, ability and competence, just to start ... before I get too wrapped up around the axle about caliber ...

Thanks for the Leggs memory dragongoddess ... ;)

MCgunner
August 26, 2006, 11:02 PM
Does anyone know of a test where tenthousand rounds of 357 were fired through four layer denim, and the frequency of failed expansion? As a statistician can affirm, a dozen or so gelatin tests, does not make a reliable statistical sample, when the "population" is as large as it is.

For all down to earth, reality purposes, the 357 is an unknown! It is.

Seriously, though, just my hunch, but with the expansion of even the high energy 357 being not a "sure thing," I have more confidence in the round that is not a fast 38, that is the nearly sixty percent greater surface area bullet, and that is not considering it expanded -the 45ACP.

At 1500+ fps, I have no doubt the .357 will expand. I have killed with it. I have only killed paper with the .45. Okay, it was deer. I wasn't even using an expanding bullet either. One of 'em was an 80 yard lung shot and she dropped within fractions of seconds. I know the caliber works, no need to speculate. It has quite a record in law enforcement on human targets, too. The .45 will work, too, I'm sure. I just KNOW the .357 will because it has for me. I don't deer hunt with less, and the .45 is less. It is rather platform dependent, though. I wouldn't deer hunt with a 3" .357, either. Hunting performances starts in 6" barrels as far as I'm concerned. I'd rather think the .45 is MORE than the .357 if the .357 is fired out of a snubbie. .357 needs barrel length to perform. Think the 6" is good? Fire one out of a 20" carbine! :D

boomstik45
August 27, 2006, 02:40 AM
MpMarty, I LOVE the glock 30. Reliable as hell, more accurate than most people will believe and holds 10 + 1 of good ol' .45 acp. I have actually never fire the G29, but look forward to it. I've fired the G20 several times and liked it. Let me tell you, the 155 grain hornady is a screamer, but the 200 grain is the one you can feel when you cut it loose. That sucker means business! Unfortunately, it's a good bit cheaper to buy and shoot .45, and I'm not a reloader, so .45 or .40 tends to be my carry round. I like the .357 a lot, but in most applications, the gun is bigger than what I'd want to carry concealed, and although the snubbies are great, they're not my favorite by far. Compact .45 or .40 gives me more rounds of adequate power. Of course, right away people will scream about accuracy and hitting your target effectively. I agree. However, there's always the possibility (and in some cases, PROBABILITY) of multiple assailants (even if it's only two guys that's plenty worse than just one). Sorry, but I'd rather have a few more rounds at my disposal to begin with, and an extra mag is a lot easier for reloading for me (training) than a speed loader. For some people, it may be the exact opposite, which is fine. I wouldn't argue with that, if you are good with a snubby or other carry revolver and speedloader (if you need one) then consider yourself well armed. Better to carry what you're good with. And remember, not only is anything worth shooting once also worth shooting twice...it's also worth shooting as many times as necessary to stop the threat. Of course, some will always take that the wrong way and do the wrong thing:uhoh: :rolleyes: .

I have to add that .357 makes more sense in the woods where your 4 legged problems are more prevalent. That's not to say that auto loader rounds won't work on various critters, but you have to have the right loading and bullet type. So, to help avoid that kind of problem, I prefer the 10mm above all other autoloader rounds for woods work. But with a revolver, you can shoot some really hot loads (even in .45acp) in .357, .41 mag, .45 Colt, and .44 magnum. All of these will handle a variety of critters, but again, you have to have the right load/bullet type to be effective against certain animals. For instance, here in Georgia (and South Carolina) the wild hog is a common and very dangerous foe. While a .357 magnum CAN take one down, a hot .45 colt or .44 magnum is better. In some cases, Wayyyyy better. When dealing with one that's 200lbs. or more, I'd definitely go with the larger bore pistol cartridge. Hell, .454 Casull or .480 Ruger won't be a bad idea either.

fastbolt
August 27, 2006, 05:08 AM
Well, if we're going to include consideration of a 'backwoods defensive handgun' as a criteria for selection ... I'll opt for the .357 Magnum.

It was always my favorite 'medium-bore' backwoods handgun ... for those instances when I didn't expect to 'need' the additional power of a .44 Magnum wheelgun.;)

If I were going to be carrying a .357 Magnum wheelgun as a service handgun again, and I could select my own ... I'd choose one of the new 8-shot 627's with a 5" barrel. The 4" barrels were a compromise intended to favor portability when it came to wearing them on duty belts all day. I knew more than a few guys that favored 6" .357's for service revolvers, though.

I was very reluctant to give up my .357 when we transitioned to 9mm pistols. :cuss:

Life goes on, though.

S&Wfan
August 27, 2006, 11:16 PM
Hi,

I posted earlier that either caliber would be great, just use the one that you shoot best! For me, that's the .45ACP . . . in a revolver!!!


MCgunner wrote:
Why shoot .45ACP in a revolver the size of a .44 magnum?

Forgive me if I fail to quote your entire, excellent response! You bring up several great points.

Why a big "N" frame revolver in .45ACP? For me it is because I do my very best shooting with this revolver.

http://216.77.188.54/coDataImages/p/Groups/246/246167/folders/183771/186049925-2.jpg

With someone helping me with a Pact timer and a LOT of practice, the best I can do out of a hip holster w/ my 5" Colt Combat Elite auto hovered around 1.15 seconds (from a position w/ each thumb touching the earmuffs in a surrender position). It took this long for me to react to the timer, draw and put a vital shot into a B-27 target at six feet.

CONSISTENTLY with this chopped barrel "N" frame Model 25-2 I would be under .85 seconds, with some draws under .8 seconds.

Also, I can reload my 25-2 as fast as I can my 1911s . . .and once won an area special tactical steel match using this revolver against nearly 40 other shooters . . . all who were using high cap. autos. There were 18 steel plates and poppers spread out over about a 40 degree area, from about 15-35 yards. All guns started unloaded in a pistol box . . . with ONE manditory reload. Needless to say, I had to load three times, not two, IF I didn't miss.

For some reason, I shoot double action revolvers better than the autos, and that day I didn't miss . . . and some of the Glock guys with their 33 round clips tried to go too fast . . . and they got frustrated the more they missed.

Yep, if the chips are all down for REAL one day, I hope I have this revolver in my hands.;)


However, I like autos for self defense. I do carry a revolver now and then, but most of the time it's an auto. I just shoot faster and reload MUCH faster with 'em. Besides square flat guns and square flat reloads tote easier concealed.

I took will usually be carrying an automatic, usually a Kimber CDP Ultra due to both size, weight AND flatness. If that's too much, it will go down to a Colt Agent six-shot .38 spl. snub. If that won't work, my little Keltec .32 can conceal most places but a nudist beach I imagine!

Still . . . in the winter when the bulk of my favorite "N" frame can be concealed, I'll be toting my favorite revolver with a couple of cylinders-worth of moon-clipped reloads!!!

T.

boomstik45
August 28, 2006, 12:56 AM
S&W fan, you and the revolver are made for each other, it seems. Also, shooting a glock is more or less simple, but some people don't consider the small differences that a fully-loaded 33 round magazine is going to make. Also, at least for me, there's a difference between factory glock sights and three-dot sights. I much prefer the 3-dot configuration. And, the match you had is a clear example of how the shooter is matched to the gun and should be evaluated that way. Why evaluate one gun vs. another when it's the shooter's level of skill and comfort that matters? Jerry Miculek with an 8 shot .357 is so much deadlier than 10 "range commandos" with glock 18s.

remfield
August 28, 2006, 04:11 AM
I hate keeping a clip compressed all the time in my dresser. I am just more confident in the ability of a wheel gun to fire. That said ill go with the 357 because its more common in good wheel guns. Plus you know a snubby is sexy.

dragongoddess
August 28, 2006, 07:42 PM
Worried about keeping a clip full. Just take 3 rounds out of it and that will release some of the tension on the spring.

Oregongundude
August 28, 2006, 08:18 PM
Funny how the CHP has reportedly stated that they've enjoyed better 'success' with the 'lowly' 180gr .40 S&W than they did with their Magnums

155gr. Speer Uni Core @ 1300 fps (582 ft. lbs.)
180gr. Speer Uni Core @ 1100 fps (484 ft. lbs.)
180gr. FMJ @ 1100 fps (484 ft. lbs.)
180gr. @ 1100fps / 484 ft/lbs- Glock 23 (4.0"bbl)
200gr. @ 1050fps / 490 ft/lbs- Glock 23 (4.0"bbl)



I added the 155 grain bullet as well, but i wanted to make a point about lowly 180 grain .40 S&W bullet. I think the CHP should rethink I don't that bullet is good enough to kill any BG's. And just for fun I added the 200 grain bullet for the .40 S&W just for fun. I wouldn't want to get hit by any of these lowly bullets. :what:

The sources I used for this thread are www.buffalobore.com, www.doubletapammo.com

fastbolt
August 29, 2006, 01:41 PM
The CHP has used the standard, 'original' Winchester 180gr JHP load since they adopted their 4006's.

The same load is again on the state contract, as the RA40180HP, and the standard 180gr JHP offered by Remington is also on the contract and available as well, as the Express R40SW2C. I know of some LE shootings involving both rounds. We've used both loads off & on as training & qualification ammunition for the .40 S&W pistols, although we issue T-series for service use in various calibers.

I'd heard rumblings that the CHP had tried to rewrite the bid specifications a couple years ago so the Winchester T-series would be on the contract, since they were very impressed with the gel/barrier tests regarding the T-series. A local Winchester LE dealer said that if they had been successful the cost of the .40 S&W T-series would have dropped dramatically on the West Coast, but no joy ...

I used to carry the 165gr RA40TA, but switched over to the 180gr RA40T in my issued .40 S&W pistol.

clarence222
August 29, 2006, 06:48 PM
I must say that i like both of these rounds and have more than a couple of guns in each caliber. I carry a 45 most of the time when I carry simply because of the slimmer look and the high capacity mags that it takes. However if and when the SHTF ever happens and I am forced to leave my home with a limited number of guns per person I will be taking my 357's. The reasons I have for that are simple, I have 357's in revolvers as well as lever action rifles. If limited to one or two guns per person I can grab the rifle and my wife can grab the revolver and we can have two guns that shoot the same round yet are very simple to operate, plus the fact that I can look for 38' or 357 makes the caliber my choice when it comes down to it.


So I say it depends on the situation as to which one is best, they are both proven manstoppers and if properly trained withe the use of them neither should ewver disappoint you.

boomstik45
September 1, 2006, 12:27 AM
Good point, Clarence. If at all possible, one should indeed try to keep the ammo situation simple.

Doggieman
September 2, 2006, 11:30 PM
Originally Posted by doggieman
No dear, the reason the 357 is usually better than the .38 is because its extra energy allows it to make a bigger HOLE since it uses that energy to mushroom and penetrate whereas the 38 will tend to stop or not mushroom. The 45 generally has enough energy to penetrate fully, and modern bullets mushroom more than bullets of yore, generating larger HOLES.

Aaahh, so energy DOES matter after all?!


Well of course energy matters.. without energy the bullet would never come out of the gun. But energy doesn't matter directly, it only matters in that it
1) allows a bullet to pass into and sometimes through a person
2) allows a bullet of the proper shape to deform (mushroom) inside a person

Energy matters indirectly, in that it allows a piece of metal to make holes in people. The holes are what matter, the energy merely allows the metal bit to make 'em.

Since the .45 and the .357 have enough power to do both of the above (with modern ammo I would argue they do both equally well), then that variable falls out and the only difference we have left is the size of the hole that the energy has allowed the bullet to impart: .45" vs. .357". .45 wins.

I mean yeah if you're looking at *HP* .357 vs. *FMJ* .45 then I'd pick the 357, but the original hypothetical allowed you to pick any type of ammo, and I assume people would pick the best type of ammo. The best HP .45 ammo will open up as reliably as .357 ammo unless you're shooting through maybe car doors or something, but that wasn't in the hypo.

If the guy weighed 400 lbs then maybe I'd go with the .357 again. Or if the guy had 15 layers of clothing on, who knows. But the average situation on the average street against an average guy you're going to want to make BIG HOLES and the 45 will do that better in that situation.

And PLEASE let's not talk about "one shot stops" those "statistics" are completely nonsensical and have been debunked time and again.

Dogbite
September 3, 2006, 01:12 AM
Well, i would literally feel good with either one. If i was forced to chose one over the other, it would be the 357 mag in a good 125 grain loading. Bottom line--they are both BUSINESS.

ugaarguy
September 3, 2006, 05:47 AM
If the difference were large, it would be obvious. If it were obvious, there would be no debate.

I like what LightingJoe said. I agree with it, and felt it bore repeating.

sm
September 3, 2006, 02:31 PM
Either one will work as long as the day they are used on ends in the letter "y".

Can't vote on poll and won't. Too many variables, and there are no Holy Grails on Firearms and Ammo.

Some thoughts:

Revolver for defense, semi auto for offense -CRSam.
His preference was a .357 revolver for defense, and bone stock Gov't model for offense.

Gun Fit. Yep, I mentioned it again didn't I? Well it is that important. In assisting students, we started with .22 revos, then .22 semis. Transition to Revos in .38spl , for instance we had six exact Model 10s - except for stocks. Only difference were stocks. Students found a "gun fit" simply because of the stocks, and shot the same gun better.

Had a variety of Semis too. Again gun fit, some fit some folks better than others, some could reach controls, recoil in one platform worse in one, better than another due to gun fit.

Gun fit also includes caliber.

Fold a sheet of typing paper in half, folk again. Set this out 5yds. 5 rounds of ammo, and best if can do this from concealment, still low ready works.

At timer shoot 5 rounds.

Do that with any and all gun platforms [ revolver or semi] and all calibers a student has narrowed down "best for them".

The paper and times don't lie.

That paper informs that student which is the best for them.

pinetree64
September 3, 2006, 09:14 PM
I'd feel good with either though I voted 45acp - big hole and quick followups. If you a table reader, Corbon offers stellar +P for 45acp. Of course what you shoot best is most important. I shoot a 1911 much better than a revolver. That said I am craving 3" SP101 in 357.

ARTiger
September 4, 2006, 02:09 AM
I'm no physicist, but like both rounds a lot. Have 5+ guns in each caliber. My totally unscientific take is that while I love my .45 ACP's, I wouldn't shoot a deer with one. Mainly because I'm too lazy to follow a 1/2+ mile blood trail to find the dead deer. On the other hand I have taken many deer with a 6" .357 revolver using Buffalo's Bore's baddest heavy bullet rounds. Quite a few laid down right where they were standing and most didn't get very far.

For a defense situation however against 2 legged critters, I know that personally I can shoot my .45's better and can get more accurate hits faster. These are different rounds designed for different guns. It's the gun that makes the difference in which is a better round for your purpose.

inggo
September 4, 2006, 07:31 AM
Thompson and LaGarde stated, "the Board was of the opinion that a bullet, which will have the shock effect and stopping effect at short ranges necessary for a military pistol or revolver, should have a caliber not less than .45".
This test was done to an animal of same weight and size

FIREARMZ
September 4, 2006, 12:57 PM
Which ever you shoot the best. Holes in the right place are the only ones that count.

goings_51
September 4, 2006, 09:44 PM
A 230 grain JHP going 850FPS=369 ft lbs energy

A 158 grain JHP going 1200FPS=505 ft lbs energy

The .45 is a bigger hole. You can shoot and reload the .45 faster. The .357 won't ever jam. You should read up on the testing that was done before the 1911 was adopted. I would trust my life to either.

MCgunner
September 4, 2006, 09:54 PM
Opinions are like......well......never mind.

jlh26oo
September 6, 2006, 04:28 AM
Well of course energy matters..

k just checking; sounded like you thought otherwise there for a while.

Doggieman
September 6, 2006, 09:22 PM
I like how you pick tiny parts of my posts and respond to them

roy berkeley
September 6, 2006, 09:42 PM
This topic has been talked to death. I would only point out that:
1) They both offer about the same stopping power
2) The 1911 is just plain better ergonomically
3) A .357 bullet may or may not expand, but a .45 bullet will not shrink

lawboy
September 6, 2006, 10:53 PM
I voted .357. I considered stopping power to encompass a lot of things, such as hit probability at long range, penetration of glass, light cover and heavy clothing, etc. The .357 comes out ahead in most categories other than rate of fire (which encompassess ease/speed of reloads). I carry a .357.

jjohnson
September 7, 2006, 09:55 AM
I voted .45 only because I didn't get to pick ammo. I honestly believe hot 125-gr HPs in a .357 (just an example) may actually cause more tissue trauma than 230-gr ball ammo in a .45, but it doesn't take me very long at all to draw, aim, and hit with my M1911, and hits are a GOOD thing. I like .357s but if I have to carry, it's usually .45, and I never feel like "ooooh, I should have packed a .357 instead....."

And like the guy said (I love this) "a .357 bullet may or may not expand, but the .45 bullet will not shrink." Cool. Elmer Keith once said that big bullets let out a lot of blood and let in a lot of air.

The .357 crowd isn't undergunned.... but neither am I.

SFvet
September 11, 2006, 04:46 PM
I shot a couple Winchester hollowpoints into the dirt and both left a nice trail and expanded beautifully. The .45 seems to expand even with slow Winchesters :cool:

S&Wfan
September 11, 2006, 11:35 PM
If the .357mag. was vastly superior, then more folks would want to tote wheelguns it would seem.

The .45ACP offers faster reloads, generally more rounds, and conceals flatter . . . again, generally.

Then again, my favorite .45ACP handgun . . . is a chopped barrel S&W 25-2 revolver!

boomstik45
September 12, 2006, 01:36 AM
OOOooooohhhh. I wish I had one of THOSE.

chipp
January 21, 2007, 07:24 PM
i alway assumed that out of same weight guns a .357 would have less recoil than 45? am I wrong? using simialr ammo?(if there is such a thing)

KONY
January 21, 2007, 08:29 PM
Although I think each would do the job, I'm voting for .357mag just for the "fun-to-shoot" factor. With that said, I usually carry a 9mm (Euro-Weenie) for the "cheap-to-shoot" factor. :D

tnieto2004
January 21, 2007, 08:34 PM
.357 hp

BOOM-BOOM
January 21, 2007, 11:20 PM
According to a chart I just read, in regards to one shot stopping power.

The 357 Mag. rated 96% The 45ACP rated 94%

With that in mind, I wouldn't want to be shot with either.......:


Here's the site. Check it out I was very surprised By the 22's..

http://www.chuckhawks.com/index2b.handguns.htm

mavracer
January 21, 2007, 11:43 PM
you are all missing the point both would be better and enough three p's to make sure all 12 shots in torso. besides should have shot 6 feet sooner 21' is the old rule of thumb.

EricTheBarbarian
January 22, 2007, 09:29 AM
shot placement. I wouldnt want to be shot by either and I would bet money that either one would ruin someones day if you needed it to

givo08
January 23, 2007, 11:04 AM
I think the super tacticool S&W 8 shot M327 .357 mag revolver that uses moon clips to reload would hold more than a standard 1911 (7 per mag), reload faster (moon clips vs. magazine), and fire faster than a semi-auto could cyle (for a trained shooter like Jerry Miculek). :neener:

BOOM-BOOM
January 23, 2007, 07:47 PM
Why would you need moonclips for a revolver that shoots 357mag. shells moonclips are made for ammo like the 45acp capible to be shot in revolvers so the bullits can be extracted

Sniper X
January 23, 2007, 07:57 PM
Since .357 mag was never used in a war or conflict, the US Government never did a study. However, in police trials the .357mag won, by a very slim margin in most studies, and .45acp won in some. I say toss up but you do have quicked reloads in .45acp if you use a Auto, but If it takes more than one or two in a fight on the street, you are probably in BIG trouble.

I'll make up a Johnny Chochranisim here....

If you need more than three in th street, you must retreat!

MichaelJ
January 23, 2007, 11:26 PM
You should use whichever one you can control accurately and quickly.
You won't have time to take a leisurely aim if you are being attacked. And if you can't hit what you're aiming at due to excessive recoil, it's not good.

Plink
January 24, 2007, 04:54 PM
Realistically, the performance between the two is a close call. There have been many reliable reports of stops, but both have also had spectacular failures to stop, like any handgun caliber. I do see a clear pick though, at least for my mindset.

Have you ever touched off a high pressure round in an enclosed area? If you have, you'll know why I went to the .45 ACP. Nice low pressure round. If you have to shoot to defend your life, you don't get to pick the arena. It may be in the hallway!

benelli12
January 24, 2007, 05:51 PM
both the 45 and 357 are proven great manstoppers, both have there different formulas, and both work, and always will work.

duke40
January 27, 2007, 12:38 AM
3-5-7

Revolver Ocelot
January 28, 2007, 02:25 AM
depends on how you define manstopper, 357 will go straight through someone while 45 is more likely to knock then down

Plink
January 28, 2007, 04:48 PM
depends on how you define manstopper, 357 will go straight through someone while 45 is more likely to knock then down

LOL! Wow, nothing like the facts, eh? Nah, I won't even start on this one.

McCall911
January 28, 2007, 04:58 PM
Both and neither.

Both if you place your shots right.

Neither if you don't place them right.

Case closed (?)
:D

SoCalShooter
January 28, 2007, 05:00 PM
Proper ammo is whats at stake here. Both are excellent stopping calibers, .45acp BALL has a tendency to over penetrate. Both are proven calibers, what are you comfortable and accurate with.

tube_ee
January 30, 2007, 08:42 PM
Stopping power: Tie, assuming top quality loads for both guns.

Shootability: Slight edge to the .45ACP, due to less recoil, unless you're like me and shoot wheelguns better because the very different way they fit in the hand works better for your hand. Of course, your average sixgun is going to be a bit more accurate than your average autoloader, on average, so this may even out to a tie.

Concealibility: Another tie. But they conceal differently. The flatter profile of the stackgun makes it somewhat easier to hide, but all those right angles scream "gun" when they're seen. The sixgun's fat cylinder is maybe harder to hide, but the rounded curvyness makes it harder to recognize if concealment isn't perfect. An autoloader in the pocket looks like a gun. A revolver looks like an undefined lump. This is also a tie. Same results achieved by different means.

Reload: .45, if it mattered, which I don't think it does. If you're facing multiple people determined to do murder, you're probably going to die, no matter how many rounds are in your gun. You can only engage one target at a time. Which means that while you're shooting one of them, the rest are shooting you. If you die, you still lose, no matter how many of them you take with you. Likewise, if you can't get the hits, more rounds won't help. Still, the stackgun takes this one. If you think it matters, and if you shoot both guns well, this might make the difference for you.

Intimidation: I'm not advocating brandishing, but this does matter, since the majority of defensive handgun uses result in no rounds fired. An armed victim is often all that's required, and if you don't have to shoot (if they run away, you can't shoot them), again, the round in your gun doesn't matter. So for this one, tie... they're both guns.

I didn't see "tie" in the poll, so I didn't vote. Me, I like sixguns. the only brasschucker I own is a .22, and I like it that way. So if I had to vote, I'd vote .357, but based solely on personal preference... not in terms of any real difference between the two in the real world.

--Shannon

Geno
January 30, 2007, 08:48 PM
For all said by all posts, it does boil down to shot placement. Both are outstanding, time-proven rounds. Take the one you shoot best. For me, I prefer a heavy round, and most revolvers, given my size, are difficult to conceal. For me, the .45ACP in a 1911. It doesn't mean it's better.

jaysouth
January 31, 2007, 01:08 AM
Hmmmm........

We need some volunteers to take a round from each to the center of their mass and report back.

Might shed some light on this burning issue.:scrutiny:

straight shooter 308 1
December 9, 2007, 09:13 PM
the 357 mag. is by far the best defence round.with the rem.golden sabors in 125 gr. i proceded to shoot my burn barrel out back and oh my god it made a fist size hole ,in a human target the blood loss would be tremendous!the energy and wound cavity would be horrid.recoil is not really that bad.noise level is somewhat brisk.(loud) but if was your life or your loved ones was on the line that would not matter. the 357 magnum 125 gr.is the superior ! ps.ask gen. Patton.;)

massglockman
December 9, 2007, 09:54 PM
i think that i would not want to get shot six times with either but if i had to shoot some one with one its tough a 357 is an in and outer, a 45 golden saber hydroshok or extreme shock are goin to leave a man with no torso so maybe its just personel preference, which is best you shoot. better take that with you with right bullet and there you go but a 357 to face will always work with 5 to spare

ashtxsniper
December 9, 2007, 09:56 PM
I would take my 357's over my 45's anyday.

jad0110
December 9, 2007, 09:59 PM
McCall911 is dead on.

Therefore, I did not vote because shot placement is king with either choice.

Triphammer
December 10, 2007, 02:14 AM
I've never had to use lethal force against a human. I have taken several dozen whitetail deer over the years. All have been with long guns, 308 win., 45-70 or 12 ga slug. Most have been one shot kills, however, with the 308 the "vitals" have been completely liquified & the deer fell got up & ran. The 45 & the the slugs caused the deer to stop, lay down & bleed out. By extapolation I've chosen the 45 ACP as my carry gun.
I also carry a 38 j frame w/ a 3" barrel or even at times an NAA 22. Gunfight rule #1- have a gun.

RNB65
December 10, 2007, 02:18 AM
Both will get the job done. But I'll take 7+1 rnds of .45ACP over 6 rnds of .357mag any day.
-

nerfsrule2
December 10, 2007, 02:47 AM
If the poll was open,I would have voted for the .357mag. Why?? Winchester "Black Talons"180 gr. sxt!!!:eek:

DMK
December 10, 2007, 09:31 AM
I don't buy into the energy argument. You need enough energy to both penetrate and expand. If a .357 and a 45ACP both penetrate enough, both expand and tear through vitals, then either will do the job, both having enough energy to penetrate and expand. 45ACP would have the slight, but negligible advantage for the larger diameter.

If the shot is at a bad angle, needs to go through more tissue and only the .357 reaches the necessary depth then the 45ACP fails.



Gel test of .357 Mag (http://www.brassfetcher.com/357mag158grSpeerGoldDot.html)

Gel Comparison of 9mm, .357Sig, .40S&W, .45ACP (http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/docgkr/myhomepage/Handgun_gel_comparison.jpg)

1911austin
December 10, 2007, 03:30 PM
10mm

BlindJustice
December 10, 2007, 05:48 PM
First if you subscribe to almost any USA gun magazine,, within 3 years
you'll see a comparison of .357 Mag & .45 ACP. Timeless Hot Stove
topic in the winter time, as you congregate at the local mercantile.

That Said:

they come out rated 1-2-3 in terms of:
* how well I shoot them
* how quick for followup shots
* how quick to reload

1911 5" Bbl. 8 round mags
.45 ACP
Load: Leadhead 200 gr. SWC @ 1,025 FPS
467 ft. lbs
( I'm getting a 500 pak of Hornady 200 gr. XTP
loaded soon to relagate the SWC to practice.
.400 CorBon
155 gr. Speer Gold DOt @ 1,400 FPS
@ 674 ft lbs - nuh yah

S&W 625 5" Bbl. Len.
.45 ACP & .45 Auto Rim
The aforementioned 200 gr. SWC @ 1,025 FPS
.45 Auto Rim only
225 gr. Barnes XPB HP @ 950 FPS
451 ft. lbs
185 gr. Speer Gold Dot @ 1,050 FPS
453 ft. lbs

Ihave HKS 25M Speedloaders but for reloads
I am quicker with the full moon clips.

S & W 686P 4" Bbl. Len. 7 shot cyl.
.357 Magnum
Hornady 140 gr. XTP-JHP @ 1,410 FPS
618 ft. lbs
Hornady 158 gr. XTP JHP @ 1,325 FPS
617 ft. lbs
Hornady 180 gr. XTP JHP @ 1,175 FPS
552 ft. lbs

I have the 587 HKS Speedloaders but the fwd upper
part of the Hogue grips interfere with the loading
and extraction of empties unlike the shorter .45 ACP/AR
rounds in the 625.

Muzzle flash and shock wave from the .357 Mag.
would imo be brutal indoors.

My no. 1 HD/SF is my 1911
it's backup would be a Model 60 3" Bbl.
with Speer Gold Dot 135 gr. JHP +P .38 SPcl. approx. 900 FPS




later,

Fishman777
December 11, 2007, 10:33 AM
Based on the real-world studies, the .357 magnum is the best manstopper on the planet. Having said that, I think that the .45 acp might be a better choice in a home defense situation. I really don't think that either is needed for home defense. I have high pressure .38 special loads on hand for home defense. I want a round that my wife is capable of shooting well.

Fishman777
December 11, 2007, 10:50 AM
Based on the real-world studies, the .357 magnum is the best manstopper on the planet. Having said that, I think that the .45 acp might be a better choice in a home defense situation. I really don't think that either is needed for home defense. I have high pressure .38 special loads on hand for home defense. I want a round that my wife is capable of shooting well.

gym
December 11, 2007, 11:16 AM
A man is like a car, in the sense that once you remove enough fluid, it stops running, unless you hit the heart or the brain. Big hole = more loss of fluid, I cary a 45.

mnw42
December 12, 2007, 04:54 PM
This conversation will be academic when I get my phased plasma rifle in the 40W range.:D

MT GUNNY
December 15, 2007, 05:20 PM
FORD VS CHEVY Ha!! Eatin chevy's an *^&$en Fords DODGE!!! :)

kawhead71
December 15, 2007, 05:29 PM
We need some volunteers to take a round from each to the center of their mass and report back


Classic, jaysouth!!!

I'd like to volunteer my boss. He goes about 320, so he's got center mass to spare!:D

By the way, I've got one of each. Nothing fancy.
.357 605 compensated w/spurless hammer
.45 Star PD

jimmyraythomason
December 15, 2007, 05:39 PM
I trust my .45acp with 230gr BALL ammo for defense but also trust my .357 with 125gr Cor-bons equally well.

earplug
December 15, 2007, 05:59 PM
ONe should think about the size and ease of each pistol to carry.
A little J frame .357 is easy to carry but a short barrel does not push a bullet as fast as a long barrel.
A alloy single stack pistol in 45 ACP is much easier to shoot and carry concealed then a equal size revolver such as a K frame smith.
In a service size firearm using a service type holster i'd give the .357 the edge.
If your shooting a little pocket grenade, that has beat you up in practice, remember only hits count.

mike4guns
March 16, 2008, 11:34 PM
i also have several of each. i love either at any given time. purely an offensive veiw- by carrying two glock21sf's(on clipdraws by the way is an excellent route to go) with only one mag in a backpocket , 41 corbon 230's is a very compitent self defense set up. being a average to good shot that puts me in a better than 50/50 chance of surviving a dance with two or three hooded baggy pants scumbags. i just won't operate with less. there are times when two g21's are to much to dress with, then the extra mag turns into two and a model 60 with 135gr short bbl rounds comes along. yes we know that the snubbies subtract velocity but the 357 does comfort me and does take the place of the g21 quiet well. i never compare what is better.i mean if your confronted by evil doer's and you have 4 or 5 feet to spare it don't matter what your using lenght wise. i won't ever be shooting from across a street . they both are a capable round that i use as a tool and practice enough to be efficient with them both. i would not choose anything less than a 45 or 357. they are the only two rounds that exsist in my world. i don't hunt so larger bore guns are useless to me. though i would not feel any less capable with a 44 mag. it's just too much. it's only two legged dangers that i protect myself from. and clothing penatration such as denim don't matter much in monroe county florida.( 80 degrees 8 days a week) people dress lightly in the keys. the clipdraw does a great job under t-shirts. holsters are just not possible for me. i hated them . i do think i have the rational thinking to go for the 45 if a problem ocurrs in a populated area. the 357 is purely backup. my son is a cop in nyc and uses a lighter grain gold dot 9mm round. he dislikes it. police travel in two's and fours in nyc. i can understand wanting more power. talk of 40cal change over is carrying on a windy day but he don't think it will happen ultimately. i guess 40 rounds from 5 officers is enough to do the job when needed.(if you remember the african fellow who went for his wallet supposedly while being told to keep hands visible ) the nypd was 100% justified in that shooting imo. who knows what this bum is gonna pull... 40 9 mm gold dots were fired in an unusual case) sorry but i digress.

BikerRN
March 17, 2008, 06:30 AM
Both are good calibers if loaded with the "appropriate" ammo, but the "edge" goes to the .357 Magnum.

I like both calibers and carry both, but if push came to shove, I'd go with the Magnum every time.

BikerRN

jaholder1971
March 17, 2008, 08:50 PM
.357 has been king for many years now.

However, some of y'all are stuck on the ".45 hollowpoints don't always open" mantra for way too long. Bullet design is far better today than it's ever been and that argument don't stand today like it did 20 years ago, folks.

Federal's 125 grain JHP load in .357 and Federal's 230 grain Hydra Shok in .45 Auto are neck and neck in the stopping department, both at 96%. The only reason I give .357 a nudge is the greater number of shootings.

DougDubya
March 17, 2008, 09:43 PM
The .45 hollowpoints don't always open reasoning always escaped me.

How could anyone see the frontal area of a .45 ACP hollowpoint and somehow feel that an FMJ has more contact area than the hollowpoint?

I'd give it to the .45 only because it'd be easier to make quicker followup shots.

LightningJoe
January 12, 2009, 09:32 PM
The .357 wins in EVERY type of test EVER done.


Except gunfights. 357 depends on hollowpoints and hollowpoints can overexpand and underpenetrate. Don't say it doesn't happen. .45 Auto. on the other hand, has more mass, less speed. All else being equal, I'd take .45 over .357. I wouldn't prefer .357 over 9mm or .38 Special.

inSight-NEO
January 12, 2009, 11:13 PM
Taken as a whole, I seem to recall the Federal 125g. "357B" JHP (.357 Magnum, of course) as being one of the most, if not THE most, effective man-stoppers out there, short of a 12g. shotgun round. However, having said this, Im still inclined to go with .45 ACP as I feel it has very honorable statistics ("stopping power") vs the .357 Magnum and for me, offers much more manageable loads (when dealing with powerful HD type ammo). After all, its not just the caliber itself that is in consideration here, but also the combined effectiveness of available loads/accuracy potential of each weapon.

So, my official vote would be for the .357 Magnum. Un-officially, based loosely on "practicality", Id opt for the .45 ACP.

CuzinMike
January 12, 2009, 11:31 PM
Wow! This thread just keeps on going...why break with tradition? :)

Seriously, while I have read all the numbers posted in this thread by various individuals, and all of the statistics pointing to .357 being a marginally better round, I'd still have to give the nod to the .45.

The reason for my opinion has purely to do with practice. When I lurk around in the revolvers forum, (I read a lot more than I talk, as you can tell by my lowly post count) it seems that a lot of the folks who carry compact .357 revolvers practice primarily with .38's.

Now, if it's my life on the line, I want the gun I carry and the ammunition I shoot to be two things I'm intimately familiar with. Therefore, when I go to the range with the gun I carry, I shoot the ammunition I carry exclusively, and to be honest, with hot SD loads, I much prefer practicing with a 45 than a 357 out of similarly sized weapons.

More enjoyment practicing = more practice.
More practice = me being a better shooter.

Now, of course I can load up powder-puff .38 wadcutters and shoot a J-frame quite comfortably. But that would kind of be like practicing for the Daytona 500 in a Geo Metro, wouldn't it?

antediluvianist
January 13, 2009, 05:48 AM
Webley .455 all the way. Not available? Then ok the .45 acp? Not available? Then throw a bowling ball: very good mass, a bit inadequate on the velocity.

.357? I have an S&W 7-shot 686. Love the fireball. If you are REALLY VERY GOOD WITH SPEEDLOADERS UNDER STRESS CONDITIONS, then ok the fireball-maker will work. Pretty tough in a room, though, or if your vision includes the fireball.

.45 is a good compromise among all factors: "stopping power", recoil, blast, ammo capacity, easy reloads.

Monster Zero
January 15, 2009, 10:25 PM
I'd take either one if I couldn't have a shotgun, that is, or if I couldn't do the smart thing and just leave. I would fire all six, though, I'm pretty sure of that.

Rampant_Colt
January 15, 2009, 10:41 PM
.357 has been king for many years now.

However, some of y'all are stuck on the ".45 hollowpoints don't always open" mantra for way too long. Bullet design is far better today than it's ever been and that argument don't stand today like it did 20 years ago, folks.

Federal's 125 grain JHP load in .357 and Federal's 230 grain Hydra Shok in .45 Auto are neck and neck in the stopping department, both at 96%. The only reason I give .357 a nudge is the greater number of shootings
96% :rolleyes:

MikePGS
January 15, 2009, 11:25 PM
There are no dangerous weapons, only dangerous men (and women).

LeonCarr
January 16, 2009, 12:14 AM
.357 Magnum

I like the .357 because of my own experience with it in my own informal tests and use in the hunting fields, and most importantly due to many fireside chats with current and former LEOs who carried it and used it in the line of duty. Virtually 100% of the LEOs I have talked to state that getting shot with the .357 Magnum with 125 JHPs is usually a two hit fight. The bullet hits the bad guy and the bad guy hits the ground. They also talked about how it worked really well on automotive body panels and tires :).

Also, the .357 revolver shoots groups at 100 yards that the .45 ACP shoots at 50. You can never have a handgun that is too accurate.

If you want to choose your handgun and ammunition based on blocks of ballistic gelatin and goats getting shot, fine. I personally have never been assaulted by goats or jello.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

LightningJoe
January 17, 2009, 05:05 PM
Then throw a bowling ball: very good mass, a bit inadequate on the velocity.



I wouldn't want to be hit by one.

Fishman777
January 18, 2009, 02:43 AM
...But no handgun cartridge is a reliable stopper. Both .357 an .45 have excellent reputations, but both cartridge occasionally fails in the field. Don't fool yourself. Given the choice, I'd take the .357 magnum.

Predator26
January 18, 2009, 09:23 AM
I wouldn't prefer .357 over 9mm or .38 Special.

^^^:what::what:^^^

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but that statement there is sheer LUNACY!

I'll take the .357 everyday of the week and twice on Sunday's.

Gary in Pennsylvania
January 18, 2009, 10:33 AM
I give the Manstopper Award to the .357 magnum.

This is based on my YEARS of prolific imagination, my 35 years of continuous life having NEVER served in law enforcement, my shoot-out experiences (none), my technical ballistic engineering background (I know what velocity is?), And the fact that I met a Navy Seal once (he was nice).


Now - I swap my EDC's back and forth between a 3" GP-100 and my XD45 tactical. I carry 158gr GDHP's in the Ruger and 230gr GDHP's in the XD.


I wouldn't want to get hit with EITHER of them....But based on my extensive experience listed above......I still claim the the .357mag has got more "Junk in the Trunk" to wallop any unfortunate recipient of my urgent message!


-

makarovnik
January 18, 2009, 08:39 PM
Projectiles need to be moving at over 1000fps to reliably expand (every time) in soft tissue.

WardenWolf
January 18, 2009, 10:12 PM
Except gunfights. 357 depends on hollowpoints and hollowpoints can overexpand and underpenetrate. Don't say it doesn't happen. .45 Auto. on the other hand, has more mass, less speed. All else being equal, I'd take .45 over .357. I wouldn't prefer .357 over 9mm or .38 Special.

Holy necropost, Batman! March 17 2008 to January 15 2009. And the thread is originally from August 2006. This topic has been beaten to death.

Fact is, though, a .357 tends to overpenetrate. When a round blows clean through, it does not impart all its kinetic energy to the target. If you're using a round that tends to blow clean through, you're using too much power. For self defense, small caliber / high velocity generally does not work that well (.223 / 5.56 is an exception due to its exceptional tumbling). You are better off using a round that will reliably stay in the target.

mgregg85
January 18, 2009, 10:15 PM
Who brought this old post back to life? This thread is a zombie, it just won't die.
Might as well toss my opinion in, I prefer .45 acp because I like autoloaders, increased mag capacity and big bullets.

gglass
January 19, 2009, 01:52 AM
.357 Magnum... Now close the thread.

Mastiff
January 19, 2009, 02:25 AM
FWIW, I use 9x23 Winchester because it gives me 357 Magnum ballistics in an autoloader, with the increased mag capacity of the semi-auto, less muzzleflash, less recoil, and faster reloads. I used to use the .45 ACP exclusively before I found the 9x23 Winchester. Now I don't even have a pistol chambered in .45 ACP. It is the best of both calibers in my opinion.

CoRoMo
January 19, 2009, 05:32 PM
Old thread... even older argument.

.357 won... again.

If I only have 6 rounds, .357 gets the nod.
If I can choose between 6 rounds of .357 and 14 rounds of 45acp, I'll take the 45 into battle.

flrfh213
February 24, 2009, 12:52 AM
i use a p90dc for home, and my ss 357 mag as ccw, i find the 2" barell is easier for ccw than the acp. and the 45 is always in the same spot if god forbid, the wife needs it to show her unwanted guests the small end..:cuss:

ranger351w
March 6, 2009, 08:03 AM
It would not matter unless the weapon was alreadty drawn. the guy with the machete can get to you before you can draw:cuss:. And dats da truth.

zt77
March 8, 2009, 04:24 AM
whichever you can shoot better
a .22 mag in the heart will work better than a .357 125 gr federal hp to the gut.

the round itself with proper bullets i would say about equal

stalkingbear
March 8, 2009, 03:17 PM
I'll take my 1911 loaded with 230 gr +P Ranger SXT EVERY time! And NEVER feel undergunned.

Taurus_9mm
March 11, 2009, 11:21 PM
I wouldn't feel undergunned with either. However being a wheelgunner at heart, I lean a little more towards the .357 Magnum.

snakeman
March 11, 2009, 11:30 PM
357 with leverevolution ammo or handloads with ftx or xtp bullets get a 4" barrel and have concealability plus a suitable bow range hunting arm

BlindJustice
March 12, 2009, 03:26 AM
Too simmplistic a question....

Define Manstopper if the question was what is the better
HD/SD or "Fighting PIstol" Semi-AUto 45 or even the .45 ACP
revolver wins hands down.

.357 Mag can come in snubbie J-frames, medium frame or large frame
revolvers.... and once the bbl. len. goes below 4" in length there's a
hell of a lot of muzzle blast - slower recovery for a second shot and all that
espacially the llighter the weapon. Nobody makes a small framed .45 ACP
revolver - it's sub sonic mostly and doesn't have to rely on expanding bullets

Instead of "Manstopper" which one yah gonna put by the bedside?

and yes I have a choice a 1911 a S&W .45 ACP 625 as well as an
L-frame and J-frame S&Ws in .357 Mag. THe .45s stay ready the .357s
are cleaned after field/range use and kept in cases.


Stupid argument has been going on since I picked up gun mags
in the mid 60s. .357 Mag Great hunting round.

Randall

drtee
March 18, 2009, 03:33 AM
Pure stopping power? I don't know.

Woods walking = 357
Concealed = 45

Personal preference rules for choice.

Mr. T
March 18, 2009, 04:01 AM
Based on the Taylor Knock Out Value formula, the .45 ACP would be the best manstopper. With standard 230 grain ammo it has a T.K.O. value of 13.16. The .357 Mag using standard 158 grain ammo has a T.K.O. value of 9.99.
I happen to own both guns. The .357 Mag is a Ruger GP100 and is more accurate in my hands, the Springfield XD in .45 ACP is an excellent weapon though. It's ammunition capacity will hold 14 rounds of .45 ACP versus just six with the .357 Mag. I consider both to be good handguns, but the accuracy is much better with the .357 Mag. At 50 yards, the .357 mag will hold 4 to 5 inch groups. The .45 ACP will shoot 7-8 inch groups at 50 yards. However at 25 yards the diffence is much less noticable. Experts say that most handgun incidents occur at ranges of arm's length to 10 yards. That's where most people would probably prefer to have the additional ammunition capacity along with the faster follow up shot and with a .45 ACP the combination would have very effective results. The .357 Mag has the edge as a hunting weapon though with it's greater accuracy out at 50 yards; in hunting the edge in accuracy is what would really count.
Good luck with your decision.
Mr. T

LightningJoe
March 19, 2009, 05:22 AM
.357 would be better for shooting at four-footed problems. For bipeds, .45 Auto. For shooting at people, the .357 relies on hollowpoints which are fine in theory but that theory has gone very wrong for some.

okespe04
March 19, 2009, 01:13 PM
either

lanternlad1
March 19, 2009, 01:27 PM
This is an interesting video:
http://www.coldsteel.com/gurkhakukri.html

In the first half of this video, Lynn Thompson shoots a free hanging piece of meat with a .357 mag. The round goes through, but also badly bruises the meat. Since bruising in muscle tissue is caused by broken blood vessels, and dead meat has very little blood in it, this shows a great deal of damage being done by the .357 magnum.

Joshu
March 19, 2009, 01:46 PM
The only way to end this decades long debate woul be to shoot the same guy with both rounds. Of course deciding which round to shoot first would be hard. And after being shot on one previous occansion is someone more or less likely to continue an attack? Oh and finding a volunteer would also be difficult....

The test might also be illegal..

1911 guy
March 21, 2009, 04:06 AM
The only thing I know of to stop a man dead in his tracks is a blonde in a slinky black dress.

If you're talking handguns, all bets are off. Weird stuff happens, one guy will give up with a minor flesh wound, another will take everything you've got to the chest cavity and keep coming.

My personal opinion is to pick a caliber of at least .36" bore diameter, 100 grain projectile and 900 feet persecond velocity. More is better in all categories. Handguns are for when a rifle isn't convenient.

drtee
March 21, 2009, 12:36 PM
It has been said that size doesn't matter.

BUT:

IMO bigger is better when bullet and stopping ability to incapacitate someone, as quickly as possible, is the issue. Of course a 22 short :rolleyes: will stop someone if hit in the right place. That doesn't mean I want a 22 if deadly force is required.:banghead: In some instances size does matter.

Clarence
March 22, 2009, 04:23 PM
.45 acp

SharpsDressedMan
March 22, 2009, 05:35 PM
Countless arguments, tests, actual police shootings etc, have led me to believe that the .357 with a 125gr. DOES impart hydrostatic shock to a man-type target (boy, is that polictically correct, or what!), with the 125gr. HP .357 dominating the charts of one shot stops in acutal police shootings. The .45 gets better results than many other standard police rounds, even the new ones. However, portability, gun handling, familiarization etc, might cause anyone of us to choose one over the other. If you like autos, you should be well armed with a .45. If you like revolvers, and are not intimidated by the blast or sharp recoil of the .357 full loads, then the .357 may be for you. A revolver guy can move up to the .41 or .44 Mag, too. An auto guy might like the 10mm, which just may EXCEED the .357 in most every way. Bullet placement will easily put one over the other, MAYBE every time.

goose2
March 23, 2009, 12:34 AM
This thread makes want to go down tomorrow morning and trade my 45 acp in on a 357. "NOT" I have been the 357 rout before and I will never own another one. That caliber rings my ears like none other.

mljdeckard
March 23, 2009, 12:42 AM
To the vast majority of shooters in any given circumstance: Absolutely zero difference in real world lethality.

Blakenzy
March 23, 2009, 02:09 AM
It would not matter unless the weapon was alreadty drawn. the guy with the machete can get to you before you can draw. And dats da truth.

Yep. With either caliber that machete is going to hit you at that distance, unless you pull off a well aimed CNS shot that completely severs his upper spinal chord, in which case the differences between Magnum and ACP really won't matter that much...

logical
March 23, 2009, 11:13 AM
I'd say a persons preferance for a revolver or an auto would drive the choice between the two more than any real difference in man stoppage. And do we need a separate poll for ladystoppers?

kauaisurfer1
November 26, 2013, 11:51 AM
I think a 357 would go right through a person and take with it a ton of energy. It makes more sense to me to use a heavy 45 acp that that expels all its energy and stays inside the bad guy with a low risk of an exit. I think that is why law enforcement is going away from the fast 9mm.

If you enjoyed reading about "Better manstopper 357 Mag or 45 ACP?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!