.357 or .45


PDA






Onofre3
July 7, 2008, 01:27 PM
Guys I need your advice! Im torn between buying a .357 revolver or a .45 semi-auto. Which should I buy? Which performs better? I need this for home defense and will also most likely carry it around with me.

If you enjoyed reading about ".357 or .45" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Flame Red
July 7, 2008, 01:40 PM
Both are excellent choices (no help there).

But here is some help. When I carry, I mostly pocket carry, and my favorite revolver is a 6 shot Colt Magnum Carry. A Ruger or S&W J-Frame is another good choice. The key is a snubby. But I have learned not to use 357 in it. The 38 Special +P works in Gold Dots much better, is easier to get follow up shots with and won't rip off the skin on my hands.

When I can go with a 45, I use an in a in waist band holster, and prefer either a Officer sized or a bobtailed commander. But I pocket carry far more times with either the revolver or a Colt Pony.

So you may find that one cann fill both needs for you very well.

batmann
July 7, 2008, 01:42 PM
First question is, are you familiar with the .45 semi-auto? They are a little different animal. If you go with one, be sure to learn the manual of arms.
A .375 revolver is, as a general rule, a little more reliable and MUCH easiler to use. The .357 125 gr Hollow point is one of the top 'man stoppers', but has a lot of muzzel flash.
If you can, shoot both and that will help a lot in making a choice.

texastony
July 7, 2008, 01:50 PM
I have both and I love them both. Great calibers!

A 1911 Series 70 MK IV Colt .45
Colt King Cobra 6 inch stainless .357
Taurus Titanium 617 2 inch snub.

Colt 1911 has a pretty good bump with 230 grain ball. (I have not had a chance to shoot any hot stuff yet)

King Cobra with 180 grain partition golds kicks pretty good. I'd say about 1.5 time more in perceived recoil than the .45

Taurus titanium with 180's SUCKS!!! SUCKS BAD!!!
About 14 shots and it is time to put it up.

But I love them all.

Vern Humphrey
July 7, 2008, 01:55 PM
Revolver reliability is over-rated. If you cruise these threads very long, you will see one account after another of a revolver tying up. And unlike malfunctions in automatics, revolver stoppages are not easily cleared.

And as John Farnham points out, the most common cause of a stoppage in an actual fight, in either automatics or revolvers is running out of ammunition. The automatic's greater capacity and more rapid reloading is a great advantage here.

Onofre3
July 7, 2008, 01:59 PM
Revolver reliability is over-rated. If you cruise these threads very long, you will see one account after another of a revolver tying up. And unlike malfunctions in automatics, revolver stoppages are not easily cleared.

And as John Farnham points out, the most common cause of a stoppage in an actual fight, in either automatics or revolvers is running out of ammunition. The automatic's greater capacity and more rapid reloading is a great advantage here.

well thats a fact. automatics can carry a lot more than a revolver ever can. However, in terms of stopping power, which will perform best, the .45 or the .357?

Black Knight
July 7, 2008, 02:00 PM
In addition to being familiar with the 45ACP there are many different makes out there. Some are DA/SA others are DAO while others are SA. If you choose a SA (1911 style) how do you feel about carrying a pistol with the hammer cocked and the safety on? Some folks have a hard time with this and thats fine. It took me a while to get used to it. The revolver is easier to get used to carrying. With the right holster depending on your body shape you could conceal a 4" 357. When I'm out recently I carry a 4" Colt Python in a Bianchi 8L Shadow holster wearing a 5.11 vest. No problems concealing it. As far as which one is better. That question has never been answered and come close to making enemies out of friends. Both are superb for defensive purposes.

mbt2001
July 7, 2008, 02:03 PM
automatics can carry a lot more than a revolver ever can

Not really... Depending on the kind of .45 you get, you might have more rounds, but comparing an average .357 revolver (6 shots) to an average .45 (7-8 shots) there is hardly a difference.

The .357 and .45 are some of the best man stoppers available. Both have an enviable record. For home defense I lean toward the .357 magnum.

which will perform best, the .45 or the .357?

Dude... Experts, laymen, police, etc have debated this and there isn't a clear answer. If you search for archives on this site, you will find folks debating this as well.

Revolver reliability is over-rated.

uhhhh.... Has a revolver ever had a "failure to feed" or a type 2, 3 or 4 stoppage??? No. It has never happened.

I have owned countless revolvers and only had 1 that had a timing issue and that happened in the first 100 rounds... That is why you do not consider a gun reliable (no matter what kind or who makes it) until you cycle 300 - 500 rounds through it.

Police and military have both used the revolver extensively... They are "trail rated" designs, as much as any automatic.

wheelgunslinger
July 7, 2008, 02:11 PM
Buy one of each. :neener:

As related previously, there are benefits to each.

Remember that not all revolvers and 1911 pattern handguns are the same. Compare a specific model revolver to a specific 45.

Vern Humphrey
July 7, 2008, 02:15 PM
well thats a fact. automatics can carry a lot more than a revolver ever can. However, in terms of stopping power, which will perform best, the .45 or the .357?
I don't think anyone can answer that. All we can say is they are both quite good at what they do.

Now, I carry a Chip McCormac 8-round mag in my M1911, with a spare 8-rounder on my belt. With one up the spout, that gives me a total of 18 rounds. In terms of readily available ammo, that's better than a five-shot revolver and 2 speed loaders -- and a lot quicker to use.

HB
July 7, 2008, 02:31 PM
Another thing to consider is cost of ammo. .45 is getting pretty expensive now days, but .38 isn't too bad. Practice with .38's and load .357's when your done. Also consider that 1911's aren't exactly inexpensive, yet you can get a used Ruger for about $300

HB

Technosavant
July 7, 2008, 02:45 PM
One one hand, a semiauto .45 will hold more ammo and will likely be easier to shoot. On the other, a .357 revolver won't have failures to load or eject and has an incredible amount of penetration.

Yes, revolvers aren't absolutely reliable, but they don't get picky when it comes to magazines. Reloading is far faster in a semiauto, but reloading isn't likely to be an issue in most defensive situations (and a S&W 627 with moon clips has 8 rounds on tap and can reload just as fast as a semiauto). Stopping power is largely a myth; it depends more on scoring good hits than on the round itself being a death ray. It is easier to conceal a 10 or 14 round .45 semiauto than an 8 round .357.

You are looking at two VERY different guns. Pick whatever feels better to you and what shoots better. Either way you will be quite well served when it comes to defense.

DragonFire
July 7, 2008, 02:47 PM
8-round mag in my M1911, with a spare 8-rounder on my belt. With one up the spout, that gives me a total of 18 rounds.

8+1+8= ???

Just a typo, no big deal, but your post shows one of the problem with these kinds of "discussions'. There are so many points to consider, and most are base on your personal beliefs and preference.

Most statistics I've seen/heard have non-LEO gunfights being over in just a few rounds. Reloads, especially fast reloads, don't play much into who wins. BUT there's no such thing as having too much ammo at a gunfight, so carry amounts and reloads should play into our decisions on a CCW piece.

And for the record, my S&W 627 has 8 rounds per moonclip, and I bet I can reload it about as fast as you can an auto. (or at least as fast as I can an auto). So with a single reload you have exactly 1 round more than I do, and I can carry at least 2 moonclips in the space of a single mag.

As others have already said, modern handguns are very reliable, and once you break them in and settle on a load for them, they are even more reliable. So neither an auto nor revolver is inheritantly more reliable than the other. 45's and .357's both have good track records, so no one can definitely say one is better than the other in every way. Plus it's not really of a decision of 45 vs .357, it's 45 in a specific auto vs .357 in a specific revolver (otherwise the Desert eagle in .357 or a 625 in 45ACP would have been discussed).

So what you carry is a very personal decision, that no one can really make for you. Which do you prefer? Can you shoot it quickly and accurately? Is the gun you choose reliable? Can you carry/conceal it comfortably? If you can say yes for the gun you prefer than you're set. Yeah, alot of people will say you made the wrong choice, but about as many will say you made the right one.

No one can say for certain that the wrong choice will definitely cause you to lose a gunfight, anymore than they can say the right choice will definitely cause you to win one.

wnycollector
July 7, 2008, 04:33 PM
Most of the year I carry either a Ruger security six snubbie in .357 or a SIG P220 .45 (in the summer S&W J frame). I am comfortable with both. It comes down to your personal preference.

kenpofan
July 7, 2008, 04:55 PM
I don't have answer as to what is best..
Both have strong and weak points.

But please if you feel the need to enter a gun fight..that exceeds the FBI standard 3 shots ,in 3 seconds at 3 Yds. take a rifle.

bestseller92
July 7, 2008, 05:02 PM
For my "one" self defense gun (if I only had one), I'd go with a Glock 22 .40 over any .45 auto or .357. Sixteen rounds of hollowpoint fun.

bflobill_69
July 7, 2008, 06:09 PM
A quality revolver (ie. ruger, s&w, colt) is the most reliable gun, period...

...even if a round misfires, you just continue to pull the trigger.

I am suprised thats even debated.

It was my understanding from my reading over the years that .357magnum has the best "one shot" stopping power. Theres an awful lot of energy in .357 loads!

Anyone have any hard statistics comparing .357 to .45?

Fire both, and see what you like. In the end, the best gun is the one you shoot most accurately with.

Bflobill_69

Walkalong
July 7, 2008, 06:15 PM
1911 .45. Hands down.

I do like my 2 1/2" 686, and take it in the car with me sometimes, but if I am going to carry it, it will be the 1911 .45 every time. I am better with it, it is flatter and conceals easier(to me), follow up shots are easier, unless you are using downloaded .357's, and I just have more faith in it for defending my life.

That is my personal preference. FWIW :)

A quality revolver (ie. ruger, s&w, colt) is the most reliable gun, period...

...even if a round misfires, you just continue to pull the trigger.

I am suprised thats even debated.It's debated because revolvers can tie up, just as autos can jam. Like Vern said, I can clear a jam pronto, not so if your revolver ties up.

SlamFire1
July 7, 2008, 06:17 PM
When I used to shoot IPSC, I saw a lot more semi autos jam than revolvers. In fact, I cannot think of one revolver malfunction.

And now, at the range, I still see more semi auto's malfunction than revolvers.

Revolvers are very reliable. Semi autos have to be looked after.

I would depend on a 357 revolver. Like this one

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Pistols/reducedM66-2leftsideDSCN5035.jpg

Walkalong
July 7, 2008, 06:21 PM
I guess I am spoiled. My 1911's just don't jam, range trip, after range trip, after.......

Yea, I would rate revolvers, in general, in the hands of the masses, as more reliable. :)

Billy Shears
July 7, 2008, 06:21 PM
I would feel very well armed with either one, but I'd lean toward the .45. Although with the right holster you can certainly conceal the .357, you will almost certainly find the .45 easier to conceal due to its flatter cross section. You will also almost certainly find the .45 easier to shoot. It has less felt recoil and considerably less muzzle blast and flash. Add to these virtues the advantages of greater ammo capacity and faster reloading, and to me the .45 looks decidedly more user friendly.

Having said that, a good revolver shooter will beat a fair semi-auto shooter almost every time, so whatever you get and are more comfortable with, practice until you have achieved a high degree of competence, and you will be well armed no matter which you choose.

valnar
July 7, 2008, 06:22 PM
I don't understand the original question. You mean you can only pick one? :scrutiny: What hell do you live in?

Both of course!

Onofre3
July 7, 2008, 09:14 PM
From deciding which to buy I am now more convinced than ever to just get both ha ha ha....but will buy the .357 first. I will then get a 1911 after.

Thanks everyone for your inputs.

the lone gunman
July 7, 2008, 09:19 PM
Revolver reliability is over-rated. If you cruise these threads very long, you will see one account after another of a revolver tying up. And unlike malfunctions in automatics, revolver stoppages are not easily cleared.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vern , sorry but I don agree with that. A revolver tying up. ? Im sure you know much more about handguns than I do, but could you post some proof of this. I have shot revolers for 30 + years and have never had one Jam. Maybe a couple that didnt fire, but just go to the next round. I think any problem with a revolver may be improper reloads. I respect your opinion, just want more facts. Thanks ..Dale

offshorebear
July 7, 2008, 09:59 PM
The reliabilty of a revolver vs a semi seems to come up a lot on this board. I wouldn't trust a gun for defense that isn't 100 percent reliable. Maybe my 1911 will act up if I shoot a thousand rounds through it and don't clean it, but for self defense its always good to go as far as I'm concerned. If it had relability problems I would have it fixed until I was satisfied it was 100 percent. After all these arn't very complicated machines we are talking about. I don't think reliability is a good argument in the semi vs revolver debate.

Sistema1927
July 7, 2008, 10:13 PM
After you resolve this dilemma, do yourself a favor and augment whichever one that you choose with a S&W .45 ACP revolver. 1917, 625, 22-4, whichever one floats your boat. Then you can have the best of both worlds, and with a double moonclip holder on your belt you will have 18 rounds at your disposal.

There are very few problems that can't be solved with 18 rounds of .45 ACP.

ArchAngelCD
July 8, 2008, 03:39 AM
I was going to argue the point about ammo capacity but "DragonFire" already did that well. Like already said, a 1911 will hold 7 or 8 rounds whereas a revolver used to be a six-shooter but there are many on the market which hold 7 rounds and now even 8 rounds. The S&W M627 Pro holds 8 rounds of .357 Magnum and can be reloaded with the use of moonclips just as fast as the 1911. (also said above and I agree totally)

As for which is best.... the .357 Mag/.45 Auto argument has been going on for Decades and there's still no real answer since both are great rounds that do the job in the real world if you do your job.

Nematocyst
July 8, 2008, 03:58 AM
I just did a search on this thread for the word "placement".

Said search turned up zero results.

Therefore, please let me be the first to offer this advice.

Shot placement, shot placement, shot placement.

I'm happier with my revolvers in .38 spl & .357 mag
than I ever was with my semi-autos.

Never once had a jam with either.
But I much prefer the simplicity of revolvers.

Never once felt under armed with revolvers.

If I could carry only one handgun?

A snub in .38 spl +p with full grips.
With that, I can put 3 in the right place
every time. (See "shot placement").

It's good enough.

Defensory
July 8, 2008, 04:24 AM
Posted by Onofre3:
Guys I need your advice! I'm torn between buying a .357 revolver or a .45 semi-auto. Which should I buy? Which performs better? I need this for home defense and will also most likely carry it around with me.

A high capacity .45 semi-auto is the best choice for home defense and concealed carry, hands down.

I recommend the Springfield XD Compact, which comes with two magazines. A 13 rounder for home defense, open carry and the range---and a 10 rounder for concealed carry.

If you fire a .357 Magnum with defensive loads in a low/no light situation in a confined space such as a bedroom, hallway, etc.---you can count on being temporarily blinded, deafened and disoriented for a substantial amount of time. Permanent significant hearing loss is very likely.

The .357 is a respectable outdoor gun for open carry and as a hunting backup, but should be avoided for indoor defense.

Nematocyst
July 8, 2008, 04:40 AM
The .357 is a respectable outdoor gun for open carry and as a hunting backup,
but should be avoided for indoor defense.I agree.

In camp, I'll take my 65
stoked with .357 mag.

At home, work & other indoor locations,
I'll take a snub eating .38 spl +p.

skoro
July 8, 2008, 08:23 AM
I have both. And I love shooting both my S&W Model 13 and my Colt Commander. But the one I keep loaded in the bedroom is the .357. Nothing against the 45 ACP as a defense round. It's been proven on battlefields and in shootouts acrosss the globe. It's just that a revolver isn't going to jam at a critical moment. ;)

Stainz
July 8, 2008, 08:25 AM
Here you go - current stock - works great. While the .45 ACPs load fast, the eight spindly legs for the 627 are a bit slower. Still, what better way to launch a .45 ACP than from a round gun? And - wanna new 1917?? They have a new 'classic' remake.

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u307/Stainz_2007/IMG_0582.jpg

Vern was worried about capacity... here is a .223 ammo box with 105 moonclips loaded with 230gr ball ammo - that's 630 rounds. How many of those 8 rd C.M. mags you got there, Vern?? Bring on the Zombies! I am ready for a serious day at the range...

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u307/Stainz_2007/IMG_0585.jpg

Seriously, this is a wheelgun forum... you want rude-case-tosser advise?? Gads! Go to the purity of the revolver - be cleansed....

Stainz

Vern Humphrey
July 8, 2008, 08:30 AM
It's just that a revolver isn't going to jam at a critical moment.
No criticism intended, but if you go through these threads, you'll see plenty of examples of revolvers "jamming" or suddenly failing. And revolver stoppages usually cannot be cleared by a simple drill.

Stainz
July 8, 2008, 08:40 AM
No, a drill seldom helps clear a jam with a revolver - now, a hammer, there is some real help!

Seriously - a backed out ejector rod on a S&W, which should have been Loctited, is the only tie-up I've had. Okay, a primer-only load - but that would have caused the same amount of grief with an evil bottom feeder.

Oh, and I wouldn't use a hammer on any revolver... not even a Taurus!

Stainz

skoro
July 8, 2008, 08:45 AM
I'm aware that there have been cases of jammed revolvers. I've never experienced or witnessed one, though. I have several autos that are fine pieces of machinery and work almost flawlessly. But you and your auto can do everything right and chamber a squib round or a dud that could lead to embarrassment at an inopportune moment.

It's all a case of probabilities. And I'm betting that the S&W revolver will probably be less likely to jam or misfire than either of my M&Ps or my Colt. Of course, YMMV.

Onofre3
July 8, 2008, 10:12 AM
If you fire a .357 Magnum with defensive loads in a low/no light situation in a confined space such as a bedroom, hallway, etc.---you can count on being temporarily blinded, deafened and disoriented for a substantial amount of time. Permanent significant hearing loss is very likely.

The .357 is a respectable outdoor gun for open carry and as a hunting backup, but should be avoided for indoor defense.

Now this is something Ive been hearing about the 357. However I was thinking that I keep the gun loaded with .38s at home but load them with .357s when I'm out? Dang! am I complicating things for myself?

Onofre3
July 8, 2008, 10:14 AM
Well Im not really out to start a revolver vs semi auto debate as both do have their pros and cons.

My concern is which would be better in terms of stopping power and penetration, the .45 or the .357?

Schofield3
July 8, 2008, 10:33 AM
All you need is practice; you can go mad trying to find “the” best round. Shot placement and accuracy is what matters, shoot with a caliber you can hit with period.

Vern Humphrey
July 8, 2008, 10:47 AM
My concern is which would be better in terms of stopping power and penetration, the .45 or the .357?
A 12-gauge shotgun with #4 buck.

22-rimfire
July 8, 2008, 11:05 AM
I think you would be well served with either. I would lean toward a Glock for reilability in a pistol and probably one of the pocket sized 38 revolvers versus a 357 for general defensive use.

mnw42
July 8, 2008, 11:11 AM
You could always split the differences and buy a .38 Super or 9x23

Walkalong
July 8, 2008, 11:18 AM
buy a .38 SuperYep, sweet round. I have two 1911's in .38 Super and would feel well armed with either. They have never jammed yet either. Occasionally the one set up for hot loads will catch the last brass on midrange loads.

I would much rather have one of my 1911s in .38 Super than any of my .357's for self defense.

Hey Stainz. Here is another .45 ACP six shooter option. 1955 Target (http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=79946&d=1213535877) I put some older S&W stocks on it. It could be my "sniper pistol" :D

Old School
July 8, 2008, 01:51 PM
I prefer the 45 acp to the 357 mag when it comes to recoil. I like the slow hard push of the 45. That fast hard crack of the 357 isn't as enjoyable to shoot for me. However, I have supreme confidence in the power of the .357.

bestseller92
July 8, 2008, 04:30 PM
When it comes down to it, any quality .45 auto or .357 revolver will serve you well for defense.

Emphasis on "quality".

Robert Hairless
July 8, 2008, 05:20 PM
But please if you feel the need to enter a gun fight..that exceeds the FBI standard 3 shots ,in 3 seconds at 3 Yds. take a rifle.

Quite so. I make it a firm rule to never be attacked with deadly force under any other circumstances.

If an attacker is going to be so boorish as to require more than three rounds at a distance other than three yards at a time other than three seconds, I want nothing to do with him and will not deal with him.

There is far too much riffraff masquerading as good, law abiding criminals nowadays. I follow the rules and I expect no less from those who try to kill me.

HB
July 8, 2008, 05:36 PM
A high capacity .45 semi-auto is the best choice for home defense and concealed carry, hands down.

We all obviously agree on that one:rolleyes:

HB

JackCrow
July 8, 2008, 06:06 PM
Robert, I just about fell out of my chair laughing at your post, good one!

Onofre3 - What it comes down to (IMHO) is, can you be honest with yourself? The reality is that .38/.357 and .45 will all give good service and reliability isn't a problem in quality handguns that are adequately maintained.

What you are going to have to do is to go out to the range and try out the guns you are interested in. Then you will have to be honest with yourself about how comfortable with the ergonomics and manual of arms for each individual firearm you try. Make your selection based on that.

Then take the one you decide upon and commit yourself to becoming as proficent in its use as you can possibly be. Everything else will fall into place along the way.

Cheers!

Defensory
July 9, 2008, 03:21 AM
Posted by Onofre3:
Now this is something Ive been hearing about the 357. However I was thinking that I keep the gun loaded with .38s at home but load them with .357s when I'm out? Dang! am I complicating things for myself?

You're not complicating things, but you are making a substantial compromise.

Whereas the .357 and .45 ACP both have proven superior stopping power, the .38 Special does not.

Defensive handgun experts like Massad Ayoob will tell you that the .38 Special is the MINIMUM you should consider when looking for a revolver cartridge for self-defense.

I don't know about you, but if my life is on the line I don't want the "minimum".

Well Im not really out to start a revolver vs semi auto debate as both do have their pros and cons.

Neither am I.

You stated you were primarily interested in a home defense handgun. I explained why the .357 isn't suitable for use in confined spaces and low/no light situations.

I also explained why the .38 Special isn't a good substitute. Reliable one shot stopping power just isn't there, and in a critical situation you might get off only one shot, so you want a proven man stopper.

I would also pass on a 10mm semi-auto for home defense, for the same reasons I'd pass on the .357.

There are no compromises with a .45 ACP semi-auto. The proven stopping power is there, without the deafening muzzle blast and blinding muzzle flash of the .357. The .45's recoil is also noticeably lighter, for better control and faster follow-up shots.

My concern is which would be better in terms of stopping power and penetration, the .45 or the .357?

Since you stated that your prospective handgun would be for home defense, you really need to take more than one or two things into consideration.

Both have proven, well-documented stopping power. The .357's stopping power proved itself in police work for many years, and .45 ACP stopping power has been proven in both military and law enforcement use.

However, the .45 is the better choice for home defense, for the reasons I've previously mentioned.

Nematocyst
July 9, 2008, 04:25 AM
I also explained why the .38 Special isn't a good substitute. Reliable one shot stopping power just isn't there,
and in a critical situation you might get off only one shot, so you want a proven man stopper.Yeah, maybe.

Still, given +p in a snub
that I look forward to carrying,
I'm happy with my .38 spl.

If something bigger floats your boat, go for it.
I got no issues with that.

But if you're a smaller person looking for a handgun
that you'll never balk at carrying (because it's heavy
and it gets tiresome carrying it around day in and day out),
then don't overlook the .38 spl +p.

And of course, we must raise that familiar reprise:
shot placement, shot placement, shot placement
is more important than velocity, force, etc.

I'm confident that with a double/triple tap,
I can put two/three into torso/head in a sec or so.

Good enough for me.

YMMV.

jashobeam
July 9, 2008, 05:08 AM
I have twice seen revolvers get tied up due to the bullets "crimp-jumping" and pressing against the frame, thus preventing the cylinder from rotating. I've also seen a shooter unable to pull back the hammer because the cartridges had backed out slightly in the cylinder (or were not fully inserted to begin with) and were pressing against the frame. At least that is what I believe had happened because after I picked up the gun, released and reclosed the cylinder, the action worked fine. The cylinder holes may have been fouled to the degree that the cartridges were sticking slightly. I've also experienced an improperly timed or poorly aligned S&W Airweight that sent tiny, hot fragments of something back into my face. It wasn't jammed or tied up, just scary.

Stainz
July 9, 2008, 06:34 AM
Okay, history lesson time. The .357 Magnum was in response to J. Edgar, etc, and their need for a round that could hole the car doors of the day in return fire at fleeing felons. Hoover's men had little chance against the bg's, often armed with a national guard's ripped off military firepower. Doug Wesson took the new S&W .357 Registered Magnum and it's ammo hunting - and dispatched every form of North American game with it - it was an impressive round.

Skip ahead to the sixties - the FBI is using a relatively new round - a .38 Special +P 158gr LHPSWC - designed to be effective from a short barrel .357 Magnum - or a beefed up .38 Special. The winds of chain pointed towards the higher capacity or a 9mm bottom feeder - the reason they abandoned the 'FBI' load. Most LEOs of the time carried .38s - with 158gr LRNs - which would gain the 'widowmaker' title as they were ineffective against the drugged-up bgs of the day, leaving many LEOs fallen due to the bg's use of semi-auto's. This is, I believe, what you will find Mas Ayoob's, a fine and most knowledgeable fellow, remarks concerning.

Even today, if you trust the compiled data of Marshall & Sanow, the 'FBI' load is considerably more effective than the infamous .45 ACP 230gr ball ammo from a 1911. Of course, modern hollow points in .45 ACP quickly pass the .38s - but also just don't feed as reliably in some case tossers. Shot placement is important - but the +P 158gr LHPSWC round, even fired from a snubby, will have enough velocity to open properly for enough enlargement to cause a significant wound channel - larger than a .45 ball ammo round. It is a fine snubby to 4" HD round - without the flash, crack, and recoil of a .357 Magnum. While a 1911 is a great weapon, I want the dependability of a revolver for my home use - this fits.

There are other 'snubby' .38 rounds with promise - the Speer +P 135gr Gold Dots, for example. Even full wadcutters could be used for the very squeamish or small of stature, those who would never pick up a 1911, etc. My pockets, if large enough, carry my HD guns - a 296 or a 642. I feel fine, protection wise, with that 642 stoked with the 'FBI' load... okay, a bit better with my 5-shot Airweight .44 Special and Speer 200gr Gold Dots. But, I can carry the 642 with those 'FBI' loads 100% of the time - which beats the heck out of the 75% carry of the .44 Special (due to size). It's hard to pick 'good' days and 'bg' days!

Stainz

PS About 'minimum' considerations... remember that we got to the Moon that way...

Nematocyst
July 9, 2008, 06:42 AM
Even today, if you trust the compiled data of Marshall & Sanow,
the 'FBI' load is considerably more effective than
the infamous .45 ACP 230gr ball ammo from a 1911.

...

There are other 'snubby' .38 rounds with promise
- the Speer +P 135gr Gold Dots, for example.

Mikey likes it.

http://www.mediaknows.com/pics/classic/clip_10.jpg

Defensory
July 9, 2008, 02:03 PM
Posted by Stainz:
Even today, if you trust the compiled data of Marshall & Sanow, the 'FBI' load is considerably more effective than the infamous .45 ACP 230gr ball ammo from a 1911. Of course, modern hollow points in .45 ACP quickly pass the .38s - but also just don't feed as reliably in some case tossers. Shot placement is important - but the +P 158gr LHPSWC round, even fired from a snubby, will have enough velocity to open properly for enough enlargement to cause a significant wound channel - larger than a .45 ball ammo round. It is a fine snubby to 4" HD round - without the flash, crack, and recoil of a .357 Magnum. While a 1911 is a great weapon, I want the dependability of a revolver for my home use - this fits.

Marshall & Sanow are thoroughly discredited here:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-statistical-analysis.htm

And here:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-discrepancies.htm

The .45 ACP round has proven itself in World Wars and other conflicts around the globe, as well as in law enforcement work and civilian self-defense.

A small sampling of elite military and law enforcement units that currently use the .45 ACP 1911, because of its superb shootability, stopping power and RELIABILITY:

U.S. Army Delta Force
U.S. Marine Corps Force Recon
LAPD Special Weapons and Tactics
LAPD Special Investigation Section

Reddbecca
July 9, 2008, 02:16 PM
Which performs better?

Oh you just had to go and open up that can of worms...

mbt2001
July 9, 2008, 02:27 PM
The .45 ACP round has proven itself in World Wars and other conflicts around the globe, as well as in law enforcement work and civilian self-defense.

Other than the obvious, what is your point? There is nothing wrong with what Stainz said.

Further to that, what the military uses and what cops use are not symmetrical. For instance, you can't silence a revolver. So, naturally the military would want something that had mobility as far as special parts go.

In any event, the .357 has been proved over and over again in the hands of Police, home owners and hunters. It is much easier to teach people to shoot a revolver, load and unload a revolver than it is an auto. Further to that, the .357 does better shooting through "cover" than does the .45, which is something the average home owner should consider as there is a great big couch in just about every persons living room....

full metal
July 9, 2008, 02:30 PM
I love and own both. My two favorite calibers.

Stainz
July 9, 2008, 03:23 PM
I still prefer the .38 Special +P 158gr LHPSWC as a HD round, whether in a 2" or less snubby .38 to a 4" or so .357 Magnum. I will not stoke my .357 Magnums with real Magnums for indoor use - it simply isn't warranted. Handguns that chamber the .38 +P load are simply smaller, far more abundant, and affordable.

I was not offering M. & S. as gospel. If I were to defend my home in a war-like manner - ie, from the hordes - as in my 'Zombie' spoof - I'd resort to what I showed and described in my earlier post (#32). I have long been a .45 ACP fan, albeit in a revolver. I feel that is the best of both worlds - the effectiveness of decent .45 ACP rounds combined with the inherent simplicity/reliability of the revolver is a hard act to follow. In fact, given the actual choice of either real .357 Magnums or .45 ACPs, I'd opt for the latter... under the requirement that they be launched from a revolver. Seriously, how could you expect a different outcome in a revolver forum?

Stainz

Defensory
July 9, 2008, 03:29 PM
Posted by Stainz:
Okay, history lesson time. The .357 Magnum was in response to J. Edgar, etc, and their need for a round that could hole the car doors of the day in return fire at fleeing felons. Hoover's men had little chance against the bg's, often armed with a national guard's ripped off military firepower. Doug Wesson took the new S&W .357 Registered Magnum and it's ammo hunting - and dispatched every form of North American game with it - it was an impressive round.

Actually, the FBI had virtually nothing to do with the development of the .357 cartridge.

Colt's .38 Super round was costing Smith & Wesson a number of law enforcement contracts around the country, so S&W realized they had to come up with a revolver round with greater power and penetration in order to compete with the Super.

Elmer Keith, who had no affiliation whatsoever with the FBI, played a central role in the development of the cartridge.

Defensory
July 9, 2008, 03:48 PM
Stainz:

The intention of my posts in this thread is NOT to dredge up the old "Semi-auto versus revolver" argument.

I've already stated that I would also reject (for home defense) the 10mm semi-auto for the same reasons I reject the .357 Magnum revolver:

1. Harsh recoil and excessive barrel rise resulting in slower follow-up shots.
2. Deafening muzzle blast in confined areas (even harmful to hearing in open areas for that matter) such as bedrooms and hallways.
3. Blinding muzzle flash in a low/no light situation.
4. Excessive penetration, which presents a greater threat to wives, kids etc. (and even to neighbors in a typical thin-walled apartment/condo building).

mbt2001
July 9, 2008, 04:12 PM
2. Deafening muzzle blast in confined areas (even harmful to hearing in open areas for that matter) such as bedrooms and hallways.

It is only 5 or 6 decibles different than a .45. Depending on the house and what not.

3. Blinding muzzle flash in a low/no light situation.

I actually consider that a plus... Even if you miss, the perp is scared out of his wits do to the roar, the flame and the resultant psych damage. :)

Regarding over pentration, bullets are not "meat seekers". They MIGHT hurt someone, but the perp in your house will certainly hurt someone if not dealt with effectively.

easyrider6042004@yahoo.ca
July 9, 2008, 04:18 PM
Alright boys, specifically Stainz and Defensory,

You're having a nice exchange now. Please keep it at that level so this very interesting thread is not deleted by the moderators, ok?

Stainz
July 9, 2008, 04:30 PM
Well, let's be accurate. The 1930 introduction by S&W of a beefed up .38, termed the .38/44 as it was built on the .44 HE frame, was to up the velocity and KE at the bequest of LEOs, including the FBI. That revolver was available first as a fixed sight as the 'Heavy Duty', and later with adjustable sights as the 'Outdoorsman'. The obvious problems of taking the hotter .38/44 cartridge, which was the same size as a .38 S&W Special, and firing it in a lighter .38 was paramount to the development of the .357 Magnum. The cartridge was co-authored by several folks 'in the industry', with arms/ammo writer Philip Sharpe, who developed many of the .38/44 loads, petitioned S&W and Winchester for the 'different' case (.125" longer) and stronger gun. Thus was born the 'Registered Magnum', the first .357M - capable of launching a 158gr round at 1,515 fps. While many notables, Ed McGivern, Col. Doug Wesson, and Gen. Geo. S. Patton, for example, got early 'Registered Magnums', the actual first one, Registered Magnum #1, went to J. Edgar Hoover. This was compiled from various writings/TV interviews of Roy Jinks, S&W's historian extraordinaire. Elmer Keith is best known for his work with the .45 Colt - then the .44 Special and .44 Remington Magnum.

Re the semi/revolver argument... you are in revolver territory...

Oh, and S&W has a perfect way to launch 10mm and .40 S&W rounds... the 610!

Stainz

Billy Shears
July 9, 2008, 06:19 PM
It is only 5 or 6 decibles different than a .45. Depending on the house and what not.
You do realize that decibels are calculated on a logarithmic, not a straight scale, right? A mere 1 decibel increase is noticeable to the human ear. Increases in intensity are based on powers of ten (hence the deci- in decibel). A "mere" 5 or 6 decibel difference actually amounts to a very noticeable increase in the intensity of the sound.

I actually consider that a plus... Even if you miss, the perp is scared out of his wits do to the roar, the flame and the resultant psych damage.
You feel like betting your life on that? In real gunfights, people have been known to soak up multiple bullets without breaking off their attack, never mind scary noises. I'm going to depend on scoring solid hits to stop the gunfight, not the unknowable factor of the assailant's level of aggression/timidity.

And it's most definitely a big disadvantage to deprive yourself of both your night vision and hearing, even if the assailant does flee. I can't imagine how disorienting yourself more than absolutely necessary translates to any kind of advantage.

Regarding over pentration, bullets are not "meat seekers". They MIGHT hurt someone, but the perp in your house will certainly hurt someone if not dealt with effectively.
And if you can do that with a round that has roughly the same amount of stopping power, yet manages to do it with less flash, less blast, lower felt recoil, and less tendency to overpenetrate, why wouldn't you? Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Orange_Magnum
July 9, 2008, 06:41 PM
You can conceal a 4" GP100 if you use a high-riding holster. A lose speedloader can be had in your front pocket.

A .45 auto, 5", which I don't own, should be single stack for less printing and a more comfortable grip.

Either one will knock a massive guy down.

These are big handguns though and will print. My favourite conceal carry piece is a 3.6" 9mm single stack semi-auto. It will not knock a massive guy down, but if he is close enough I can always shoot him in the head.

BlindJustice
July 9, 2008, 07:10 PM
40 years ago it is a recycled debate of
.357 Mag vs .45 ACP, Revovlers vs Semi-Autos
what about HI-Cap 9s or the new comer .40 S&W.

Two of my revolvers had to go to a gunsmith after a
range session. The 625 .45 ACP had the cylinder lock up.
The 686P had a mainspring screw that backed off and started
doing dud hits on primers.

My specific points of ref.S&W

S&W 1911 5" Bbl. Stainless Steel. It's my carry piece
because I shoot it as well as my 625 but it is a lot
more concealable than the big N-frame S&W. I carry 1
spare mag. in an IWB mag holder. which is a lot more concealable
than any loaded full moon clip.

S&W 625 5" Bbl. - not small at 45 oz. but a joy to
shoot El Kah Bong away a range session. THe only way
to carry one would be Muzzle down, shoulder rig.and
get some betlholders for full moon clips.

My latest is a CZ 75B 9mm x 19 and I like the
sub sonic 147 gr. JHP loads that are available for
HD/SD - slide is narrower and shorter than the 1911
and the frame in the grip area is almost the same width.
So I'm looking for leather for this one ahead of the 625
and 60.

I don't care for the .357 Magnum platform that I own,
a S&W 686P 7 shooter w/4" Bbl. It just has too much of a
violent recoil, with a big muzzle flash of the slower burning
magnum powder - not good for HD indoors imho.
& about the 7 shot cylinder, - sometimes two empties
hang up on the cyl. release. I think it is better as a
6 shooter. Did I mention the HKS Speedloader #587 has
clearance problems with the same cyl. release.
I shoot this one the least well but I'll keep trying.

I also have a S&W Model 60 3" Bbl. .357 Magnum and have
settled on the .38 Special +P Speer 125 gr. Gold DOt JHP for the
HD/SD load. I like it better and hit better with it than the 686P.

I'm thinking about trading the 686P for a good used N-frame with
a 6" Bbl. to utilized the cartridge to better potential and the heavier
frame will soak up recoil.

R-

StrawHat
July 9, 2008, 08:02 PM
I would recommend what I carry on a daily basis, a S&W 45 ACP with the skinny barrel.

I believe the current terminology is Mountain Revolver.

Mine was created long before they thought of the name.

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc194/StrawHat/SW45ACP002Small.jpg

Defensory
July 9, 2008, 08:02 PM
Elmer Keith played a SIGNIFICANT role in the development of the .357 Magnum, as documented by Blue Press/Dillon Precision:

"Accordingly, Col. Douglas B. Wesson, grand-
son of one of the founders of Smith and Wesson,
got together with noted firearms experts Phil
Sharpe and Elmer Keith to develop a cartridge that
would far surpass the .38 Special in power. It was
to have a bullet diameter of .357” (the actual bul-
let diameter of the .38 Special), but configured so
that it could not inadvertently be loaded into .38
Special handguns with potentially disastrous
results. What they developed was a case about
1/8” longer than the .38 Special, loaded with a
158-grain bullet to an original velocity of 1515
f.p.s. from an 8-3/4” barrel. Col. Wesson, being a
wine fancier, knew the term “magnum” meant a
wine bottle of increased capacity, and he applied
the name to the new cartridge. In 1934, Winches-
ter produced a cartridge to Col. Wesson’s specifi-
cations, and the .357 Magnum round was born."

Mar 08 Blue Press 20-37 1/15/08 10:55 AM Page 36

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:liU4Z2TfKosJ:www.dillonprecision.com/docs/Mar_08_Classic_handguns1.pdf+Elmer+Keith+developed+.357+Magnum&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=11&gl=us&client=firefox-a

pbearperry
July 9, 2008, 08:10 PM
I have been shooting both revolvers and semis for over 42 years.I truly feel that if you are a new shooter,you would be best served with a quality .357 mag revolver.They are easier to use,plus they can shoot 38 .spl ammo.I have never seen a revolver jam up by bullets being caught in the forcing cone due to recoil with factory ammo.In my experience,a stock revolver will pretty much shoot circles around a stock semi.Pick up afew speedloaders and practice reloading at the range or home using dummy ammo.

Stainz
July 10, 2008, 06:45 AM
Interesting... John Marshall writing in a monthly catalog article mentions Elmer Keith... Roy Jinks, noted S&W historian, in his well received 'standard', "The History of Smith and Wesson", doesn't. Also, I believe they may have collaborated on the .38/44 round - it was a popular periodical topic of the day - and it took no case changes. The Winchester supplied new .357 Magnum cases were in response to the Smith and Wesson requirements for their new Registered Magnum. While it's easy to cut down cases as a reloader, manufacturing ~.125" longer cases is more in the domain of a case-maker.

Interestingly, that gun was not expected to sell well. In fact, initially, S&W only had cardboard boxes large enough to hold the 8.4" version. While the RM started life at $60, it's value today is in the thousands - even that box is valuable. I wonder if the blue plastic box of today's S&W will one day have value?

Blindjustice, I, for one, would really like to know what bound your 625's cylinder up - any feedback on that yet? I am sorry about your 686P & the HKS 587 troubles - I don't seem to have them, myself. Mine seems to clear both my wimpy .357M and .38 Special cases pretty well, too. Maybe I am just not that fast - I know dropping the short-cased .45 ARs from the #25 requires more attention - and I did that a bit before ever getting the 686P.

Interesting how you become accustomed to certain things - I love my moonclipped .45 ACPs and 625JM - they belong together. I find aligning the spindly legs of eight 'clipped .357Ms with the eased charge holes of my 627s more of a chore.

This brings up a great, albeit a tad costly - $719 locally - choice for a house gun - this year's S&W 627 Pro (SKU #178014 - MSRP $964). They also have a bit more plain 627 (SKU #163357 MSRP $916). I have the former - what a keeper. Eight rounds of the 'FBI' +P .38 Special load should be good protection. Mine remains a safe-setter - it has lower effort springs. My CC/HD firearms remain 'stock'.

Stainz

mbt2001
July 10, 2008, 11:50 AM
You do realize that decibels are calculated on a logarithmic, not a straight scale, right? A mere 1 decibel increase is noticeable to the human ear. Increases in intensity are based on powers of ten (hence the deci- in decibel). A "mere" 5 or 6 decibel difference actually amounts to a very noticeable increase in the intensity of the sound.

http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/loudness.html

Yes, I did know that. Read the referenced chart and you will see that what I was saying is that whether firing a .357 or a .45 indoors, you are screwed. The 5 or 6 decibel difference won't save, help or stop anything.

You feel like betting your life on that? In real gunfights, people have been known to soak up multiple bullets without breaking off their attack, never mind scary noises. I'm going to depend on scoring solid hits to stop the gunfight, not the unknowable factor of the assailant's level of aggression/timidity.

And it's most definitely a big disadvantage to deprive yourself of both your night vision and hearing, even if the assailant does flee. I can't imagine how disorienting yourself more than absolutely necessary translates to any kind of advantage.

uhhh are you serious? Home Invasions are an inherently "scary" process. Hence the number of folks who end up shooting through doors and doing other idiotic things that are difficult to explain in court later. Everything you said above is the way that we all feel, but the reality of the situation is that hits in a combat venue are hard to come by, police reports tell us this much.

You feel like betting your life on that?

I actually detest this question. At the end of the day, I am betting my life on a $0.15 per unit hunk of brass and lead. A $0.05 spring on the hammer. A $2.00 light bulb / flash light bulb and batteries. A phone line that has been around since 1960. et cetera et cetera.

Betting that gun shots might conceivably scare a home invader is pretty safe. Aiming to hit is priceless eh?

And if you can do that with a round that has roughly the same amount of stopping power, yet manages to do it with less flash, less blast, lower felt recoil, and less tendency to overpenetrate, why wouldn't you? Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Recoil is subjective... If you are using a 5" 1911 and comparing that to a .357 2" j frame, then yeah there is a BIG difference. If you compare it to a 4 or 5" N frame, it isn't that big.

If you use Winchester 230 grain ball ammo, you are right, there is virtually no muzzle flash. If you are using other hollow point ammo, there is quite a bit of muzzle flash. I use .38+p's and have tested my ammo at night, specifically bought Winchester to keep flash down and I can live with the ammo I use. Not all .357 rounds shoot 10' of flame out the barrel... Not all .45 ammo produces one spark. Corbon 45 ammo, for instance, produces a tremendous muzzle flash. Federal 230 Hydrashock ammo ALSO produces a large flash. If you are practicing with your chosen ammo in a Combat setting (i.e. at the range, in low light) then you will mitigate risks you otherwise wouldn't have known about.

Billy Shears
July 10, 2008, 02:21 PM
http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/loudness.html

Yes, I did know that. Read the referenced chart and you will see that what I was saying is that whether firing a .357 or a .45 indoors, you are screwed. The 5 or 6 decibel difference won't save, help or stop anything.
Actually it's significant enough that it can mean the difference between recovering your hearing sooner rather than later (assuming you don't negate the whole issue by experiencing auditory exclusion, which is not uncommon in gunfights). Not to mention the fact that the .357, as a high pressure round, produces a much larger night-vision-destroying muzzle flash.

uhhh are you serious? Home Invasions are an inherently "scary" process. Hence the number of folks who end up shooting through doors and doing other idiotic things that are difficult to explain in court later. Everything you said above is the way that we all feel, but the reality of the situation is that hits in a combat venue are hard to come by, police reports tell us this much.
Of course they are. But trying to hit your opponent is the object of the excercise. Scaring him off is a purely secondary effect, and not something you can count on. And if the difference between the noise of the .45 and .357 is negligible, as you assert, what makes you think the .357 would be any more likely to scare him off than the .45?


Quote:
You feel like betting your life on that?

I actually detest this question. At the end of the day, I am betting my life on a $0.15 per unit hunk of brass and lead. A $0.05 spring on the hammer. A $2.00 light bulb / flash light bulb and batteries. A phone line that has been around since 1960. et cetera et cetera.
Doesn't matter whether or not you detest it, it's a valid question. I don't think the certainty of impairing my hearing and night vision to a significantly greater degree is an advantageous trade off for the remote and unknowable possibility of being more likely to scare off the intruder.

Betting that gun shots might conceivably scare a home invader is pretty safe. Aiming to hit is priceless eh?
If you can scare him off, well and good. But if you can't, you'd certainly better be aiming to hit. You're responsible for where every one of those bullets goes.

Recoil is subjective... If you are using a 5" 1911 and comparing that to a .357 2" j frame, then yeah there is a BIG difference. If you compare it to a 4 or 5" N frame, it isn't that big.
I notice quite a bit of difference between my Less Baer 1911 and my Colt Trooper Mk III. Slightly ligher recoil of the cartridge, combined with lower bore axis and a shorter trigger pull and reset all add up to a gun that I can fire significantly faster without sacrificing accuracy.

If you use Winchester 230 grain ball ammo, you are right, there is virtually no muzzle flash. If you are using other hollow point ammo, there is quite a bit of muzzle flash.
I load the 1911 with Federal 230 grain hydra-shoks, which duplicate the flash of the standard 230 grain FMJ load quite closely, and it's considerably less than the flash of a 125gr .357 magnum JHP out of a four inch barrelled revolver (which is by far the most common bbl length for a defensive revolver).

I use .38+p's and have tested my ammo at night, specifically bought Winchester to keep flash down and I can live with the ammo I use. Not all .357 rounds shoot 10' of flame out the barrel... Not all .45 ammo produces one spark. Corbon 45 ammo, for instance, produces a tremendous muzzle flash. Federal 230 Hydrashock ammo ALSO produces a large flash. If you are practicing with your chosen ammo in a Combat setting (i.e. at the range, in low light) then you will mitigate risks you otherwise wouldn't have known about.
I'm not calling your ammo choice a bad one. In fact I keep the aforementioned Trooper loaded with similar ammo in my house. Since I live alone, and don't have to worry about anyone else finding and playing around with a gun, I keep a couple of handguns stashed in strategic locations in my house. That may sound paranoid, but I happen to be a police detective, and it's not unheard off for officers to be targeted. We had someone take shots at the house of a female detective in our department year before last. I could also be the victim of a random break in. Since there's no possibility of kids or others getting their hands on any of my guns, I pay no penalty for having a few such weapons secreted around the house. If I get married and have kids, the balance of risks changes, and so will my arrangements.

But my bedside gun is a .45. My carry gun would be too if my department allowed the 1911.

Defensory
July 10, 2008, 02:51 PM
.357 Magnums are actually a whopping 7.3 decibels louder than a .45 ACP. :eek:

Which makes the .357 Magnum even louder than a 12-gauge (18" barrel) shotgun and a 30-06 (18" barrel) rifle. :what:

http://www.freehearingtest.com/hia_gunfirenoise.shtml


A scientist at the U.S. Department of Energy website explains the substantial difference that even 3 decibels makes:

"First, remember that the decibel (dB) is a logarithmic unit, meaning that you cannot add and subtract dB like ordinary numbers. For example, an increase of 3 dB is a doubling of the "strength" of the sound, and an increase of 10 dB means that the sound is 10 times as loud; i.e., 70 dB is 10 times as loud as 60 dB."

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/eng99/eng99325.htm

Smithiac
July 10, 2008, 03:20 PM
This information came from handloads.com

Questions have been asked about stopping power and the differences.

All you can really do is look up the velocity of each round. And here it is this is the highest velocity I could find for each round.

45ACP 230gr. bullet 910 FPS

357Mag. 125gr bullet 1,966 FPS

as I said before this info can be found at www.handloads.com for anyone who wants to check my facts

enter the same caliber and bullet weight.

As far as wich ever is the best for personal protection??? The answer is wich ever one you can get a round in the center of the chest. A 22LR for all I care it has to go in the center of the chest.

Smithiac

MCgunner
July 10, 2008, 03:46 PM
.357 is more powerful, more versatile for field use. .45 Auto in an auto platform is arguably a better fighting combination, but not really a better self defense carry IMHO. Just depends on which one you like the most. I carry revolvers a lot in the field and some for self defense. I have a .45 ACP. I don't carry it much, but it's fun to shoot.

357Mag. 125gr bullet 1,966 FPS

That load HAS to be out of a rifle. Most good self defense loads run a bit over 1400 fps from a 4" barrel. You can get a bit more from a handload.

mbt2001
July 10, 2008, 04:15 PM
7.3 decibels

Anything over 120 decibles catastrophic to hearing... The point is .357 .44 .45 doesn't matter, they are all over that level.

So don't kid yourself. Loud = Loud. I am not debating that the .357 isn't louder, I am saying that if you think that the margin is going to save your hearing, you are mistaken.

Get the amplified hearing muffs for indoor shooting.

Defensory
July 10, 2008, 05:53 PM
Posted by mbt2001:
Anything over 120 decibles catastrophic to hearing... The point is .357 .44 .45 doesn't matter, they are all over that level.

You're wrong again.

I've fired a .45 ACP indoors without hearing protection---no catastrophe whatsoever.

I found it more bearable than having to shoot in the lane next to a .357 shooter at my private OUTDOOR range, WITH my protective muffs.

Being a supersonic round, the .357 also makes a distinct ear-splitting "crack" as it breaks the sound barrier.

The .45 ACP is a subsonic round that doesn't break the sound barrier, thus no ear-splitting crack.

So .357's are considerably worse for your hearing, any way you cut it.

So don't kid yourself. Loud = Loud. I am not debating that the .357 isn't louder, I am saying that if you think that the margin is going to save your hearing, you are mistaken.

I'm not kidding myself. YOU are kidding YOURSELF.

As the trained scientist at the Department of Energy clearly explained, there is a SUBSTANTIAL difference at only 3 decibels. At 7.3 decibels, the difference is ENORMOUS.

At my private outdoor range, I've stood better than 10 feet behind guys shooting .357 Magnums, and can still feel the shockwave emanating from the weapons. Stand the same distance behind a .45 ACP, and I feel nothing.

The highly experienced CCW trainer who I took my concealed carry course from, doesn't even allow students to use .357's on the qualification range.

Many indoor ranges also don't allow .357's. Some that do allow them, often restrict their use to the less busy hours and/or days of the week. On multiple occasions at indoor ranges, I've personally witnessed people pack up and leave once a guy with a .357 started shooting in a lane near theirs.

Get the amplified hearing muffs for indoor shooting.

Uh yeah, right. If someone's dead asleep when multiple armed invaders bust down their front door, I'm sure their hearing protection is the first thing they reach for. :rolleyes: :p

Huddog
July 10, 2008, 06:13 PM
So far you have 4 pages of discussion. I don't know what is right for you. I have and shoot both but if I could only have one gun it would be my ...........oh thank God I don't have to chose. But I did own a .45 before I had a .357 but the .45 came after two .38's.

Confederate
July 10, 2008, 07:11 PM
I'd go with a .357.

It'll go from mild .38 wadcutters to rounds that would down Godzilla. BTW, I wouldn't use .357 in a house. A hot .38 +P or a law enforcement semi-wadcutter will be just fine. Outdoors, or on the road, a full throttle .357 round is the way to go. If you're afraid of bear, use a 158-gr. bullet or heavier. For people, 125-gr. JHP is best.

Revolvers won't jam, they don't throw brass, and they're extremely versatile. I love the .45, but it just doesn't crank out the horsepower of a good .357.


http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/RugerFBISS_1.jpg

The old Ruger Security-Six was a great .357.

.

General Geoff
July 10, 2008, 07:18 PM
357Mag. 125gr bullet 1,966 FPS

Either that's out of a rifle, or someone has a death wish.

buck460XVR
July 10, 2008, 07:38 PM
this thread has gone from informative to ridiculously funny. I'd be interested to know how many of these self proclaimed HD experts have ever experienced shooting at a BG in a dark and enclosed room. From what I have gleaned from my LEO friends who have been in gunfights, that adrenaline and will to live make muzzle flash and loud reports irrelevant. From what they tell me, for the average Joe, after a 12 gauge pump, whatever gun they can control and shoot the best is the best SD weapon for them. So, Onofre3 pick the one that you feel the most confident with, for it is you, not all the self-proclaimed experts here, that will have to use it.

mbt2001
July 10, 2008, 10:45 PM
You're wrong again.

I've fired a .45 ACP indoors without hearing protection---no catastrophe whatsoever.

I am not wrong about 120 decibles screwing your hearing up. Go review any number of sights and / or any number of experts and they would hardly disagree with the assertions I made. I am telling you that there is no difference between and atom bomb and a hydrogen bomb when you are standing on it...

But you are correct that the .357 is louder. Although that is like comparing a q-beam to a sure fire by shining it into your eyes...

Get the amplified hearing muffs for indoor shooting.

Uh yeah, right. If someone's dead asleep when multiple armed invaders bust down their front door, I'm sure their hearing protection is the first thing they reach for.

Tell that to the dude that have Kevlar vests and helmets... :neener:

I have several .45's... But I will be honest. There is something about a .357 that makes me always favor it. The first time I held one I just had this feeling of "whatever I shoot is toast". Confidence in your weapon is worth something at the end of the day.

I also prefer the 9mm to the .45.... I have several .25 acp's as BUG guns. I carry .380's from time to time and am a HUGE FAN of the .22 short the .32 rimfire... I like the 5.45x39 over the 7.62! I HATE THE GARAND! The 32-20 is a great round and I have routinely used the .223 on deer! Major Applewhite should have started in front of Chris Simms........

Did I miss anything? :p Flame away :neener:

the lone gunman
July 10, 2008, 10:56 PM
Confederate
Senior Member



Join Date: 02-19-05
Posts: 1,154 I'd go with a .357.

It'll go from mild .38 wadcutters to rounds that would down Godzilla. BTW, I wouldn't use .357 in a house. A hot .38 +P or a law enforcement semi-wadcutter will be just fine. Outdoors, or on the road, a full throttle .357 round is the way to go. If you're afraid of bear, use a 158-gr. bullet or heavier. For people, 125-gr. JHP is best.

Revolvers won't jam, they don't throw brass, and they're extremely versatile. I love the .45, but it just doesn't crank out the horsepower of a good .357.
------------------------------------I Agree, I will take the 357 over the 45 acp anyday. when someone breaks into your home the noise is not a factor,

ajax
July 10, 2008, 11:46 PM
General Geoff even tho I dont reload that particulerly hot of a round in my 686 that load can be safely done.

Mr. Magnum
July 11, 2008, 05:17 AM
both are good calibers. If one would be better than the other, it would just surpass it by a few concerns. my 2 cents worth.

MCgunner
July 11, 2008, 12:38 PM
I agree with Confederate's post. I, too, load .38 special for home duty. Hey, .38 is PLENTY for self defense. I don't need no stinkin' cannon. I see the .357 as a great, versatile outdoor round that will kill or protect from about anything in the lower 48 while chambering .38 special for small game or whatever. It is my favorite outdoor round followed by .45 Colt if I want even more horsepower. .45ACP isn't my choice, nor are autos in general, for outdoor carry. Love my .45 for occasinal concealed carry, helluva defensive gun and fighting round, but it is not near the power level nor the versatility of the .38/.357 for outdoor uses and revolvers are more accurate in general. Hitting a rabbit at 25 yards requires more than just combat accurate handguns. A rabbit's head is smaller than center mass on a human.

They both have their place. I'd buy (and did) the .357 first and the .45 later. Actually, though, my favorite carry is an auto in 9x19. LOL!

Beatnik
July 11, 2008, 02:16 PM
Another big consideration is whether anyone else in the house will have access to this firearm.

My wife has rheumatoid arthritis. The cartilage in her wrists is under constant autoimmune attack. She is the irrefutable case of a woman who can't rack a slide. So I got a 4" GP100, and we keep 38+p in it.

I keep thinking of fighting video games, like Soul Calibur. I'm usually drawn at first to the small, fast characters. I know the big brute types are slower but have more staying power, and I play them once in a while to mix things up a little. But I also know that if I learn the proper moves, the little scrapper can end the fight just as quickly.

That's probably why I would go with .357. ;)

Defensory
July 16, 2008, 02:55 PM
Revolvers won't jam.

Keep dreaming.

Here's a three page thread from The Firing Line revolver forum, documenting numerous jams etc.:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=301206

Vern Humphrey
July 16, 2008, 03:08 PM
Revolvers "jam" about as often as automatics. Good revolvers (and good automatics) jam less, but revolvers can fail catestrophicaly, with no immediate fix.

Automatics, on the other hand, usually can be put back into action with a "tap-rack-bang" drill.

Defensory
July 16, 2008, 03:16 PM
Posted by Vern Humphrey:
Revolvers "jam" about as often as automatics. Good revolvers (and good automatics) jam less, but revolvers can fail catestrophicaly, with no immediate fix. Automatics, on the other hand, usually can be put back into action with a "tap-rack-bang" drill.

So true, Vern!

If a semi-auto jams, it's back in action with a quick tap-rack-bang.

If a revolver jams, it'll be down for a while, and you'll likely have to take it to a gunsmith. NOT a viable option in a shooting situation where your life is on the line.

Vern Humphrey
July 16, 2008, 03:29 PM
Here's a neat little demo for those who believe revolvers can't jam:

1. Unload your revolver with the muzzle pointing down.

2. As you do, give it a jiggle so one case tips outward and falls back into the chamber, under the ejector star.

3. Imagine someone is standing six feet away and shooting at you as you try to clear your revolver.

Defensory
July 16, 2008, 04:12 PM
Six fer sure!

Yeah, right. :rolleyes: :barf:

Brand new Ruger SP101 repeatedly malfunctions:

"This is a brand new Ruger SP101 357 Magnum. I took it out to the range twice and it malfunctioned like this about every 50 rounds. Pull the trigger and it hangs up. If I needed this to defend myself, I'd be dead. I returned the revolver to Cabela's for a refund. Too bad, because it did shoot nicely but what good is a wheelgun that you can't depend on?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsgd5fZJCjU

earplug
July 16, 2008, 05:06 PM
Check out the price of ammunition.
Consider the .357 can shoot less expensive 38 spl.
Its easy to dry fire and practice with a revolver. No springs to mess with when cleaning.
You can always get a S&W revolver in 45 ACP with moon clips. Or consider a S&W 610 in 40 S&W/10 MM.

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