[oldfool]

curious... carbine vs. carbine, at modest range, say 50 yards

ARs have a huge following, obviously, chosen by many as "home defense, etc" gun

so how does a typical 223 FMJ round compare to 357 mag 125 JHP, both out of carbine length barrels ?

not talking about calculations on paper, muzzle velocity, energy, power formulas... but visually observed results of hits on target, damage done

been thinking it might make for a fun range day fun to do some informal evaluation, nothing real scientific, maybe stack up some rows of filled milk jugs, several deep for each, just to see what happens.. how many of those will each round will go on through, see how much visible damage done

somebody here probably been there, done that


PS
many here have shot whitetail deer with calibers both large and small, and proper bullet placement kills, we all know that already, no such argument implied

[greyling22]

I've shot .5 inch steel at 50yds with both. 357 leaves no scratch or dent. 223 FMJ goes straight through. that right there rules it out for home defense for me.

[kanook]

The BIGGEST flaw, FMJ vs JHP

[Tirod]

Look up the results of drywall testing on the box of truth website. .357 will punch through multiple layers, 5.56 will fragment and disintegrate because the bullet is less solidly constructed.

Please don't make assumptions that one kind of material and bullet has the same response in all others. Home defense isn't a sensible discussion anyway, no one really does it, and most homeowners who have used handguns - which are notorious overpenetrators in sheet rock. It also begs the question, why do so many brag about there precision shooting ability, but worry about missing a perp standing six feet away in their bedroom? A center of mass shot will be about 4 feet up, well over the resting height of someone in bed.

The whole home defense thing is mostly internet fantasy.

Back on topic,out to 75 feet, both could be equally effective. Beyond to 400 yards, not so much. Rifles are almost universally better energy retainers due to the better ballistic coefficient. It's why most hunt with a rifle, not a pistol.

[browningguy]

Using bullets properly constructed for the task, the rifle will always win out. There is just too much of an energy difference for wishfull thinking to beat.

[Art Eatman]

"so how does a typical 223 FMJ round compare to 357 mag 125 JHP, both out of carbine length barrels ?"

Seems to me that this question needs to be applied to some specific use or need.

Comparing the effects on jugs of water would be entertaining, but I'm not sure anything truly useful would be learned.

IMO, if self-defense is of concern, and some distance around fifty yards is the reasonable outer limit to be considered "defense", my personal opinion is that it's six of one, half-dozen of the other. Bullet A cannot make something deader than bullet B. There's no such progression as dead, deader, deadest.

[19-3Ben]

The whole home defense thing is mostly internet fantasy.

While I think that people on the internet get carried away with "I shall defend my castle" bravado, home invasions are very real.

Look up home invasion stats in Google. The common numbers are 8k home invasions per day* , and that one in every 5 homes will be subjected to home invasion or burglary.

So the armchair ninja who plans to wake up the moment he hears glass break and start clearing his house slicing the pie in each room and all that nonsense may be a bit carried away. BUT, being prepared and having good equipment to defend one's self is just good common sense in my mind.

*In "N. America"- I don't know if that's just USA or if they include Canada in that. It's USDOJ stats though so I assume just USA.

[Oic0]

I think some people here are greatly greatly underestimating the .357. You think its way weaker?

5.56 has what? about 1500-1700lbs of energy from carbine length?


Just looking at the stats for Buffalo Bore ammo, the .357 can do:
180 grain - 1850fps 1369lbs
158 grain - 2153fps 1626lbs
125 grain - 2298fps 1466lbs

Close to the same energies but one has a fatter bullet with a hollow point. The other is small and pointy. Which one would you rather have go through you?

[MichaelK]

Bullet A cannot make something deader than bullet B. There's no such progression as dead, deader, deadest.

Oh, I don't know about that! Was shooting a rat crawling along the top of a brush pile when I shot it with a .22 Stinger. It popped like a balloon and the pre-gutted remains sort of wrapped itself around one of the brush branches.

That was much more satisfying than shooting it with a solid and watching it run off before dieing!

To answer you OF, given a choice for just plain old plinking, I'd go with the .357 carbine. It's a more economical choice than the .223, a little more quiet, and chicks love shooting .38 specials in it. It's more economical to reload too if you do that.
Michael

[MetalHead]

Well I have grabbed both at times in my life because I thought I heard something. When that happens any gun is better than none but I'dd rather have a shotgun. My old ugly WingMaster fills this role just as well as it covers truckgun and farmgun. I pray I never have to fire a shot.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Hornady Critical Defense 125gr .357 Magnum through bare gel and heavy clothing: http://www.hornadyle.com/products/more_detail.php?id=129&sID=144&pID=1

Hornady 5.56 NATO 75gr LE-TAP through baregel:
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/more_detail.php?id=72&sID=75&pID=2

About 13" penetration in bare gel in both cases; but a VERY different sized cavity. I would not be excited about getting shot with either; but there is no question which one does more damage.

See also: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=146306 for other .223 rounds.

Close to the same energies but one has a fatter bullet with a hollow point. The other is small and pointy. Which one would you rather have go through you?

So, what do you think? Which one would you rather have go through you?

[CornCod]

Yeah, but how many of those home invasions are bad guy vs. bad guy drug ripoffs and such?

[Enachos]

... it's still a home invasion isn't it?

[desidog]

How do these two rounds vary in hydrostatic shock wave? I mean, a hole is a hole, but the P1 and P2 shock-waves that liquefy organs are what spells "lights-out" to me.

I'd be more inclined to compared all options:
-223FMJ vs 357FMJ
-223FMJ vs. 357HP
-223HP vs. 357FMJ
-223HP vs. 357HP

I think the 223HP vs. 357 FMJ might be really close, but the damage of the HP coupled with the shock of 223 would really make a spatula a good thing to have around as well.

[greyling22]

my understanding what the OP just wanted to know what they did to stuff at the range, not open a "what is best suited for HD" can of worms. we all know that different bullet types behave differently.

a note about my original post, the 357's were shot out of a carbine. they pick up a couple hundred FPS as opposed to when I shoot them out of a pistol.

[Oic0]

Hornady Critical Defense 125gr .357 Magnum through bare gel and heavy clothing: http://www.hornadyle.com/products/mo...&sID=144&pID=1

Hornady 5.56 NATO 75gr LE-TAP through baregel:
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/mo...2&sID=75&pID=2

About 13" penetration in bare gel in both cases; but a VERY different sized cavity. I would not be excited about getting shot with either; but there is no question which one does more damage.

See also: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=146306 for other .223 rounds.

Quote:
Close to the same energies but one has a fatter bullet with a hollow point. The other is small and pointy. Which one would you rather have go through you?
So, what do you think? Which one would you rather have go through you?

That is from a pistol barrel and its a very anemic load made to be comfortable in lightweight pistols. 1500fps with a 125 grainer from an 8 inch barrel... that is very anemic. It would be doing ~1800fps if it were a decent load. Even that anemic load though would probably be doing 1700+ from a carbine... although it would be doing closer to 2300 if it weren't designed to be tolerable to a sissy firing it from a snubby.
Compare to this http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=21_27&products_id=63 , 100 more fps from half the barrel... I have some, mostly for home defence. Kicks like a mule and spits flames when shot out of my short python but pleasant out of the rifle. There are also these, http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=103 . I want to get some of their 158s for deer :D

All of hornady's ammo for .357 mag is very anemic. Even the "Leverevolution" stuff made for rifles. They only get about as much velocity from a 140 grainer as some of the more serious loaders get from a 180grainer!

[MachIVshooter]

I think some people here are greatly greatly underestimating the .357. You think its way weaker?

5.56 has what? about 1500-1700lbs of energy from carbine length?


Just looking at the stats for Buffalo Bore ammo, the .357 can do:
180 grain - 1850fps 1369lbs
158 grain - 2153fps 1626lbs
125 grain - 2298fps 1466lbs

Close to the same energies but one has a fatter bullet with a hollow point. The other is small and pointy. Which one would you rather have go through you?

5.56 energies are usually closer to 1,300 FPE. But forget energy here. KE is not completely irrelevant, and is a good way to compare cartridges with more similar traits, such as .357 vs. .38 Spl. But when you're dealing with a rifle cartridge, you're talking velocity and terminal ballistics that don't necessarily reflect FPE in any way. A .300 Rem Ultra Mag with a 180 gr. soft point pill at 3,300 FPS is gonna damage a human more than a .50 BMG 660 gr. FMJ at 2,700 FPS, even though the .300 has only 1/3 the energy. It's the expanding projectile and the higher velocity that create greater permanent and temporary cavities.

Lets just look at varmints. A praire rat shot with my Marlin 1994 .44 Mag is quite dead, usually almost torn in half. You're talking almost 2,000 FPE from the rifle with normal .44 loads. The same sized rat, shot with my .220 Swift, is nearly vaporized at close range, despite the lower energy. It's the hydrostatic shock of a 4,000 FPS impact and a bullet that comes apart.

In summary, while a .357 rifle would do the trick, I'd rather have my 16" Armalite M15 with 62 gr. HP's for defensive use. Especially if there was a possibility of soft armor to contend with.

[Oic0]

A .300 Rem Ultra Mag with a 180 gr. soft point pill at 3,300 FPS is gonna damage a human more than a .50 BMG 660 gr. FMJ at 2,700 FPS, even though the .300 has only 1/3 the energy

The .50 would blow right through the target, just as your .44 is wasting a large portion of its energy on the dirt behind the little varmint. What if they were both designed to properly expend their energy in a man sized target? Or heck, imagine a prarie dog shot from the hole under the tail and straight through out of the mouth with a rapidly expanding .44. With more of its energy put to use it would leave you mangled hide with legs. Both the .223 and the .357 have ammo designed to maximize energy put in to a man sized target so ideally neither is going to waste energy with massive over penetration.

[R.W.Dale]

PAH! A pox on all you serious sherlies treating every pointless thread like it's a matter of life and death.I'm going to compare these cartridges based on the only criteria important to me.

FUN FACTOR

A 357 carbine will bounce cans,clay pigeons, rotten fruit or put the smackdown on used consumer electronics or appliances with gleeful authority. I liken a 357 carbine to driving your grandfather's 40 yr old 6cyl manual braked farm truck. It may not be the best at anything but it sure is fun to buzz around town in wearing a funny looking hat and "Big Smith" overalls.

A .223 autoloader will do the same things as the 357 although with a much less satisfying thump on appliances. Fruit shot with this cartridge pretty much disappears into a shower of small rotten pineapple chunks in a most gratifying way. The thing with the .223 is it will do so 2 to 3 times farther away. Hearing that faint ring report back from that 11" gong placed 300m away you shot with your iron sighted AR is a real joy. Plus lets face it it doesn't matter how codgy you are about rapid fire deep down inside we all enjoy the occasional mag dump. The .223 autoloader is more the kinda fun you get from a rollercoaster, you just hold on smile and let the machine do much of the work.



ETA: IMO the 357 carbine is MORE fun firing 38's because if loaded properly they're so quiet the pullet impact on an old 5hp briggs and stratton block is louder than the report

[MachIVshooter]

The .50 would blow right through the target, just as your .44 is wasting a large portion of its energy on the dirt behind the little varmint. What if they were both designed to properly expend their energy in a man sized target? Or heck, imagine a prarie dog shot from the hole under the tail and straight through out of the mouth with a rapidly expanding .44. With more of its energy put to use it would leave you mangled hide with legs. Both the .223 and the .357 have ammo designed to maximize energy put in to a man sized target so ideally neither is going to waste energy with massive over penetration.

Don't forget about the velocity factor ;)

[kenno]

The post alluded to the Home Deffense advanages of 357 vs 223 and you guys are now talking 44 mag and 50 cal?
Unless you live in a castle Home defence means around 18 feet, at that range neither round has a practicle advantage only the platform would provide an advantage, a semi would be the 'winner'.

[The Tennessean]

People hunt bears with .357 Magnum rifles. I would have no problems using them on a bad guy. As for which is better, .357 or .223 for bad guys, I think it's 6 one way, half a dozen the other. If the bad guy goes down what's it matter? We know the bad guy will go down with either.

[dom1104]

A 357 carbine will bounce cans,clay pigeons, rotten fruit or put the smackdown on used consumer electronics or appliances with gleeful authority. I liken a 357 carbine to driving your grandfather's 40 yr old 6cyl manual braked farm truck. It may not be the best at anything but it sure is fun to buzz around town in wearing a funny looking hat and "Big Smith" overalls.

A .223 autoloader will do the same things as the 357 although with a much less satisfying thump on appliances. Fruit shot with this cartridge pretty much disappears into a shower of small rotten pineapple chunks in a most gratifying way. The thing with the .223 is it will do so 2 to 3 times farther away. Hearing that faint ring report back from that 11" gong placed 300m away you shot with your iron sighted AR is a real joy. Plus lets face it it doesn't matter how codgy you are about rapid fire deep down inside we all enjoy the occasional mag dump. The .223 autoloader is more the kinda fun you get from a rollercoaster, you just hold on smile and let the machine do much of the work.

Excellent Post.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

1500fps with a 125 grainer from an 8 inch barrel... that is very anemic.

OK, if you've got some more .357 ballistics gelatin shots, I would be interested in seeing them. I think you'll be looking awhile to find anything near that Hornday 75gr TAP though.

Unless you live in a castle Home defence means around 18 feet, at that range neither round has a practicle advantage

How do you figure? In the links above, the Hornady gel shots were taken at the FBI-standard distance of 30'. I doubt the Hornady .357 is going to lose a tremendous amount of energy or velocity in the 12' from 18' to 30'; but it definitely is at a practical disadvantage in how it performs in ballistics gel.

[NG VI]

1800 feet per second with a 125 from an 8" revolver? Seriously?

That sounds a little dangerous to me, but I suppose I'm not a reloader yet.

How's the life expectancy of that brass?

[R.W.Dale]

1800 feet per second with a 125 from an 8" revolver? Seriously?

1800fps I would categorize as EXTREMELY optimistic

IMO for a 8" revolver 1400 to 1500 fps is a much more realistic figure. You gotta understand that Hodgdon for example lists their 357 mag velocity figures as being from a 10" ventless pressure bbl. In fact much of their handgun data is failing to meet their specs from my 18" marlin

[Oic0]

You won't get 1800fps in reloading, only in commercial ammo. I think doubletap makes the hottest 125 grainers.
They claim:
Velocity: 1600fps / 4" Ruger GP-100
1425fps / 1 7/8" S&W
1750fps / 6"bbl S&W 686

I've seen guys on forums posting some really hot reloads in the ranges that BB and doubletap get but it was only for strong 92 actions and even in that I would be scared to go that far. DT and BB must be working with some powders we don't have available. I can attest from the 125g DT bullets I have, it is night and day compared to winchester white box. They are really too much to handle in my little revolver. The gun takes them fine. Primers look good, nothing sticks, but its a flamethrower and will hurt your hand if you don't have a great grip. I took them out of my revolver as home defense because I figured if my wife fired one the gun would probably hit her in the face or fly out of her hand.

[R.W.Dale]

You won't get 1800fps in reloading, only in commercial ammo. I think doubletap makes the hottest 125 grainers.
They claim:
Velocity: 1600fps / 4" Ruger GP-100
1425fps / 1 7/8" S&W
1750fps / 6"bbl S&W 686

I've seen guys on forums posting some really hot reloads in the ranges that BB and doubletap get but it was only for strong 92 actions and even in that I would be scared to go that far. DT and BB must be working with some powders we don't have available. I can attest from the 125g DT bullets I have, it is night and day compared to winchester white box. They are really too much to handle in my little revolver. The gun takes them fine. Primers look good, nothing sticks, but its a flamethrower and will hurt your hand if you don't have a great grip. I took them out of my revolver as home defense because I figured if my wife fired one the gun would probably hit her in the face or fly out of her hand.

Really please share your chonograph results!

Steve Riccerdilli got 1505fps from a 4" S&W
http://stevespages.com/page8f357magnum.html

DT and BB must be working with some powders we don't have available.

IMO this is pure marketing fantasy perpetuated for these boutique ammo manufacturers to throw everyone a red herring for their fanciful overstated velocities.

Us handloaders have no fewer than 20 different propellants of progressively slower burn rates suitable for such full powered 357 mag loads. Yet you expect me to believe double tap can buy a magic in between powder burnrate that allows them to exceed my loads by 300fps??????come on?? Don't you thing that if such a powder existed it's manufacturer would be marketing the crap out of it?

Bottom line is if these manufacturers are getting more velocity than me it's because they're running more pressure than I am.

[Float Pilot]

I have shot Arctic Caribou (smaller caribou weighing about 150 to 175 pounds at most) within 75 yards with both cartridges.
Sheengik, Coleen, and Black River drainage's.

I used a Mini 14 on a couple hunts with FMJ and soft point 5.56mm ammo. I was not impressed. Caribou are rather tough and can run a long ways with a fatal wound. When they do, their meat becomes tainted.

I then used a Rossi M92 levergun and Federal 125 grain hollow points on the other trips. The immediate effect of being struck with a 125 grain hollow point traveling over 2,000 fps from the 20 inch barrel was very evident. The only negative aspect of using the Rossi 357 lever-gun was that the exit wounds were huge. Like coffee can huge with jacketing fragments. So there was considerable meat wastage. I changed to 158 and 160 grain flat nosed soft points and still had much better results in a clean kill over the 5.56mm and the exit wounds shrank to about 2.5 inches with no shrapnel.

[ny32182]

I know that DT loads are hot (I've fired some of their 10mm stuff, and it is easily hotter than major brand JHP defensive 10mm I was comparing it to). I did not chrono it.

However, I don't believe that anyone who is not buying powder by the rail-car full has a powder manufacturer doing special development just for them. Regardless of what they might say, I do not believe these botique loaders are using special super-secret powders that the rest of us cannot get.

[RockyMtnTactical]

It's not a fair comparison for the 357, a mere handgun round.

[Oic0]

I don't own a chrony and I can't find much on DT. A few people that have tested buffalo bore had the velocities match up though, and weight per weight BB and DT make about the same claims.
Here's one from one of the members here saying he chronied some of their 180 and 158 grainers.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=3022345&postcount=40

180gr flat points, 5 shots 7 yards from muzzle.....(1860,1850,1855,1853,1855fps) whipping out the balistics software. Round has a B.C. of .185....take the Average 1854 that give a ME of 1369...doesnt cross the ME of handgun until it crosses the 175yd mark at 635ftlbs. Sight for 3" high at 100yds max PBR
(I.e 3" low) at 175yds.

Okay now for the 158gr Buffalo bore stuff. Again 5 shots 7 yards from muzzle....(2140,2143,2150,2139,2158)....average 2146. This round has a B.C. of .170....ME 1616,doesn't come down to the hangun ME until it also crosses 175 yrds. Sighted 3" high at 100yds, Max PBR 189 yrds (I.e 3" low)

Here is a test in gunblast too, they got 1500 from a 5.5 inch barrel with one of the 180 grainers. http://www.gunblast.com/MilesFortis-AKChurch_BuffaloBore.htm and as advertised from a carbine.

How can they do that if they are using the same powders as us?

[Boats]

The .357 Mag carbines are also "merely" way more fun to shoot too, especially with a tang sight, trying to do 200 yards old school.

To the OP--

If you, like me, are really bored to tears by the attitude that the AR is great in almost every application, or you don't relish a very tedious cleaning regimen on an AR bolt, give the lever gun a try. If it doesn't work out for you, ARs are so common that you can use the lever for a sizable fraction of an entry level one's price.

[R.W.Dale]

ow can they do that if they are using the same powders as us?

simple! they run higher pressures. Over the years 357 Magnum has had it's pressure rating lowered. Way back when 357 Magnum pressures were in the high 40K psi range. Over the years this has been lowered to the high 30K range to be more friendly to small framed revolvers so chambered. Dollars to doughnuts buffalo bore and DT are running pressures closer to the original 357 magnum specs

Hence buffalo bore's own warning
Please note that this ammunition is not intended for older guns. It is made for modern firearms only, as some of the ammunition could damage older and weaker firearms.

Now if SAAMI 357 magnum is safe to fire in any firearm so chambered (which it is) why could you NOT use buffalo Bore in anything if it's loaded to the same pressure.

Buffalo Bore loads their ammunition up to maximum SAAMI specifications,
This is like the 90% fat free on that bag of potato chips. Which SAAMI specifications??? The new ones at 35,000psi or the older firebreathing specs Elmer Keith helped develop that would launch 158grn bullets right at 1500fps from a 3" revolver

There is no free lunch! You want more velocity than what the most optimum propellant and bullet combo for a cartridge provides inside SAAMI pressures. Then you only have one place to go HIGHER PRESSURE

Now this isn't to say that Buffalo Bore ammo isn't indeed hot S&(# on a shingle! But I am disagreeing with the premise that it gets that way from a magic propellant.

[C-grunt]

Both should be very fun and will tear up the bottles. I think the .223 will make them explode more because of the sheer velocity but might break up and not penetrate as many jugs as the heavier .357.

[MCgunner]

My .357 carbine pushes 1900 fps with a 165 grain SWC with 17 grains of Lil' Gun. that's plenty enough for hogs or deer to 100 yards. It puts 'em into 4" at that range. It has taken a deer at 80. Same gun, .38 special 105 SWC over 2.3 grains Bullseye gets 900 fps and 1.5" at 50 yard accuracy, becomes a squirrel gun. I like the .357 for that reason. Revolvers? This is the rifle forum, right?

.223 and .357 are pretty even concerning energy out of the muzzle of rifles, but of course the .223 has the BC edge and will distance the .357. The .357 carbine's effective range on game realistically is 100 yards maximum.

[MCgunner]

Another bonus for the .357, for me, is that I can shoot my own cast gas checked 165 grain SWCs. I don't need no stinkin' expansion to kill deer and penetration is aplenty. :D

[C-grunt]

MC is that a light .38? What does a standard .38 do out of a rifle?

[R.W.Dale]

My .357 carbine pushes 1900 fps with a 165 grain SWC with 17 grains of Lil' Gun. that's plenty enough for hogs or deer to 100 yards. It puts 'em into 4" at that range.



Care to hop over here and share what you're doing with lil gun that I may not be.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=502030
I still have a pound of this powder to burn and I can get nothing even resembling accuracy from it.

[Oic0]

The new ones at 35,000psi or the older firebreathing specs Elmer Keith helped develop that would launch 158grn bullets right at 1500fps from a 3" revolver

Shame they don't just come up with a +p rating for the cartridge, or I guess a -p since the newer rounds are weaker ;) You've got to admit 1500fps from an 8 inch test barrel is pretty weak though. Not that I think it would be bad for anti-human use, it would allow a second or third shot much easier from a small hand gun.
I've put the DT 125s through 3 guns so far and none of them had any issues. A fellow on another forum had sticky cases with the BB 158s, who knows if it was just that batch, just his gun, or a sign. That is the only complaint I have heard in .357 though.

[MCgunner]

Care to hop over here and share what you're doing with lil gun that I may not be.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=502030
I still have a pound of this powder to burn and I can get nothing even resembling accuracy from it.


Hell, mine shoots as good as with my 2400 loads. Maybe the gun? I read and posted on that thread, but I'm afraid I'm of little help. You might page Mr. GooseGhestapo. He's the one that was touting Lil' Gun, why I picked up a pound. He was saying he was pushing a 158JHP to over 2000 fps with 17.5 grains.

I finally got 100 new .357 cases to load rifle only loads in for the Lil' Gun loads, haven't got around to it, yet. My 2400 loads are 14.5 grains and push about 100 fps less at around 1800 fps which, really, is good enough I reckon, was just impressed with the Lil' Gun's extra zap at less apparent pressure. I've heard the stuff is hard on forcing cones and for gas cutting. It burns slower. I'll stick to the carbine with it.

[R.W.Dale]

I reckon, was just impressed with the Lil' Gun's extra zap at less apparent pressure.

That's another issue that's come up under serious questioning in my thread.

[MCgunner]

Yeah, would be good to have a strain gauge for such stuff, eh? :D I pushed up to 18 grains with the 165 and really didn't see any pressure signs in the rifle or the Blackhawk, no sticky brass, no primer pocket cratering, no ejector marks.

[oldfool]

Thanks guys, some good posts and interesting info
it was just a casual mode question though
I don't Grizz hunt with either round, and I don't do rifles for "home defense" either
I just like to shoot

I have a pair of 357 lever actions, and do enjoy 'em a lot
I don't have a 223... yet... thin wallet fever
(but drooling over a Ruger Hawkeye 223 bolt carbine "just because")
couple of my buddies do have ARs (dunno know what make/model, but they are black and 223 caliber)
and I have shot 'em (guns, not buddies), but bolt guns are just more "me"
going to save up some jugs and invite my buddies to the range for a "splash" day


browningguy
"the rifle will always win out"
yes, it will

Art Eatman
"if self-defense is of concern, and some distance around fifty yards is the reasonable outer limit to be considered defense"
Agree, I think 50 yards is pretty excessive to even be considered "defense", myself
(until Martian Zombie invasions become more prevalent, I am sticking with 38+P k-frames for personal matters, and 380acp for casual wear)

Oic0
"I think some people here are greatly greatly underestimating the .357"
I think so, too

BartRoberts
thanks, some great jello pictures there, interesting and educational

greyling22
yep, you got it
a guy just gets tired of just punching paper every now and then
my buddies have some ARs, thought it might be entertaining to check 'em out vs my 357 carbines

krochus
yep, you got it, too
alas, they get a tad peevish if we shoot up the really fun stuff at our local range
(but they do leave us a junker car out there, every now and then, for LEO trainees to shoot up, we help 'em out al we can with that)

Float Pilot
jello is fun and entertaining, but caribou is what I call "been there, done that"
and there are guys on other forums who say much the same for modest range whitetails (although I favor a 30-30 or 243 carbine for that sort of thing myself)

Boats (#33)
yeah, mea cuplea, it do get mighty tiresome
got nothing against ARs, just don't much believe in magic of any flavor
(already own two 357 lever actions, Marlin 1894 and Rossi/LSI '92)

MCgunner
"This is the rifle forum, right?"
well I thunk so, too... ain't got no 8" carbines nor snubbie carbines myself
(and agree, shooting 38s and 357s out of same gun do add bonus fun factor)

C-grunt
"What does a standard .38 do out of a rifle?"
about 1 1/2" groups at 50 yards, vs. about 1" at 50 yards w/ 357 and about 1" higher POI, 5-shot groups
357 must go downrange a little quicker, heckifiknow ;)

ya'll shoot well, be well, and be safe

[tubeshooter]

This has been a great thread. Thank you all.

I'm wondering what .38s do velocity-wise out of a carbine. The info I can find seems to indicate maybe about an extra 150 fps or so for +P, and little to no gain with standard practice ammo. Maybe even a loss with jacketed.


Is this about right? I don't have access to a chronograph...

[_N4Z_]

BartRoberts
thanks, some great jello pictures there, interesting and educational

I'm looking at these on the Hornady site and see no information (barrel length, velocity, twist...) for the .357 magnum. Was it shot from a 18 or 20 inch barrel, or a handgun?? All that info is posted for the .223. Not sure this is a good comparison without knowing how the mags were deposited into the jello.

Maybe I missed something?


Here's an interesting link to some .357mag carbine shots into lime jello. :-)
http://www.diyballistics.com/.357%20Mag%20Carbine%20Tests.html


Couple months back I had many pumpkins needing to be aired out. Took them to the range with my AK and my Marlin1894c. At 25 to 50 yards the 7.62x39's went thru the targets with small inny and outty holes. They were BrownBear 123gr. FMJ and HP. The .357's made slightly bigger inny holes, but the exits were very large and spectacular. Chunks were flying all over the place. They were Speer 158gr SP's over 14.5gr of Alliant 2400. Wish I had had some soft point x39 on hand to see their performance, but didn't.

[oldfool]

This has been a great thread. Thank you all.

I'm wondering what .38s do velocity-wise out of a carbine. The info I can find seems to indicate maybe about an extra 150 fps or so for +P, and little to no gain with standard practice ammo. Maybe even a loss with jacketed.


Is this about right? I don't have access to a chronograph...
tubeshooter, fair question

not meaning to pretend I would actually know (nor meaning to bump this thread up "just because")
but it's not the sort of thing you are likely to see a whole lot of studies on...
I don't do chrony either , but as far as casual observation goes (???)
I think you pretty much got it nailed

I don't see any difference on how it (38sp) hits/drops at 50 yards or 100 yards, whether it's an 18" carbine or a 6" revolver, generic factory 38sp loads, but the whitebox 38s are a whole lot cheaper than 357 JHPs/JSPs, recoil (?) is 22 rimfire class, and there never was anything real wrong with stretching the fun factor on range day, a few more bangs for your buck

never took one tree rat hunting, but I am pretty sure they will kill 'em pretty dead, hit most anywhere (no expansion required)... but I wouldn't count on 'em for "scenarios", just fun stuff or small game, nothing so worrisome that 38sp out of a snubbie couldn't take care of up close

but I am still going to have to get me a 223, if things ever loosen up..
(me, only kid on my block that don't have one yet)

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I'm looking at these on the Hornady site and see no information (barrel length, velocity, twist...) for the .357 magnum. Was it shot from a 18 or 20 inch barrel, or a handgun?? All that info is posted for the .223. Not sure this is a good comparison without knowing how the mags were deposited into the jello.

You have to go over to the civilian side to find out that the muzzle velocity for the 125gr was 1,500fps from an 8" barrel.

The DIYBallistics site is interesting; but given the penetration depths, it is pretty obvious that they are using a much denser medium than ballistics gel. That makes it tough to compare (and also affects expansion strangely).

[JDGray]

Shot placement is king! Both will kill you instantly, or allow you to run for cover.

[tubeshooter]

Thanks for the response, oldfool. I appreciate it!

[MCgunner]

.38 will not get as much gains as .357 from the longer barrel due to the faster powders commonly loaded in .38. I haven't shot any +P from mine over the chrony, but I wouldn't expect it to be much more out of a rifle than an 8" revolver.

[Lloyd Smale]

if i had to bet on a one shot stop at 50 yards or less id take the 357 loaded with 158hps out of a carbine any day over a ar shooting ball. But extend the range and farther or subtitute the ball bullets for a good bullet like a 60 grain vmax or better yet a 60 grain partition and id have to go with the Ar.

[JFrame]

I'm not arguing the ballistic pluses or minuses of .223 versus .357 -- I'll let more educated minds than mine hash that out... :)

The only centerfire "long gun" I have in the house (if you exclude a 12 gauge pump and a T/C Contender carbine in .44 mag) is a Winchester Trapper in .357. I live in a built up suburban neighborhood, and don't have a clear line of sight beyond 100 yards if I actually even needed to place such a shot for some catastrophic reason.

Also, I have a slew of .357 and .38 revolvers, so I'm very likely to keep a decent supply of that ammo around the house.

I'm not saying it's an ideal solution, but I find it practical for my circumstances, and don't feel terribly under-gunned with 10 quick shots of hot .357 coming out of a 16-inch barrel (backed up by a 12 gauge with slugs).

Of course, I am not precluding owning some kind of rifle-caliber rifle or carbine in the future...

.

[ChristopherG]

I've had a Marlin 1894c for several years; it was my first centerfire rifle and is still probably my favorite to shoot. It's so handy and fun and has such great practical accuracy--within the limitations of its range. I've done a good deal of loading and chronographing with it. My favorite loads in .357 are a 158 gr Hornady XTPFP over a max book load of Little Gun for 2,000 fps; or a 125 gr HP over a max load of H110/W296 for 2,150 fps. Both are very consistent and accurate. I've used heavier and lighter bullets, and cast bullets and swaged bullets, but settled on these standards as able to do anything that's reasonably within the capabilities of the .357 in a carbine. .38's are fun for plinking, and I've shot plenty of 158 gr. RNFP and LSWC through it for fun and in cowboy action games. Oh, and a final plus for the Marlin: it's super easy to reload for.

I was issued an AR last year by the Sheriff's Office. To me, it's not as fun a gun to shoot as the Marlin. Nevertheless, there is NO DOUBT in my mind that it's the one I would prefer to have in a fight. The handling characteristics, capacity, longer range capabilities and fast reloads make it all business for me. I shot the Marlin in several 3-gun competitions several years back and became keenly aware of its limitations, and the AR overcomes all these; but it's still not as fun to handle and shoot, for me.

In terms of terminal ballistics I don't have any practical experience to share; just the opinion that I think either one would give you a pretty good margin of potency within 50-75 yards. Past that, the .357 starts to give up ground pretty fast.

[MichaelK]

.38 will not get as much gains as .357 from the longer barrel due to the faster powders commonly loaded in .38. I haven't shot any +P from mine over the chrony, but I wouldn't expect it to be much more out of a rifle than an 8" revolver.

I have. I make a +P .38 special load with Lyman's 358477 SWC. It's about 151-152 grains cast in #2 alloy. With 8.0 grains of Blue Dot that bullet is going at 1090fps in a 6" revolver, and 1265 fps in a 20" rifle. So, that's a gain of 175fps, which appears in line with data I see in my Speer manuals.

[Jason_W]

Quote:

"The DIYBallistics site is interesting; but given the penetration depths, it is pretty obvious that they are using a much denser medium than ballistics gel. That makes it tough to compare (and also affects expansion strangely)."

Hi all, new here.

The site in question is my creation. I found this board while going through my website statistics. Seems like an interesting place.

I just wanted to mention that I did conduct some .357 mag tests into a medium of bone and ballistics gel, here. http://www.diyballistics.com/Shooting%20the%20Mock%20Deer%20Page%201.html

Admittedly, these tests were conducted using a handgun, but I close range hit with handgun simulates a long range hit with a carbine, more or less. Someone mentioned that the differing twist rates between the revolver and the carbine could impact terminal performance.

They may not be professional level ultra-scientific tests, but it is a lot of fun:D