.40 cal or .357 for ccw?

Status
Not open for further replies.
X

xring shooter

Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
15
I have a Taurus 101 in .40 I was going to use for my ccw. I just bought my wife a Taurus ultralight ss 38 that I have been pretty impressed with. I like the 40 for capacity but it is quite large. I can get pretty much the same model as my wife's in 357 which is a smaller package and a stout caliber but only a 5 shot. Looking for some input from both sides here(semi auto and revolver).
Thanks
 
Since you have both of them already (or wife's that's similar enough), I would actually carry them for a few days to see which one feels more comofortable. If you don't carry it b/c it's uncomfortble, it's worthless.

I would also shoot both to see which one you feel comfortable shooting, and with decent accuracy.

As for wheel vs. auto....it's a preference thing. Some people argue that revolver is the ultimate in reliability, and I don't argure with it necessarily, but wiht modern semi-auto, the difference is negligible.

You would "probably" not need more than 5 rounds...most of us carry for years without shooting single round, and I hope to keep it that way, so really, it comes down to carry comfort and shooting comfort IMO.
 
I had an SP101 for a while, great gun. Problem is I discovered accurate follow up shots with 357 rounds were very difficult for me, and it was pointless using 38+p as the gun only holds 5 rounds and I might as well get something in 9mm +p with more capacity.

So I bought a Kahr K9. Haven't looked back.
 
After a lot of years and different guns, I found I like revolvers for CC. A few reasons:

1) carries easier, conceals better - the curves and shapes on a small revolver blend more naturally under clothes - nothing "box like" that really pops out at you visually

2) simple manual of arms - draw and shoot. No safeties, no fuss.

3) six rounds is plenty in real life. This isn't the movies, and thorough studies by state and federal agencies have shown most shootings involve less than 3 rounds discharged. So with my revolver I can, on average, get into two separate self-defense shooting situations in one single day and still probably have a a single round left before I need to reload.

4) more power for the size - .357 in a small package is a hell of a lot of firepower. I like the .357 as a cartridge/chambering. It gives me tremendous versatility with different loadings.

If you don't like revolvers for some reason, no worries, autos work, too. These are my lessons I've learned and what I go by, but there are other theories and plenty of good autos to use as cc guns, and people who prefer them. I'm just sharing my thinking and others can reach their own and practice it. I'm not trying to convert anyone (as a matter of fact, I would prefer it if people would go back to the way it was in the '80s and '90s and just ignore revolvers, letting the prices drop back down to low levels so I can buy 10 or so more wheel-guns affordably ;)).

As to .357 vs. .40 for a carry cartridge, I would feel fine with either. I think anything above 9mm is, in all reality, a fine choice. I have shot and own/owned .38, .357, 9mm, .40, .44 (special and magnum) and .45 (acp and Long Colt). For cc, I would use any of those calibers without a worry. Hitting where you want is MUCH more important than whether the entry hole is .355" or .454". Heck, if 9mm isn't big enough to kill ya', I guess a .30-06 would barely be noticed, right?
 
I don't know if this is true for other brands, but with the .40 M&P you can order a barrel for .357 SIG and shoot either one with a barrel swap. The same magazine will hold either round. I'm not sure if this is an option for anything other than the full-size models though.
 
I own pistols and revolvers in .38, .357, .40, .45 and 9mm that have carried as my ccw over the years. My pistols are all "service sized" (e.g. SIG P220 and P226) and can easily be concealed with a good holster and the right shirt/vest/jacket. My revolvers range from ultra-light J frames to 6" N frames. Again with the right holster and clothing they can all be a CCW.

I personally cannot shoot small J frame .357's accurately and rapidly with full power .357 ammo. The smallest .357 I own is a 2.75" Ruger Security Six. You will find many people here feel that the snubbie Ruger 'sixes" are the finest .357's ever made for CC. I fall into this camp. The 2.5" and 3" S&W K frames are also wonderful CCW's for .357.

If I want to carry something smaller than my Six (and MANY days I do!) I carry a .38 S&W J frame loaded with the remi FBI load (LSWCHP +P) and do not feel undergunned. I think you will find that your taurus .38 will find it way on to your belt many a day;)
 
I carry a revolvers and semi-autos interchangeably.

I alternate several semi-autos and an S&W 3" Model 65 IWB in a Don Hume 715M. No difference and no problems.

When I have to disarm frequently (Post Office, posted businesses, restaurants with liquor licenses) I carry an S&W 2" Model 36 in a Desantis Nemesis pocket holster. Again, no problems.
 
The 357 in most any small revolver is hard on the shooter, Slower recovery for second shoot ,the blast can and will hurt your hearing for life if in a closed area and my hurt it if out side to and if dark the muzzle blast will blind both the bad guy and you. Now any gun can hurt your hearing but a 357 has a crack to it that is just worse than most all others. Thats the reason experts typicly shoot 38's in them.
 
Just a thought, .357 mag uses slow burning powder, better for longer barrels. If you go to www.ballisticsbytheinch.com you will see that out of a 2" barrell a 9mm actually has more velocity (115gr 9mm v 125gr 357). I would say that is due ot the faster powder burn rate for most autoloaders. This helped me decision, I pretty much carry a Glock G32 (357 sig) loaded w/ 125gr Winchester Ranger ammo.

I still carry my j-frame a lot, its fits great in my pocket holster, and yes I agree the j-frame is a lot less noticable than an autoloader.

357 mag is a versatile caliber and I wouldnt ever feel undergunned no matter what the barrel length. My J-frame is like a stick of dynamite going off, and you must practice and get used to that if you ever need to use it. If you dont hit your advisary, you'll definetly blind and deafen him
 
.357 recoil makes second shots with a snub very difficult for me personally, and like others in this thread I find a revolver conceals much easier, so my personal choice is 38+p short barrel speer in a 642.
 
I have never carried a revolver for CCW, but I have fired a few that I found myself thinking would be ideal. I would carry a 4" 686 or Python, I love Ruger .357s. I suppose the main reason I don't, is that I have gone up the path of single-action auto for training, and I would really need to retrain to effectively use a revolver in a SD situation. I would probably have the hammer bobbed and the cocking notch ground off, to make it a true DA only revolver.

Understanding that all pistol rounds are inadequate for SD, and the real world difference is negligible, I have forgotten why I ever used a .40. Modern 9mm ammo is good enough I would rather carry a 9 with more capacity, and if I was to get a compact BUG, I would rather use .357 SIG, to make the most of the velocity from the shorter barrel.
 
I use 158gr in my 2" .357 SP-101

Out of a 2" barrel you get about the same fps whether it's a 125gr or a 158gr. The magnum has plenty of power to get either one up to speed, it just runs out of barrel too soon. So I opt for the heavier bullet since the velocities are about the same.

Plus I prefer the recoil from the heavier bullet. The 125gr produce a shorter, sharper recoil since the bullet accelerates so fast. When shooting 125gr I have to cover the target with the tip of the front sight blade, with 158gr I can use a 6 o'clock hold which works better for me.

I like the 2" barrel because I can wear it with a more comfortable OWB holster and a sweatshirt or T-Shirt covers it, without the barrel sticking out the bottom if I reach a little or bend.
 
.40 out of a service gun might actually have more power than .357 from a snub-nose. I think the .40 will be easier to aim and shoot and not as easy to carry, while the .357 would be easier to carry, due more to to the guns than the caliber.
 
.40 out of a service gun might actually have more power than .357 from a snub-nose
Click to expand...

Not with full-power .357 loads - they perform dang well in a 2.5" gun as many have demonstrated (Speer provides ballistic data for 2.5" revolvers, and member Hoptob here has posted quite a few of his measurements).

Either is going to do the job - choosing one over the other solely on ballistics is not really wise. But when it comes to control, I just don't much less than a 2.5" K frame as a .357 platform - the J is really maxed out at a stout .38 in my opinion for control, or at least with my skill level and arm/grip strength. And even then I eschew the "unobtanium" framed ones and stick with steel.
 
yer Taurus PT101 will make a good defense handgun for house/car/rv defense; I agree that CCW with a full size handgun is tedious and often a royal PITA; to balance the scales...firing full power loads from a small framed .357 mag revolver causes its own share of problems (large muzzle blast, very loud audible report, and sharp recoil) that inhibit placement of followup shots; and yes I have owned my share over the years (Taurus 605, Taurus 651, S&W 640, Ruger SP101) and ended up choosing moderate .357 mag loads (Remington Golden Sabre 125gr jhp, Winchester WWB Personal Defense 110gr sjhp, Speer Gold Dot 'short barrel' 135gr jhp) and still finding my accuracy and effective speed slowed down;

I eventually gave up on the entire 'tiny .357 mag. gun' idea and went back to a lightweight S&W 642 .38 spl +p snubby; I concluded that raw power that couldn't be placed accurately and precisely was a wasted effort; .38 spl +p loads like Remington 158gr lead semiwadcutter hollowpoint & Speer Gold Dot 'short barrel' 135gr jhp (this is only a small example of the modern loads available) still deliver enough oomph to get the job done without the shooter going deaf, blind, and dumbfounded
 
I don't like the .40. It was a solution to a problem that didn't really exist. If female FBI couldn't handle the 10mm then the solution was to give them 9mm not redesign the cartridge. .40 is/was a wildcat that got adopted into service. It is NOT the "perfect" cartridge.

.357 is a LOT of firepower in a small package. For CCW, .38+p is more than enough punch in most situations. 9mm is more than sufficient as well.

And, remember, ammo choices should be made based on your locale, the amount of clothing being worn, and season. Cold climates in winter need different bullet/powder selection than warmer places because of heavy winter coats and clothes. Caliber is not a consideration provided that the caliber is 9mm or larger.
 
I'm a great believer in the stopping power of the .357, but I'm not necessarily a fan of it for CCW in city environs. It's a very powerful cartridge and the fireball is intense and, interestingly, still dangerous, even if you miss! I'd drop down to a small 9mm 115gr JHP. The .40s kick a bit more and it hasn't been the panacea many people thought.

A .38 +P revolver is very attractive to me, six shots. Some people make the last two .357s just in case.

Don't know how reliable the Taurus is....
 
357 mag is one of my favorite calibers. I must have six revolvers or more chambered in it. That said, I prefer the .40 for carry. Not as loud, especially with 180's, higher capacity and I can personally shoot my M&P and Glocks much faster than my revolvers which all have beautiful trigger jobs. Reloading at speed with revolvers (again for me) is slow compared to my auto reloads.

I started on autos in 1992 and got my first revolver about ten years later. It may be different for you but the noise and capacity factors stand as facts. I'm confident both rds. will "do the job" if you do yours. I've taken hogs with 44mag, 357mag, 10mm, 357auto and 40. They were all very effective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top