WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
Okay, so what do you guys think about the .357 for deer?
Does the deer have a knife, and is it after my wallet?
357 Magnum has become pointless... for me.
- Thread starter mcb
- Start date
- Status
Does the deer have a knife, and is it after my wallet?
OP
OP
mcb
Member
Okay, so what do you guys think about the .357 for deer?
I think its just fine. My reasons for not using 357 Mag on deer is based on reasons other than its terminal performance. But I am also comfortable hunting deer with a 410 slug gun that is probably more marginal than 357 Magnum is.
Master Blaster
Member
Okay, so what do you guys think about the .357 for deer?
Would the Deer prefer a Snubby or a longer barrel?
What kind of Holster would the Deer use?
The trigger guard would need to be removed so the deer could shoot it with a Hoof.
fireman 9731
Member
Deer have sensitive ears, they probably wouldn't like the excessive report of the 357.
Choctaw
Member
LOL, I know. I just thought I would throw that in there since that is what you guys have been talking about for ten pages. This has been a fun thread.
Okay so a few more points in this fun topic
1. This forum seems fairly biased towards overkill in an overkill vs underkill (new word) debate. Whereas both of these have potential pros and cons.
IE: "I'd rather shoot a squirrel with a 500 magnum than a whitetail with a 357 magnum"
2. Point one seems to define many people's definition of the range of application for a firearm.
3. Even if you reload the 357 magnum has an absurdly more diverse component selection than any big bore handgun.
4. Versatility is entirely subjective.
I'd personally argue that using a big bore handgun for small game is equally as irresponsible as using a small/medium bore handgun for large game.
5. Everyone is basing their arguments on what the respective cartridges can do vs what they should do. If we limited the cartridges to a more average use case they're honestly about the same.
Thing to be killed:
Small---------------Medium---------------Large--
22LR. 327 Mag 357 Mag. 41 Mag 44 Mag
-----Why am I shooting this again?
460 Mag 500 Mag
Hopefully that chart turns out like I was trying for.
1. This forum seems fairly biased towards overkill in an overkill vs underkill (new word) debate. Whereas both of these have potential pros and cons.
IE: "I'd rather shoot a squirrel with a 500 magnum than a whitetail with a 357 magnum"
2. Point one seems to define many people's definition of the range of application for a firearm.
3. Even if you reload the 357 magnum has an absurdly more diverse component selection than any big bore handgun.
4. Versatility is entirely subjective.
I'd personally argue that using a big bore handgun for small game is equally as irresponsible as using a small/medium bore handgun for large game.
5. Everyone is basing their arguments on what the respective cartridges can do vs what they should do. If we limited the cartridges to a more average use case they're honestly about the same.
Thing to be killed:
Small---------------Medium---------------Large--
22LR. 327 Mag 357 Mag. 41 Mag 44 Mag
-----Why am I shooting this again?
460 Mag 500 Mag
Hopefully that chart turns out like I was trying for.
How so? I wasn't aware that there were degrees of dead...
No but there are degrees of usability. There's not a whole lot of animals I'd advocate killing just to chuck in a dumpster
Edit:
And to the other side of the equation there is the hunters safety and any unnecessary suffering that the animal might have to endure.
OP
OP
mcb
Member
Not much meat left to make limb rat stew if you use your 500 S&W on the old bushy-tails. I quit hunting them with 22 Mag due to the meat loss.
In the context of this thread, getting into post-kill ethics is a slippery slope that can easily derail this thread, so, folks, let's all stick to discussing the .357mag, right up to (but not beyond) it's terminal ballistics.
View attachment 823954
It can work
I think it a 50 yard and in kinda thing though.
Okay, so what do you guys think about the .357 for deer?
It can work
I think it a 50 yard and in kinda thing though.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Here we get into extreme and exaggerated examples. It proves nothing but the inexperience of the person making the statement.
FACT: A .44Spl launching a 250gr cast bullet at 900fps will kill any deer that walks deader than fried chicken. It does this without expansion, from any angle and without eardrum shattering blast. I am fairly certain that this does not constitute "overkill". In fact, it will result in less bloodshot meat than a rapidly expanding, high velocity .357 load.
I'm also fairly certain that .500's have not been submitted as a viable alternative to the .357.
That said, it is far more desirable and ethical to use more than enough gun than too little.
I have NEVER had a shortage of appropriate bullets for the .44's and .45's as compared to the .357. FACT is that one can literally hunt everything from rabbits to elephant with three or four different bullets.
Versatility is not subjective at all. It is purely objective. How it applies to the individual is subjective.
I've only been hunting with handguns for 30yrs so maybe I've missed something but if I were hunting small game with a big bore, I'd be using cast bullets at low velocities and not be wasting as much meat as a hyper velocity .22LR. Not "blowing away" anything or irresponsible in the least. Of course, this is purely hypothetical, no one actually does this.
It's all relative and the .44 is so much more on deer than the .357.
I hunt virtually everything with handguns and I can assure you I'm not messin' around.
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
I wouldn't hesitate to use a heavy 357 on a whitetail with a good shot and reasonable distance.
Deer aren't that hard to kill. They may run a bit.
But then again I could hunt in my back yard with a claw hammer.
Deer aren't that hard to kill. They may run a bit.
But then again I could hunt in my back yard with a claw hammer.
Place we hunt now, might get one chance at a buck.
My avatar deer was 75 yards and thread the needle, and done on the quick.
If I had been toting a .357 mag handgun I'd not have shot.
Hell, if I had an iron sighted .44 mag handgun, I'd not have shot.
My old spot was great.
Recurves and Handguns added fun.
Have taken a few deer with SBH and 629. Only one with a SRH.
They worked. Used to blast chucks with em too.
My current spot I like toting a rifle.
The little 8 I shot this yr was on the move in thick stuff. Scope and stable platform made for an easy shot IMHO.
My avatar deer was 75 yards and thread the needle, and done on the quick.
If I had been toting a .357 mag handgun I'd not have shot.
Hell, if I had an iron sighted .44 mag handgun, I'd not have shot.
My old spot was great.
Recurves and Handguns added fun.
Have taken a few deer with SBH and 629. Only one with a SRH.
They worked. Used to blast chucks with em too.
My current spot I like toting a rifle.
The little 8 I shot this yr was on the move in thick stuff. Scope and stable platform made for an easy shot IMHO.
YA see there was this guy named elmer and a long long time ago he did a bunch of testing with the 44spl on all sorts of critters. Well anyway to make a long story short he ended up making a bullet design that's still popular to this day and his load was +/-1200fps with the bullet he designed, namely the 429421.
I'm going to have to go with elmer on this 1.
Last edited by a moderator:
There is some controversy about this topic. Purportedly, Phil Sharpe actually designed that bullet. It started out as a 173 grain .35 caliber semi-wadcutter on a Lyman mold. He didn't put his name on the bullet when he submitted it to Lyman. Phil Sharpe was a genius, with great grasp on ballistics and bullet design. It was Lyman that attached Keith's name to the 429421 which was Sharpe's design. If you can locate an early Lyman catalog, the 429421 was not listed as the Keith bullet until sometime later (after it's inception). Not taking anything away from Elmer Keith it's just that I believe much is attributed to him that he had nothing or little to do with.
Also, Keith was not a handgun hunter and he viewed hunting with a revolver as a weapon of opportunity.
Last edited:
@forrest r - I edited the snark out of your post. And check your inbox...
Last edited:
OP
OP
mcb
Member
I think because I came to revolvers first, as a toy for playing UPSPSA and IDPA with, and second as a CCW/Woods/Hunting tool, I have always steered away from lead SWC/Keith/Sharp style bullets. I remember the first match after getting my 627. The only ammo I had for it was some re-manufactured 38 Special SWC. The 38 Short Colt Brass and RN bullet where still inbound and I just had to shoot the new blaster at the next club match. Having just transition from a 625 with 45 ACP round nose bullets the SWC bullets, on long 38 Special mixed head stamp cases, flopping around loose on the moonclips, was a nightmare. 9 out of 10 times I would throw a moonclip at the cylinder those big flat noses would dance on the face of the cylinder or the shoulder of the SWC would catch on the edge of the cylinder and the whole moonclip would go catty-wumpus. It was an exercise in frustration. I use a nice long round nose polymer coated 160gr bullet (it started life as a 38 Super bullet) now and the reloads are almost as good as my old 625. For hunting/woods I have always just loaded JHP. The XTPs have always worked well for me so I have stuck with them.
Last edited:
OK????
I was just told by a moderator here about your (actually craigC & MaxP) vast knowledge of the use of handguns, the bullets they use and handloading in general.
The watered down version.
In 1937 sharpe being SSSSOOOOOOO inspired by Elmer's swc/lyman designs. He wanted a lighter bullet and didn't want to use the 358431 hb version of the keith bullet. So he designed a swc +/- 16% shorter. A link to what really happened.
http://www.lasc.us/FryxellMagnumPerformance.htm
A link to the 1929 lyman mold catalog on page #90 you can clearly see the 429421 & 429422 molds being advertised with elmer keiths name there quote "Keith special bullet " along with designed by elmer keith
http://castpics.net/dpl/index.php/the-library/moulds/30-mold-catalogs-of-old/104-1929-ideal-catalog
I'm not even going to touch the "keith was not a handgun hunter".
- Status
