357 CCWs a white elephant?

[jad0110]

Though I've never fired a sub 20 oz .357 Magnum (and I really don't care to), I've done so in guns like my 2.5" Model 66 and a 2.25" Ruger SP101. It certainly lets you know it is there, but I don't find them to be painful to shoot.

That said, I still don't use .357 ammo for SD. I am as accurate with .357 or .38, however my recovery time just isn't as good with .357s. I'm getting close on heavier revolvers such as my 4" Model 19, 686 or 28. But I don't consider myself proficient enough to carry .357s. So I stick to good .38 or .44 special options that offer at least 12" of penetration, and I honestly feel perfectly well armed.

Granted, if the crap is about to hit the fan, I'd rather have my 12 gauge or my AR.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Other than some being limited to certain bullet weights, I know of no reliability problems with the revolvers themselves. I have fired enough full power .357s through a Ruger SP101 to know I really won't like them in a gun weighing half as much. If a handgun is miserable, painful or even debilitating to shoot, you won't practice with it. And you aren't going to magically get better in a real gunfight.

 

[pendennis]

I carry a Model 65, with a 3" barrel as a daily CCW. It's loaded with .38 Special +P 158gr LSWCHP. I also keep a Model 66-1, 2 1/2" barrel at home with WW 158gr JHP, .357 Magnums. Both are ideal carry revolvers.

 

[Elm Creek Smith]

I carry a short-barreled .357 Magnum revolver daily. Inside my home, it's loaded with +P loads to keep from deafening everyone. Outside, it's .357 Magnum all the way.

I don't feel "under-gunned."


ECS

 

[GJgo]

Years ago I carried one of those S&W scandium J-frame snubbies. It was brutal & not reliable. Sold it.

After that I carried a short barreled SP101 357. Nicer to shoot. Traded it off for a 686 6 shot with a 4" barrel. Great gun, but a little to big to carry. Sold it off eventually.

Now I sometimes carry a 686 w/ the 2.5" barrel & 7 shot cylinder. It also has a more compact Houge grip. I can easily carry this IWB, even with shorts & a T-shirt as long as I have a good belt on. I have no problem handling it, shooting it, or taking follow up shots. If I run out of rounds it's still a solid chunk of steel. Don't think the only 357 carry options are J frames, folks. If you can I highly recommend this combination.

For those who talk down on 357s with 2-3" barrels & compare them to 38s & 9s, I bet you know a lot about things you don't actually have. I've owned, carried & loaded for 38s & 9s as well. Sorry, but they don't compare.

 

[BehindTheIronCurtain]

My .357 LCR with 158 Grain Fiocchi Extrema XTP 357 loads with Hornady Bullets.. You decide if the recoil is too much.

VIDEO

Very impressive, but you were in a range with no stress and shooting at paper.

 

[Big JJ]

Always buy the 357 if you have the choice over just a 38special. There is nothing wrong with the 38 special if that is what you want. The 357 just gives you more versatility in ammo choices. I shoot a Ruger 357 LCR 2 inch. The 357 is a stronger built gun and will last longer because it has to handle the higher pressure of the 357 caliber. I shoot 357 loads outside and I can control the recoil without a problem. When at home I always load 38 special +P’s because I do not want the concussion to blow out my ears. I reload 357 and 38 special rounds for that gun. This gives me the choice of shooting range rounds between 650fps and 1300 fps for about 15 cents per round (that’s versatility). In the end the gun has to be right for you but if all things are equal choose the 357. The weight difference in the 38special and the 357 is only about two and a half ounces. You can carry either one in a pocket all day and not know it’s even there.

 

[JohnKSa]

My .357 LCR with 158 Grain Fiocchi Extrema XTP 357 loads with Hornady Bullets.. You decide if the recoil is too much.

My personal opinion, for whatever it's worth is that the recoil is too much. The reason I say that is because you have to reacquire your grip after every shot. I wouldn't carry a gun/load combination that prevented me from shooting rapid/accurate followup shots, and the first step in achieving that goal is being able to maintain a shooting grip all the way through a shot string.

For comparison, in the next video with the GP100, you are able to maintain a shooting grip on the pistol through the entire shot string without having to readjust your grip after each shot.

 

[jon_in_wv]

My .357 LCR with 158 Grain Fiocchi Extrema XTP 357 loads with Hornady Bullets.. You decide if the recoil is too much.

Based on the video you posted I would have to say yes. The grouping was nice but your rate of fire was WAY too slow for any type of defensive scenario and you were unable to maintain any type of proper grip with your off hand. I could produce the same groups with my M&P 9c or my 3913, which are just as easily concealed, in a fraction of the amount of time it took you with the LCR.

 

[drunkensobriety]

You know, that's one caliber I've never had the opportunity to shoot. I've shot 9mm luger and mak, 7.62mm tok, .38 special, .38 super, .380, .40 S&W, .45 acp and .44 mag. I really should invest in a model 27 in .357. maybe one of the police magnum trade ins (if there's any left to be found anywhere).

Now, more pertaining to the original poster. I have fired a detective .38 special DOA with a super short 2" snub barrel. It caused more than twice as much muzzle rise as my commander sized 1911. So .357 in an ultra light and ultra short package: I don't think recoil is the problem so much as the muzzle rise is. It's really the shear volume of unexploded gunpowder at the muzzle causing a ridiculous muzzle flash and blast.

Not to mention the effectiveness (and point there of) to using something like a .357 magnum is reduced to nill when fired from ultra short barrels. .357 only works really well when you burn off all the gunpowder: at which point you can get the heavier 158 gr to 180 grain projectiles moving at pretty high speeds and thus it hits like a hammer. Not only do you get great accuracy on target but you'll have deep penetration and heavy duty momentum.

.357 wasn't developed as a man stopper: the .455 webley was, .357 was designed for game hunting with a powerful pistol.

Federal .357 mag 158 gr. Hydra-Shok JHP from a 2 inch barrel is only moving at 914 FPS (BBTI figures). power factor 144.

Federal 9mm Luger 147 gr. Hydra-Shok JHP from a 2 inch barrel is 837 FPS (BBTI figures). power factor 123.

On the other hand, that same .357 load from a S&W 686 with 4" barrel, 1248 FPS. 197 power factor.

2 inches of extra barrel results in 36% greater velocity. .357 was never really designed to be used in ultra short barrels: the longer the barrel the greater the velocity will climb for the most part. It has diminished returns after a while, but it still has some amount of gain.

If you're literally going to have a super short barrel and ultra light revolver: it's actually better to get one that you can use moon clips and load auto cartridges in because they're better suited to the task.

Federal .45 ACP 230 gr. Hydra-Shok JHP fired from a S&W 325PD Airlite with 2.5" barrel has a muzzle velocity of 807 FPS. 185 power factor. Compared to all the unburnt gunpowder of the .357 in the same barrel length - which one do you think will produce more recoil and muzzle rise?

-disclaimer- For future references: -DO NOT- actually perform the following experiment. You will experience some level of hearing loss, even from doing it just once.

Here's a fun little experience: try taking one of those ultra snubbie .357's and fire it without ear protection in any conditions dimmer than bright direct sunlight. Basically - a flashbang just went off in front of you, and it's very disorienting. That in and of itself can literally hinder you much more than help you.

Given the choice between the two revolvers: I'd use the .45 because it really doesn't rely on high velocity in order to put stopping power on target. As where the .357 does. It's also going to have less recoil, muzzle blast, muzzle flash and less muzzle rise. Which means faster follow up shots that are more accurately placed.

I don't recommend using a .357 with a less than 4 inch barrel: you're really taking away too much of the cartridges capability otherwise. If however you can comfortably carry a mid sized (4 inch barrel) revolver that's lightweight and use it effectively, I wouldn't hesitate at all to recommend the .357 in just such a firearm.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Again BBTI test figured CANNOT be directly compared to revolvers.

BBTI bbl length reflects a single shot pistol WHICH INCLUDES the chamber. In the case of 357mag this is only a 1/2" barrel as measured on a REVOLVER wich does not include the cylinder length.

http://www.snubnose.info/docs/38-snub_vs_357-snub.htm

This brief report by the late Steven Camp shows that even from a 2.5" bbl 357 bests 9mm from a service sized pistol

posted via mobile device.

 

[lobo9er]

The small short barreled guns such as Rugers SP-101's are a poor choice in reality.

3 inch sp101 180 grain winchester gold partion is a heck of a hiking combo, IMHO of course,

 

[drunkensobriety]

http://www.snubnose.info/docs/38-snub_vs_357-snub.htm

This brief report by the late Steven Camp shows that even from a 2.5" bbl 357 bests 9mm from a service sized pistol

Dale, you clearly didn't pay attention. In my example above of 9mm luger compared to .357 magnum: the magnum still won. Check the post - it hasn't been edited in any way. I never said that the 9mm beat the .357: I was only highlighting what happens to .357 when it IS fired from super short barrels.

Which I summed up later in the post when I stated "I don't recommend using a .357 with a less than 4 inch barrel: you're really taking away too much of the cartridges capability otherwise. If however you can comfortably carry a mid sized (4 inch barrel) revolver that's lightweight and use it effectively, I wouldn't hesitate at all to recommend the .357 in just such a firearm. "

Also, I was only using the BBTI figures as a yard stick, not an exacting set of stated numbers. It's a simple concept: shorter barrel = slower velocities. I was only detailing that phenomena. More to the point, to further demonstrate I also held up as example from BBTI their results of .357 mag being fired from an actual 4 inch barreled REVOLVER.

Meanwhile; lets do a comparison of my final point v.s. the article you dug up.

As in my original post "Federal .45 ACP 230 gr. Hydra-Shok JHP fired from a S&W 325PD Airlite with 2.5" barrel has a muzzle velocity of 807 FPS. 185 power factor."

As from your article: "Handload: Rucker 158-grain CSWC: 1100 ft/sec". power factor 173.

In a super short barreled revolver you're still going to put more stopping power on target by relying on a caliber that's less dependent on muzzle velocity to be effective. So once again; I don't recommend .357 in anything shorter than a 4 inch barrel, otherwise go with a softer shooting but higher caliber round that relies less on velocity.

I like it when people argue with me; but I greatly prefer it if we have the -same- argument at the same time. It gets a little hazy when what I'm stating has to do loss of muzzle velocity making something ineffective and what you're arguing about is that .357 beats 9mm. That gets difficult to converse over for two reasons:

1. I never said otherwise, nor did I notice anyone else either.
2. The examples I presented already showed .357 beating the 9mm.

 

[Tony_the_tiger]

"Speer gold dot 135 grain "short barrel" .38+P muzzle velocity of 860 ft/s."

860? That's why I would not trust my life to a wimpy load like factory +P. I tested Winchester +P and El Dorado +P from a 2" gun and got less than 900 FPS. No thank you. Not when the shooting is for real.

Saxonpig, that gold dot round performs pretty well in ballistic testing.

However, I happen to agree that 850 ft/s seems pretty slow.

That is why I use the .38+P DPX round, published velocity of 1050 fps with a 110 grain bullet out of a sub-2" snub and in testing:

HI: 1143
LO: 1091
Average: 1110
Extreme Spread: 52
Standard of Deviation: 19

110 grains is pretty light, but I hope it will get job done and I am quite accurate with it. The 442 is a firearm that is easy for me to conceal at all times in Florida. I use .357 for light woods carry and my wife carries DPX in a snubby .44 special, which was my carry piece until she took it.

 

[joneb]

110 grains is pretty light, but I hope it will get job done

Does this DPX meet the FBI's 16" penetration test ?

 

[Tony_the_tiger]

I'm not familiar with the FBI standards or their testing medium, but in the second link of my original post on this thread, the reviewers noted that the .38+P Corbon DPX round penetrated through 4 layers of denim and then through 14.5 - 15.5 inches of 10% gelatin. In subsequent testing, they shot it through the door of a dodge dakota and it penetrated the steel, subsequently traveling into the vehicle.

 

[NoirFan]

I think of the .357 snub as a super heavy-duty .38 special. The "magnum" stamped on the side gives me the confidence that it will handle the heaviest .38 loads I can stuff into it. Would I actually use magnum loads in a snub? Probably not.

 

[The Bushmaster]

Well Gee BehindTheIronCurtain...They just won't let us go out and practice on real people. So paper is all we can use.

Wait a minute...Are you volunteering to be a moving target?

The more you practice on paper the better you will become. If your mind set is good and you have practiced. Stress probably will work for you. I know, having some experience with this.

 

[Deaf Smith]

If you guys are worried about flash you will find many premium .357 magnum loads use LOW FLASH powders.

And yea, I like the DPX ammo (but mucho $$.) My preference is Buffalo Bore .38 158gr LSWHPs at 1000 fps from a 2 inch. They chrono out of my 2 3/4 inch Speed Six at 1100 fps so they are not shabby at all (and low flash to boot.)

A soft lead SWC hollowpoint gas checked slug at 1000 + from a 2 1/2 Combat Magnum is plenty and Buffalo Bore delivers that with no where near Magnum pressures.

Deaf

 

[R.W.Dale]

Dale, you clearly didn't pay attention. In my example above of 9mm luger compared to .357 magnum: the magnum still won. Check the post - it hasn't been edited in any way. I never said that the 9mm beat the .357: I was only highlighting what happens to .357 when it IS fired from super short barrels.

Which I summed up later in the post when I stated "I don't recommend using a .357 with a less than 4 inch barrel: you're really taking away too much of the cartridges capability otherwise. If however you can comfortably carry a mid sized (4 inch barrel) revolver that's lightweight and use it effectively, I wouldn't hesitate at all to recommend the .357 in just such a firearm. "

Also, I was only using the BBTI figures as a yard stick, not an exacting set of stated numbers. It's a simple concept: shorter barrel = slower velocities. I was only detailing that phenomena. More to the point, to further demonstrate I also held up as example from BBTI their results of .357 mag being fired from an actual 4 inch barreled REVOLVER.

Meanwhile; lets do a comparison of my final point v.s. the article you dug up.

As in my original post "Federal .45 ACP 230 gr. Hydra-Shok JHP fired from a S&W 325PD Airlite with 2.5" barrel has a muzzle velocity of 807 FPS. 185 power factor."

As from your article: "Handload: Rucker 158-grain CSWC: 1100 ft/sec". power factor 173.

In a super short barreled revolver you're still going to put more stopping power on target by relying on a caliber that's less dependent on muzzle velocity to be effective. So once again; I don't recommend .357 in anything shorter than a 4 inch barrel, otherwise go with a softer shooting but higher caliber round that relies less on velocity.

I like it when people argue with me; but I greatly prefer it if we have the -same- argument at the same time. It gets a little hazy when what I'm stating has to do loss of muzzle velocity making something ineffective and what you're arguing about is that .357 beats 9mm. That gets difficult to converse over for two reasons:

1. I never said otherwise, nor did I notice anyone else either.
2. The examples I presented already showed .357 beating the 9mm.

My point is how exactly is a short barreled 357 inadequate or as you put it (effectiveness reduced to nil) when it still beats the 9x19 from a full sized service pistol? I'm comparing weapons of the same caliber you're the one throwing a 45 load into the comparison for some reason.

Another thing is your reliance on power factor to indicate anything beyond ipsic scores.

Of course there are more powerful rounds and of course you give up velocity for the convience of a short barrel. But all things being equal the 357 is ALWAYS more powerful than its weaker lower pressure counterparts in the same length barrel. Any differences that arise from changing barrel lengths then become a firearm issue not an ammunition one.

Fwiw I carry a 5" 357 that 125 g golden sabers leave the muzzle north of 1400fps and this is a weak load.

posted via mobile device.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by R. W. Dale: This brief report by the late Steven Camp shows that even from a 2.5" bbl 357 bests 9mm from a service sized pistol

In terms of ballistics, yes.

Consider this from a few years ago. Excepts:

"I don't think the bad guy will notice the difference between a 357 and a 38 +p but you will...."

I WISH EVERYONE WHO WAS GOING TO CARRY CONCEALED WAS FORCED TO SHOOT A FEW BOWLING PIN MATCHES, or shoot some IDPA or ICORE matches!

...You'll learn to shoot as fast as you can, but with utter accuracy (pins approximate the vital heart lung area of a person, and are set chest high at TEN YARDS).

...You'll learn that too powerful a load in a handgun that's too light will make you LOSE when you go up against other competitors . . . or against thugs too.

Those flame-throwing, hard-kicking .357 snubbies are gonna twist the gun to weird angles in your grip, causing the remaining shots to be off target due to improper grip. ... And yes, you'll have a much poorer chance to walk away from a real fight because of your chosen gun (a super-light snubbie) and too stout-kicking of a load!

YOU DO NOT NEED A .357 TO DO THE JOB!

I'll take a .38 or 9MM any day over a lightweight snubbie with magnum loads.

 

[wheelgunslinger]

2 points that I don't see being made succinctly here are:

1. Weapon size varies with the individual, with regard to how large of a wheelgun one can carry and conceal comfortably.

2. The recoil might bite when at the range, but during an adrenaline dump and other physiological effects of a real shooting, you really won't even register any pain associated with shooting. you probably won't even hear the report.

 

[JimStC]

My EDC is a S&W 627. It is an 8 round .357 magnum. It weighs 37.6 oz empty. 2.625" barrel
In a good holster with a good belt I don't even notice it. Very concealable even with the large cylinder.
I couldn't care less about recoil or muzzle blast. I practice with it weekly and put 95% of my shots in an IPSC target A zone. These are timed, fast, DA shots. 10-20 yards although if it were to be used in a self defense scenario, I expect it will be at a shorter distance.
Simply put, it is a matter of practice and mental discipline....
Might not be for everyone but sure suits me.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by wheelgunslinger: The recoil might bite when at the range, but during an adrenaline dump and other physiological effects of a real shooting, you really won't even register any pain associated with shooting.

Pain isn't the issue. The question is, how quickly can you get two shots into each of two rapidly moving targets and be prepared to follow up with more very quickly if necessary? The objective is very, very rapidly.

People seem to confuse the fuss and flash and boom at the shooter's end, and/or the explosiveness of the impact of the bullets on a plastic water jug, with the effect on a human attacker. When one considers that handguns are not as effective as portrayed on the screen, that it is unlikely that one will be able to choose the point of impact on an attacker with greater precision than "somewhere in center mass", and that two shots in the same lung, for example, would be unlikely to stop a really determined attacker quickly enough for comfort, it is the speed of getting multiple hits that counts the most, given adequate penetration. The additional penetration offered by a .357 magnum pver a lighter load would be valuable in stopping an animal or penetrating plat glass or a car body, but it is likely of little if any real use in self defense, and as pointed out by S&WFAN and TAB in the above link, the additional recoil can prove detrimental.

In the high performance defensive pistol training in which I have participated, those who use full-size 9MM service pistols invariably do best. Of course, not everyone can carry one of those concealed.

....you probably won't even hear the report.

And if you shoot indoors, you may not be able to here anything else for a while afterward.

 

[357 Terms]

In the high performance defensive pistol training in which I have participated, those who use full-size 9MM service pistols invariably do best. Of course, not everyone can carry one of those concealed

And that is what it really comes down to.

Most SD shootings wont exceed 3 shots, or 10 feet. Having the most effective round you can access and shoot well is the most important aspect. (along with being able to comfotably conceal)
For me it is a 357 snubby loaded with 125grn Barnes bullets that I know will be VERY effective, shoot to point of aim, and be controlable.