.357 mag/.38 vs .223

[JimmerJammerMrK]

It will mostly be a range/plinking gun, but I am also interested in it for home defense, as it will be, for now, my only firearm.

Some day I will own a handgun, although I doubt my first one will be a revolver.

EDIT: Sorry for the double post.

 

[eldon519]

The operative words being "energy levels" and "loaded", not store bought ammo. Like I said, I'm not arguing how bad the .357 in a rifle is but how good it is with limitations. I just don't want anyone making it out to be something it isn't, because as sure as you do there will that person that thinks it is a 200 yard gun just because someone else said they use their 30-30 out to 200 yards and they read the .357 is as good as the 30-30.

Truth is I've never used the Buffalo Bore ammo so it is wrong of me to say they are not truthful but you have to admit the speeds they give for the 158 and 180 grain bullets sure raises a eye brow. I'm loading 180 grain hard cast lead with gas checks and Hornady 180 grain XTP's and I can't get enough powder of any kind in there to reach the speeds they claim. Sure would like to know what they are using........ a little nitro maybe.

Buffalo Bore ammo is store bought, and it can match the energy levels of all but the hottest .30-30.

The Buffalo Bore 158 grain at 2150fps gives 1622 ft-lbs. That's a chrono'ed value out of a 18.5" Marlin 1894.

Now yeah, that 170-grain bullet at 2200 fps and the 150-grain load at 2390fps you mentioned would put the .30-30 well ahead of the .357, except.....that's not really what they do. Out of a 20" Winny, you're looking at 2012 fps and 2234 fps respectively. That puts the 170-grain energy level below that of the BB 158 .357 and the 150 grain right about equal to it.

There are a couple premium .30-30 loads that it can not match, (Federal Fusion 150 and Hornady Leverevolution 160), but your average or even slightly above-average .30-30 isn't going to do any better in terms of energy.

And Buffalo Bore doesn't have to load them over allowable pressure, they just load them with non-canister grade powders not available to us. Same goes for the Leverevolution and Fusion.

Here's an article that sheds some light on some of these .30-30 loads:
http://www.realguns.com/archives/120.htm

Maybe they do better in some guns, but it's not uncommon for factory ammo to fall well below advertised ballistics. On the other hand, Buffalo Bore is one of the few companies I've heard of that from time to time actually delivers more performance than advertised.

 

[ArmedBear]

Note that most ammo manufacturers use a 24" test barrel, not a real rifle.

Why shouldn't they? It's not THEIR fault if your real-world rifle doesn't shoot quite as well as a test barrel. They're just stating what the ammo is CAPABLE of under laboratory conditions, not what it will do in your rifle. They're not lying; they state the test conditions in the literature.

Buffalo Bore, on the other hand, publishes test velocities measured with actual guns. Their Marlin 1894C test is actually done with one. So I'd expect that, unless they are actually lying, the performance should be as-advertised.

 

[Gohon]

I don't know what length test barrel Winchester uses but my 336 is almost identical with their published loads. You're hanging up on fps when talking about energy when there are other factors at play. A 30-30 150 grain will leave the barrel at 2390 fps with 1902 fpe. Thats 2200/1827 for the 170 grain. At 100 yards the 30-30 150 grain will arrive at 1376 fpe and the 170 grain at 1370 fpe. The 158 BB arrives at 1177 fpe. The 30-30 150 and 170 grain will arrive at the 150 yard line with the same energy the .357 arrives at the 100 yard line. And last but not least is the BC of the bullet. A high BC (pointed bullet) of the leverevolution rounds allows the 160 grain bullet they sell to retain it's energy (fpe) for a greater distance than normal blunt/rounded nosed bullets. The stubby bullets of the .357 will never be as good as the longer rounded nose bullets of the 30-30's .308 bullets.

A good hunting round out to 100 yards with broad side or quartering away shots on deer the .357 is. A fun gun to carry,plink and load for it is. Here in my state there is no draw for deer tags. Just buy a tag over the counter for one buck and one doe. Can shoot either sex on the last day of the season. Two deer for firearms season, two for muzzle loader, and two for bow season makes it easy for me. If I had to draw in a lottery system I might need to look towards something like BB but fortunatly I don't have to do that so I load my own, or I probable would stay on the safe side and go with the 30-30 or something larger. So far I've only taken 3 deer with the .357 rifle load and all three of those were between 60-80 yards. All one shot kills with no tracking required.

You can load it down and hunt squirrels or you can load it up for deer and hogs. But, a 30-30 it is not. Close maybe............ but still not there.

Just so you, understand I prefer to hunt deer in my wooded area with the .357 rifle over other guns at my disposal. I's simply more fun to carry and shoot. But I can't put enough lipstick on it to make it act like something it is not.

 

[eldon519]

I think everyone here understands that the .30-30 is a better long range caliber. We are all just saying that the .357 magnum can produce .30-30 range energies which you disagreed with. I don't think anyone ever said it would carry that energy farther or shoot flatter. And when it comes to muzzle energy, mass and velocity are all there is to look at.

All I was saying is that the .357 can produce energies in the .30-30 range, which it can.

 

[michael_aos]

9mm carbine is fun to shoot, quiet, and plenty of power for plinking.

Mine even likes the Hirtenberger L7A1 9mm +P+ mild-steel jacketed ammo.

 

[scubie02]

apparently the marlin's are in demand--tried to order one today and ths hop owner called his distributor who said they'd just gotten a shipment in July 2nd but had already sold all of them, and he hoped to get another bunch in by the end of the month...damn the waiting!

 

[YodaVader]

It will mostly be a range/plinking gun, but I am also interested in it for home defense, as it will be, for now, my only firearm.

For the uses mentioned above I would just get the 357 for now (if they are readily available) and this is coming from an owner of three .223s! Two are bolt guns and one a TC single shot "handgun". The .223s I use more for precision target shooting. They all have scopes. If I were to get a .223 for plinking purposes I would like to give the little CZ a try.

I did have the pleasure of borrowing a friend's Marlin 1894C 357 mag a few years back and it was a very fun rifle to shoot and the accuracy was pretty respectable to boot! His was an older Microgroove barrel version with an aperture or peep sight. Marlin 357s are hard to come by around here but I hope to add one to the collection one day.

I used to own the 44 mag Marlin. It was an accurate rifle but for plinking and possible home defense I think the 1894C 357 mag would be the better choice.

 

[Gohon]

And when it comes to muzzle energy, mass and velocity are all there is to look at.

That is true............. been a long time since I shot anything at muzzle distance though.

I guess it is kind like the old .308 and 30-06 debate. Both pretty much comparable to a certain point, then the picture changes. Anyway, good huntin and keep it safe.

 

[JimmerJammerMrK]

I'm going to bump this to see if I get any .44 mag vs .357 mag comments. If not, I'll let it get buried.

 

[AStone]

Also, how does the .357 compare to a .223 in terms of power?

Ford F-350 at 70 v Honda Civic doing 90.

I'm in the Ford.

Note that my comparison is
applicable to the original
.357 v .223 question
rather than the revised
.44 v .357 question of post 60.