357 Mag Vs 44 Mag

[BOOM-BOOM]

Ok I may not be the brightest star in the sky, so please bare with me.

From what I read the 357 is rated as the #1 one shot man-stopper. That being said, then why is it when someone asks about carrying a 357 in the woods they're told that a 44mag would be better..

My Question is, what can a 44mag bring down that a 357mag cannot..I realize it may take a few more rounds with a 357mag then it might with a 44mag. but its the end results that matter.

Also what if I had a rifle chambered in 357mag, would that level the playing field any????

 

[Lucky]

No thread off-hand but a couple guys did some math with .357 carbines and found ballistics approached that of 30-30's. .357 did great out of a longer barrel, if you find the thread please post it as I'd like to read it again too, one talked about different lengths of barrels and even measured what length 9mm begins to slow down.

For .44 the point is why carry in the woods. Defence against people or animals? Against bear it's assumed that there won't be time for several shots, so the ones that hit have to hit hard. .44 goes deeper heavier faster. Bears are tough and move fast and bullets have to mess them up badly to stop them attacking, even headshots can glance off. Nothing is certain, every situation will be different, but even .44 is thought to be less certain to stop a bear in than desired. Where I am the bears are protected now so not hunted much, but those that do just use rifles.

 

[American_Pit_Bull]

My Question is, what can a 44mag bring down that a 357mag cannot..I realize it may take a few more rounds with a 357mag then it might with a 44mag. but its the end results that matter.

Hell, why do our troops carry .223's when it isn't even considered a good deer round? In some states it is illegal to hunt with a .223 because it is under-powered...

.357mags are good against human targets and .44mags aren't usually in the same rankings because of the lack of data. You will not catch many LEOs carrying a .44mag. Especially today.

 

[DENALI]

The .357 magnum in it's full power 158gr loading was designed to exit a 4' barrel in the vicinity of 1500fps actual muzzle velocity. That will penetrate the skulls of plains Buffalo and any errant Brown/Grizzly Bear.
The .44 is considered way to heavy of a load and demonstrably harder to control to be of any real value against human targets, of course it will also work just fine in that capacity if called on for it.........

 

[hnk45acp]

Bears, mountain lions, etc are a lot harder to bring down than people, thus the .44

 

[Timthinker]

DENALI just make my point. In terms of raw power from comparable barrel lengths, the .44 Magnum would prove superior. But what about rapid, accurate successive shots? In this instance, the .357 has the edge. To make a .44 Magnum revolver controllable, one would need to load it with .44 Specials or lighter magnum loadings. Please do not misunderstand, the .44 Magnum is a powerful handgun round, but there are other factors to consider as well.


Timthinker

 

[shooter429]

Even with the advances in bullet design

And improvements in factory ammo such as Buffalo Bore, the .357 still cannot produce the same raw "horsepower" (for you car junkies) as the +P+ .44, making it less than ideal for Bruin encounters involving species such as Ursus arctos horribilis/Ursus arctos arctos, for example. Reliable .357 wheelies are great for use against lighter bodied predators, however, such as Homo sapiens, Canis lupus and C. domesticus, as well as Felis concolor and Ursus americanus, to name a few of the more dangerous critters you might meet.

In short, you would be foolish to chase AK brown bear with a .357 or even try to repel one with it or any lesser caliber, but if you are living in the South, the .357 is plenty for red wolves, coyotes, Cougar and hippies.

For those of us that do encounter the big bears from time to time, we need the power that only a .44 +P+ or larger handgun can deliver.

Shooter429

 

[MikePGS]

.357 did great out of a longer barrel, if you find the thread please post it as I'd like to read it again too, one talked about different lengths of barrels and even measured what length 9mm begins to slow down.

I think this might be the thread your looking for http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=152659

 

[Confederate]

The matter is as simple as is relativism.

A .44 slug will hit a man and go through him, exiting with great force and wasting whatever is left of the big bullets on whatever's left. The .357 125 gr JHP will generally hit a man, then stop somewhere in the body, having expent all of its considerable energy in that person. If you could figure out a way for a .44 mag to stay in the human body, then it would be a super duper man stopper, but no luck so far. Anyway, it's all about energy transfer, and the .357 125 gr JHP does the best job.

 

[BOOM-BOOM]

Yes I understand that the 357 was a better man stopper then the 44 because of the over penetration thing.

What I want to know can the 357mag be used in the wild as a replacement of the 44mag.

Or would it take a 357mag lever to even the playing field.

 

[MechAg94]

I wouldn't say it is a direct replacement at all, but unless you are worried about big bears, I would say it is fine for animal defense. Like others said, use the larger rounds.

There are no bears where I grew up. The worst threats run on two legs. Dogs are probably the next worst. The only relative of mine that ever got killed in those woods was killed by two legged animals.

 

[glockman19]

Hell, why do our troops carry .223's when it isn't even considered a good deer round?

Because it takes 2 soldiers to rescue one fallen soldier so it's strategically better to wound than to kill. Also, as discussed in other threads, you can carry more 5.56 than .308 and finally 5.56 can kill.

To addres the OP, I specifically have a .44 mag revolver & lever acvtion when camping in the sierra. .357 can certianly kill many animals, deer, pig but I wouldn't want to take the chance with a bear. You may get good velocity from a lever action but the stopping power of the .44 over the .357 with Mountain lion, Elk, Bear is undeniable

 

[JShirley]

Because it takes 2 soldiers to rescue one fallen soldier so it's strategically better to wound than to kill.

There is NO historical basis for this as a driver for the 5.56*. More gunshop commandoing.

The .44 Mag could be more effective as a manstopper with a lightweight, rapidly expanding bullet.



*Instead, the reason for the 5.56x45mm is a 300 meter cartridge that can be carried in bulk, and was more controllable in full auto.

 

[wickedsprint]

Aren't most deer bigger than us..so while a .223 might work ok on people, it makes sense why they might not be ideal on a larger animal..I guess.

 

[jmr40]

I sold all of my .357's a few years ago and decided it was easier to just use the .44 mags. My 4" 629 is only slightly larger than the 686 and GP-100 I sold. With good .44 special ammo it is my "opinion" that the .44 is a superior manstopper than the .357 with much less recoil and muzzle blast. If I need a handgun for hunting or protection from wildlife the .44 mag. loads are a big step up from the .357.

 

[Ben Shepherd]

A few things:

Momentum- A 240-300 grain slug out of a 44 will go A LOT deeper penetration wise than a 158 grain out of a 357 given similar slug construction and compareable velocity. Will also be more likely to go through anything, including bone.

So if the BIG bear decides to chew on you and all you have is a bad angle shot? I'd have much more confidence in the 44.


Diameter-A bigger hole is a bigger hole. No way around it.

Environment-Urban setting means that overpenetration must be considered. Out in the wilderness, it's much less of a concern.

The average woodland critter that does try to eat you is a whole lot bigger, far tougher, and much more motivated than your average urban perp. He also doesn't understand brandishing very well. If it comes to that point you will have to shoot, showing him your gun does nothing.

Concealment-A Dirty Harry cannon around town is honestly a pain. Trust me on this, I CCW a 7.5" 357 redhawk occasionally. Just because I can. Outdoors, who cares if it shows. And you can wear enough belt to hold it up without sticking out.

 

[Gunz]

Well, if each round were rated at 1200 fps, the 44 mag at 240gr will be like a Suburban, and the 158gr 357mag will be like an EQuinox.

The Equinox will slam into the target and crumple and wrap itself around what it hits.

The Suburban will slam and mangle, but will probably also bore through what it hits, if there is not enough mass to capture and absorb all of the sububan's mass.

I admit that 44 mag can be overkill for mammals under 200 lbs.

 

[dirtdog]

Diameter-A bigger hole is a bigger hole. No way around it.

That is the way I see it also.

 

[_N4Z_]

There is NO historical basis for this as a driver for the 5.56*. More gunshop commandoing.

1985-6, Ft Sill OK. US Army basic training. Drill sergents given the task to train 70 some recruits, including myself, did in fact make such statements concerning tumbling rounds and wounding. I was there, I heard it, it is part of my history.

Now I am not saying they were right and you are wrong, but I will say there is something more to it than just gunshop commandoing. Sure there may not be in any official doctrine, but it was discussed.

For a long time the gov't denied the existence of neutron type nuke warheads. I saw them first hand, in bunkers, in then W.Germany. That same gov't used your tax dollars to train us to deploy them. Hoorah!

 

[slzy]

i would think any thing that moves in a combat zone will get shot till it stops.

 

[GJgo]

I admit that 44 mag can be overkill for mammals under 200 lbs.

So then.. That cottontail rabbit last weekend? I didn't need the .44?

In Ohio, I imagine that a .357 would prove more than versatile enough for the woods and the street. In other locales something with more juice may be preferred.

But then, shouldn't everyone have at least one gun that they don't really need?

 

[Quoheleth]

for Bruin encounters involving species such as Ursus arctos horribilis/Ursus arctos arctos, for example. Reliable .357 wheelies are great for use against lighter bodied predators, however, such as Homo sapiens, Canis lupus and C. domesticus, as well as Felis concolor and Ursus americanus, to name a few of the more dangerous critters you might meet.

Shooter429: Latin...showoff

Pax Vobiscum...

Q

 

[polekitty]

Now, here comes an opinion from someone with zero experience with big things like bears. Going back to the reason our armed forces switched from .38 to .45acp (many years ago)---I think if I came nose to nose with a bear I’d want the .44mag. Like you guys say, the .357 would likely kill him, but wouldn’t the.44mag come closer to stopping him (even if it didn’t instantly kill him) before he stopped you?

 

[MechAg94]

223 can kill a deer just fine. It just requires more accuracy to make sure it is a quick and humane kill. Larger more powerful cartridges make bigger wounds and are more forgiving for bad shots.

 

[BigBlock]

I think a lot of people overrate the .44 mag recoil and the problem of repeat shots. I don't know, maybe a lot of you have little girl wrists? Even though I'm generally a bad shot because I can't see and I'm over caffeinated...I can unload six rounds in my single action .44 in the same general area (say, the size of a bear) in a very short amount of time.