357 Magnum vs 45 ACP

Status
Not open for further replies.
I sometimes carry each one. It depends on what I'm doing and where I am. A .45 ACP is easily concealed in an IWB holster and is very comfortable. My .357 has a 4" barrel and is equally comfortable to carry but a whole lot less concealable. However, I have the utmost confidence in both. I do tend to take my .357 where I might have to shoot longer ranges. I always take it when I travel even though I may also be carrying a .45.

Ditto on Texagun's comment. Welcome to the Forum!
 
.45ACP versus .357 Mag

With regard to power the .357 Mag beats the .45 hands down. There is also a test called the TKO or Taylor Knock Out value. I don't have the formula for it right in front of me, but if you google it I'm sure you can find it. That is supposed to remedy the difference in bullet size and energy, to determine which load is the most effective. I hope this helps
 
.357 Fed or Rem 125 grain.

.45 is a sissy compromise for those who are afraid to lose their hearing.
 
S&W model 13 (3 in barrel) - length 8 inches, weight 32oz. / Colt LW Commander length 8" weight 26oz (the steel Combat Commander is 33oz). I chose these two as they represent a median for hand filling, controllable, reasonably concealable examples of the .357 and .45. To me, they would probably conceal about the same, given a quality belt and holster. A person could easily find smaller or lighter guns for both calibers, or heavier ones for that matter, but these two represent a compromise that everyone can work from. I could live with either as a defensive gun, but favor the .45 because it cuts a larger wound channel (at least initially), and does so with a lot less muzzle blast than a healthy .357 loading. After firing .357's in tight places, I like the .45 more and more. In any case, to choose the .357 for defense and to feel armed superior to the .45, you'd have to use full .357 loadings, and not lesser .38+P. The .45 clearly outclasses the .38. The choice is yours. Borrow a .45 and .357 (full loads) and be your own judge.
 
...books, schmooks!!! Let's try common sense...bullet placement being the first requirement...if you can put 3 in the right place with a .357 quickly, go for it...I can't...so I load 158gr .38Spl +P LHP by Rem into my GP100 3", and have into all my .357s for years...my hearing was shattered by a snub M19 going off in a police car-a Norma 158 gr. JHP...we couldn't hear for 3 days after...I don't need that much noise/flash/power, unless it's in at least an 18" bbl...I prefer a .45, with 230 Gr. JHP Gold Dots...but the superround in a lot of the tests-the Hydrashock- didn't do the job in at least one case where the perp was hit through a light shirt, missing his heart by a coupla inches...he walked out to the squad car-and sat waiting for the meat wagon...no more Hydrashocks for me...I would confidently face someone who couldn't shoot well with even a .22LRHP...whichever gun you can place shots with best...go for it...I don't belittle a man's weapon even if I've seen him shoot with it....it's not the weapon that ultimately finishes the fight...it's the man....
 
My, my, my...look at all the responses. The .357 packs the greatest punch and works well in putting down deer at up to 100 yards. The .45 has a trajectory like a bowling ball, but offers good penetration and stopping power.

If I had but one shot, and knew I had to put down a bad guy who was going to rip my head off, I'd have to pick a .357 125gr JHP. I'd feel very comfortable, however, with a .45 ACP 185gr JHP, which I consider the best .45 load.
 
The .357mag was originally designed to take out engine blocks.

The .45acp was originally designed to take out Moro zombies.

Now, while I've never seen or heard of any zombies driving cars, in the interest of being prepared, I'd rather take out the zombie's car first, if you know what I mean. ;)
 
I'd rather defend with a 45 acp then a 357 magnum round. The flash, noise and recoil of a 357 are a huge tactical disadvantage. Couple that with the bigger hole made by the 45 acp and I'm sold.
 
"Stronger" does not always mean "better"

Hardest punch between the two? Id say a .357 Magnum loaded with "full house" 125 grain Federal JHP (357B).

However, is this a "practical" load for HD? Opinions vary, but many seem to lean towards the "no" category. Hence, while not offering the "lightning strike" of the 125 Magnum loads, I still prefer .45 ACP JHP overall as I feel its a more controllable, "practical" load while still offering maximum stopping power.


.45 is a sissy compromise for those who are afraid to lose their hearing.
Click to expand...

This is a dumb statement. There is absolutely nothing "sissy" about the .45 ACP round. Hearing issues aside, controllability/practicality has as much to do with it as anything else. If this were not the case, then we would all probably be using .44 Magnums or S&W 500s for HD.

Try educating yourself before making such blatant statements.
 
Last edited:
I'd feel fine with either or:) I like .45's, but I generally carry a .357 revolver. My main reason being that I don't own a .45 yet, and I'm not made of money. The .357 allows me handle different load outs for practice and protection.
I generally load it up with .38 special for daily carry and protection and .357 mag when going out into the woods (cat country). I carry a back up speed loader of .357 in both situations. Muzzle flash and hearing loss are not any concern for me as for HD duty I have a shotgun. If I ever HAVE to fire a .357 unmuffed, well then my ears ringing are going to be the least of my concerns.

Like I said, I like .45s. I've just practiced more with .38/.357 and feel that it suits my current needs better. Six shots of either out of a 4" barrel go right where I tell them to...mostly:eek:
 
doesn't surprize me this thread has gone on for pages
haven't read any of it except the first post today.

I think the first .357 Mag versus .45 ACP article I read
was in Guns & Ammo in the late '60s.

D.D.S.O.S.

All depends on the situation, and personal preference and
what the one is the user can hit the target with.

Had a 686P 4" bbl. - at the range with full house .357 Mag
loads, what was it my shooting buddy siad -"at least 2.5" feet of
muzzle blast and it was slower in recoil recovery for ME than
my 1911 as well as my 625 5" Bbl. .45 ACP +P ( or .45 Auto RIm 250 gr.
@ 900 FPS ). Sold it to a good friend who likes it better than
his 29 - arthritic wrists.

I also have a S&W Model 60 3" Bbl. .357 Mag but the
HD/SD ammo for it is Double Tap .38 Special +P 125 gr. Gold
DOts. I wouldn't want to light off a .357 Mag inside a
building. Heck with the velocity loss for a .357 mag a
good 9mm luger has it all over those shortie Bbl. revos.

Fanning the flames

Randall
 
Both are very powerful rounds. But to compare them in the hopes of resolving which one is a better defensive round, more comfortable to shoot, which is more accurate, etc., etc. is an exercise in futility. I shoot them both and I love them both. They are excellent rounds that do an excellent job.
 
Your all wrong.

The 9x18 Mak in a CZ Vz 82 is the superior defense cartridge/gun on the market! :neener:

Something I learned out of that first Armscor I rented is that if your going to use a .45 ACP 1911 pistol you need to buy QUALITY. The Armscor jumped out of my hands, had stripped threading for the grip bushings that made it hard to hold, the sights were set to the dirt and couldn't be adjusted without tools, and it grabbed after-market magazines with only the G.I. Spec seven-rounders working well. I finally started renting their Kimber 1911 and it's been everything the Armscor was not. Problem: The Armscor would cost $419 from Show Me. The Kimber is over $800.

Meanwhile .357 Magnum revolvers can be found for under $500, and it's apples to oranges. A S&W vs. a Ruger is not something to debate because there is nothing performance wise, price wise, or even reliability wise to make a case for either.

The two rounds are so similar debating their effectiveness is something that should be mute. It's what you want to pay, and what your comfortable with.
 
Last edited:
I would choose the .45ACP... Chuck Taylor has stated that (230gr. ball) falls on the ground right behind the BG. I prefer this to .357 for HD. Do i own a .357 ? Yes, its loaded with shortbarrel golddot .38+P. I dont want to abuse my old K frame.
 
I would choose the .45ACP... Chuck Taylor has stated that (230gr. ball) falls on the ground right behind the BG. I prefer this to .357 for HD. Do i own a .357 ? Yes, its loaded with shortbarrel golddot .38+P. I dont want to abuse my old K frame.
Click to expand...

right behind the bad guy? he's full of it.

the 230 gr fmj that passed through my pelvic bone went an inch into a 2x4 that was 15 ft behind me.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, that's total BS. If a round was that weak, I wouldn't use it for SD or HD. If it BARELY goes through a person and immediately dies, that means if the person is wearing leather and or layers, it might not penetrate at all. You want it to penetrate at leats 12 inches of ballistic gel.

As for .45 vs .357, the real world difference is so little, it's really more of a auto vs revolver question. If you prefer revolvers, you probably want a .357.
 
When I am deer hunting, I don't wear hearing protection. When I shoot my 30-06 during target practice, I always wear hearing protection. Of all the deer I have shot, I can not remember one occassion where my ears were ringing or otherwise hurting, afterwards. I suspect that it would be the same in a self defense situation. In other words, I think that the argument of a .357 magnum being too loud is unfounded.
 
Understand, there is a difference between a rifle fired outdoors, with the point of the origin of the sound almost three feet away from your ears, and a revolver being fired indoors, with the muzzle much closer to your ears, and much pressure and sound being released between the cylinder and forcing cone laterally. A .357 fired indoors without hearing protection pretty much guarantees hearing damage. Is it worth it if it saves your life? Probably. But it doesn't mean that there aren't other guns that will do the job with a lot less likelihood of hearing damage.
 
In other words, I think that the argument of a .357 magnum being too loud is unfounded.
Click to expand...

Back in the day, before I "discovered" hearing protection, I fired off a 4" .357 Magnum loaded with Federal 125 JHPs. The result? After the first round I stopped and went inside to grab a set of ear muffs. Too bad my ears were already singing to me and my hearing acuity had dropped by 20% or more.

Oh, and I was shooting outdoors.

But, back to the main argument. As I mentioned before, I think the overall nod goes to the .357 Magnum, given the appropriate load. However, I still prefer .45 ACP as I simply find it more "practical" from an HD standpoint and I have yet to feel as if I am compromising much at all in going with this choice vs. the .357 Mag. Having said this, I still love the .357 Magnum and always will. In fact, its on my "to do" list as we speak. But, this has nothing to do with any belief of mine that this is a superior load bearing weapon. Rather, its about the versatility/characteristics of the platform itself.

It is true what many here have said in that both of these loads are very effective manstoppers (by reputation), so arguing between the two essentially boils down to platform choice.
 
Last edited:
There has been a documented case in Texas where a police officer's .45 round did not penetrate a tractor-trailer's shell, but a .357 SIG round from a backup officer's gun did, killing the suspect inside. The round's ability to penetrate barriers is the main reason for its adoption by law enforcement agencies. However, other documented police shootings have confirmed the round's ability to not overpenetrate the body, even though ballistic gelatin shows 16 inches (410 mm) of penetration through heavy clothing (125 grain Speer Gold Dot).


This quote is from wikipedia in regards to the .357 sig..yes, I realize this is a different cartridge but it does have similar ballistics. I would guess the results would be very comparable to .357 mag.
 
The "tired" debate continues...but, Im bored, so Ill bite..again

There has been a documented case in Texas where a police officer's .45 round did not penetrate a tractor-trailer's shell, but a .357 SIG round from a backup officer's gun did, killing the suspect inside. The round's ability to penetrate barriers is the main reason for its adoption by law enforcement agencies. However, other documented police shootings have confirmed the round's ability to not overpenetrate the body, even though ballistic gelatin shows 16 inches (410 mm) of penetration through heavy clothing (125 grain Speer Gold Dot).
Click to expand...

I wont comment on the .357 Sig vs. the .357 Magnum (125gr.) as Im not familiar enough with the .357 load. I imagine they are similar, but not similar enough. Either way yes, the .357 is penetrative (Im dubious about the report regarding the "non-overpenetration" of the body) but, this does not necessarily make it the "best" round as there are several factors at play here.

Having the ability to "shoot through metal" may be great for police, but not necessarily so for civilian CCW/HD use. Besides, the .45 ACP is quite penetrative in its own right. But, its the ability of a round to "stop" an opponent that Im concerned with. The .45 ACP does this nicely without the penetrative nature of various .357 Mag loads (leaving the .357 Sig aside for a moment).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
10mm vs .44special
Replies
24
Views
8K
meef
M
el Godfather
  • Locked
10mm v 357 magnum
2 3
Replies
67
Views
10K
kozak6
K
Hokkmike
  • Locked
A caliber comparison question.
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
3K
GEM
G
tomrkba
  • Locked
One 45 ACP
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
172
Views
9K
I6turbo
I
P
  • Locked
New entry to the caliber conflict that has played out so often
2 3 4 5
Replies
113
Views
4K
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
Back
Top