.357 under-rated these days?

[CorpITGuy]

.357 has a 90% first shot stop record. .380, which I am carrying right this minute (so I am not against it, you understand) has something like 47%, I think.

That's all I need to know. .357 will remain my favorite SD cartridge.

 

[HammerG26]

I started with a S&W Model 19 with a 4" barrel. I still have that gun and love it. I replaced the huge wooden grips with a set of Hogue grips and it conceals just fine.

 

[junior geezer]

THE loudest revolver i've ever fired was a 6" python. fella in NM had it. loaded it with a LOT of "red ball" powder. so much so, when fired it "melted" a hole in the primer. his words, not mine. but that sucker really cracked. and clearly he meant pierced primers under red dot powder.

 

[junior geezer]

in magnum force, harry's comment was he was shooting "light loaded specials."

 

[m2steven]

357 Underrated

I don't think it is. Here in the south, the 357 holds a revered place. It's justified. An FBI study, to determine which rounds would reliably pierce an automobile windshield reliably basicaly came to the conclusion that anything with a "4" in front of it (40, 45 cal eg) will do the job. The 357 also got high marks as it should because it's right up there with many larger bullets. ANY bullet can bounce off a windshield. On the upside, almost any bullet can reliably pierce door safety glass.

It's an extremely lethal knockdown round. Check out the bullet gel damage profiles among other things. Check out the ft. lb. energy data of some of the loads. Even in it's weakest form, it's a knockdown round. Call an emergency room physician and they'll occasionally give you first hand damage reports. My father, a WWII veteran (who I salute on this day) who was in action on this day 50 years ago said that when a man was hit with the German defensive fire he dropped like heavy sack of feed. I think he was referring to 50 cal. Very sobering stuff. The beginning of Saving Private Ryan captured the feel of the event pretty perfectly.

At this level, shoot what you shoot best. He said he knew Audie Murphy. He said he once ran into a machine gun nest under heavy fire and delivered a grenade to it. He didn't even get grazed. All that power with no ability to put it into the target. I'm rambling now, but those men 50 years ago DID save the world.

 

[m2steven]

....."380, which I am carrying right this minute (so I am not against it, you understand) has something like 47%, I think."

One study showed the .380 has a 74 percent putdown efficiency. I believe someone in Highroad posted that. Even if 47 is true, hit the target twice and you've raised your odds to 96 percent. Theoretically, if you flip a coin twice, and you want heads - you will get a head with 2 flips. But statistics concerning random events assumes randomness or unpredictability. You could conceivably empty a 10 round 9mm clip into someone and they could still be after you. That rarely happens in real life.

If you're a cop, or you watch a lot of recorded shootouts - as the distance increases, your margin of error increases as the square of the distance. I've seen the police fire 70 rounds at a guy and not hit him. When they started using their cruisers as weapons - they got much better.

 

[S357mag]

I use to keep a several 357 revolvers available around the house for self defense but replaced them all with semi autos. Not because I thought the autos were better but because I wasn't near as concerned about them being stolen. Use to worry too much about my revolvers.

 

[maroast]

Even if 47 is true, hit the target twice and you've raised your odds to 96 percent.

Not to be a jerk...


47*2=94

 

[76shuvlinoff]

I was going to say 47% is 47% regardless of rounds fired but I guess that would depend on whether we're talking multiple targets or not .... oh fergit it I need coffee.

 

[Graymutt]

funny thing

ok so here is a simple story, I was at the range with my wife, I am showing her how to shoot with my .357, but using the lightest loaded 38sp that I can. So it is not really making a loud pop. rigth be side of us is a young soldier shooting I think was a 9mm glock. so there is my wife and him shooting both going pop about the same. So my wife was done, and I took my little ported 357, with some 125g that I love to shoot. I walk up he looks and sees I am shooting the same gun as my wife was shooting. Gives me a look like oh you shoot that little gun too. He shot hit 9mm, then I shot my 357No pop, but BANG. He almost dropped his pistol when he jumped back. The look on his face was priceless.

Oh, if I had a choice of just one gun, I would give up my autos for my 357 anyday. Its simple, and effective.

 

[BaltimoreBoy]

"The 110s are too hard on the gun and tend to come apart too quickly"

I had a question about part of a comment (quoted above) by Confederate on June 1. I understand that 110's would tend to come apart, but why would they be especially hard on the gun - compared to anything else?

 

[HankB]

If the .357 is under-appreciated today, it may be because it's under-loaded.

IIRC, the standard max pressure for .357 Mag was around 42,000 CUP, a level that endured for decades after the original introduction in what would later be called the "N" frame S&W.

But more recently, many manufacturers (including S&W) began putting out smaller revolvers that didn't hold up well, so SAAMI took the move to piezo pressure measurement techniques as an opportunity to reduce the allowable pressure to 35,000 PSI.

There's no good conversion factor to go from CUP to PSI, but generally CUP numbers are lower numerically than PSI numbers when the same ammo is measured, so (guessing here) the SAAMI move may have cost the .357 as much as 10,000 PSI in allowable chamber pressure, resulting in a drop in both velocity and energy.

I vaguely remember reading that SAAMI "allowed" some commercial manufacturers to continue using the old pressure limit, which may explain why companies like Buffalo Bore put out ammo that performs better than the mass-produced stuff commonly found at places like WalMart.

 

[76shuvlinoff]

"The 110s are too hard on the gun and tend to come apart too quickly"

I had a question about part of a comment (quoted above) by Confederate on June 1. I understand that 110's would tend to come apart, but why would they be especially hard on the gun - compared to anything else?

I just came back to ask the same question. Are they too fast?

 

[goodtime]

I'm not exactly sure, but I remember reading here, a while back, that since the bullet is so light, it is therefore short, and it completely leaves the brass before it even hits the forcing cone. This causes extra wear -- and I think my explanation might be half baked, because I don't exactly remember, but --
1. from gas blast going around the bullet in the mouth of the cylinder and other areas, and 2. because the bullet is not guided by the casing at the rear while being guided by the forcing cone at the front, it is actually flying loosely in the cylinder mouth for that short distance between the case mouth and forcing cone and slams against the forcing cone at odd angles.
One of the guys here who knows better will correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Dogbite]

I think that the reason you don't hear much about it anymore, is that it is chambered in revolvers. Heck, some young shooters have never even shot a revolver! I have been shooting for 34 years, and I can tell you the 357 magnum is deadly serious, and just as able to defend the house and hearth today as it ever was, more so now that bullet development has progressed.

 

[Ed Ames]

Just finished reading all four pages of this thread.

The answer to the title question is obviously a pretty resounding "no".

My problem with them is pretty simple... if I'm going to pay the revolver premium I want to get something that is a significant departure from what a semi-auto can do. Don't get me wrong, the .357mag beats most semi-auto cartridges, but not by any huge margin.

I guess they have the advantage of cheap bullets for reloading. I can go even cheaper with a .38special. "But with .357mag you can run .38special and go up in power with a single gun!" I don't need to have a single compromise gun. I can have a range of guns.

Just me, but I see nothing to really draw me to the .357 mag.

 

[Guy de Loimbard]

After firing some .357 loads through the new-to-me Security Six I picked up Friday, I would have to say if the .357 is under-rated, it is undeservedly so. The only downside I can see is that you have to reload after only 6 shots (or 7 or 8, depending on which particular gun you have). I see this as a very minor issue though, easily overcome with a modicum of training/practice and some good speedloaders. I believe the pros of a .357 easily outweigh the cons.

 

[Dogbite]

I am a strong advocate of the 357 revolver, but I can see the capacity point. With 17 to 19 rounds of +p 9mm, an aggressor(that can shoot) could make life very tough on a revolver man. Heck, they could waste 4 or 5 rounds making you keep your head down, or firing blindly into a room at you(not saying this is a good tactic), but you get the idea.

 

[OregonJohnny]

Skipped to the end, sorry.

I have great respect for the .357 Magnum. The first revolver I ever shot was my dad's Ruger GP100 4" stainless when I was about 10. I now own that very revolver. It's got a lot of miles and sentimental value. But it still bucks and roars and feels very comforting on the hip in the Oregon wilderness. I keep her stoked with Federal 180-grain solids when out in the middle of nowhere. Good black bear, cougar, and meth-addict medicine. It's the handgun I hold above all others in terms of shear reliability and ruggedness.

The .357 Magnum will be around for a long time. I've said it before, and so have many others; it does nothing exceptionally but it does everything well. A revolver chambered in .357 Magnum can do everything from plinking with light .38 Specials, to home defense/CCW with 125-grain hollow points, to deer hunting, to black bear protection. Few other handgun cartridges, if any, have that kind of versatility.

 

[Dogbite]

The .357 Magnum will be around for a long time. I've said it before, and so have many others; it does nothing exceptionally but it does everything well. A revolver chambered in .357 Magnum can do everything from plinking with light .38 Specials, to home defense/CCW with 125-grain hollow points, to deer hunting, to black bear protection. Few other handgun cartridges, if any, have that kind of versatility.
---------------------------
Agreed

 

[trex1310]

I own a 9mm, a 45acp, 4 .40's, 1 .38 and 6 .357 mags. Its a wonderful cartridge and my favorite.

 

[kmrcstintn]

in magnum force, harry's comment was he was shooting "light loaded specials."

IIRC...Clint Eastwood's character (Harry Callahan) was using a S&W 29 in .44 mag...considering the snot, roar, and recoil snap I get from my S&W 629 PowerPort with fullbore 180gr and 240gr loads, I also would opt for a milder loaded .44 mag load or even a .44 spl load, which is very similar to a .45 acp in bullet weight and terminal effect

Quote:

"The 110s are too hard on the gun and tend to come apart too quickly"

I had a question about part of a comment (quoted above) by Confederate on June 1. I understand that 110's would tend to come apart, but why would they be especially hard on the gun - compared to anything else?


I just came back to ask the same question. Are they too fast?

the Winchester WWB personal defense load that uses a 110gr semijacketed hollowpoint is relatively rated at 1295 fps by Winchester from a ???4" test barrel??? shot out of my 45 oz Ruger GP100 w/ 6" barrel there is very little recoil...in comparison to being fired from a Taurus 651 I owned for a while (25oz steel frame 5-shot snubby w/ factory rubber grips) recoil was moderate for the first few rounds and got worse the more I fired it without taking a break; in the older 'one shot stop ratings' allocated by one of the often quoted studies, 110gr sjhp .357 mag loads achieved an 89% rating...not too bad for a light weighted bullet

 

[Mr. T]

The reason that the .357 doesn't get it's dues is because of TKO values. If you base your sole issue on knock down power, you would have to choose the .45 ACP round over the .357 mag. I happen to own 9mm, .357mag, .45 ACP and each of them has their suited use. Overall if I could have only one pistol I would go with the .357 mag for it's versatility -- in my humble opinion it's an excellent utility pistol round. Anything that can shoot through an engine block is good enough for me!

 

[skoro]

If you have a habit of wrestling grizzly bears then you might want a 44.

If I was in grizzly country, I'd want a bazooka. To me, handgun + grizzly = I'm dead.

 

[skoro]

The .357 Magnum

Just my two cents...

The .357mag just strikes me as "too much" for any reasonable concealed carry duty. The small, lightweight revolvers in that caliber would be horrific to practice with or use in a SD situation. And the practical service size revolvers are just too darn big and heavy for concealed carry, unless it's under a coat. And coats just aren't part of the wardrobe here in Texas for about nine months each year.

I have a pair of S&W Model 13 4" revolvers that I use for home defense. But I recently came to the point that I load them now with 158gr 38+P FBI loads.

Do I respect the .357 Magnum? You're damn right I do. It's an awesome handgun round. Not as practical for most purposes as some others, though.