357 vs 44 for versatility

[D.B. Cooper]

As a (recently) former resident, I can attest to just how bad it got and how much it puts you at a disadvantage not to be able to order ammo online. Fortunately, I was able to get 3 bricks out of a large shipment of .22LR received by Alaska Custom Firearms during the worst of it. It is disappointing to hear that things still aren't back to normal.

It's at least available now. This month was the first time I saw quantities of 22LR on a shelf, but there was very little variety to choose from.

 

[John Joseph]

I've carried both a Python and a M-29. It really is a matter of horses for courses.. A .44 loaded with.44 Mid range "Keith type" Mags or .44 Specials is incredibly accurate, shot rings around my .357 even loaded .38 match wadcutters,. but then I had a heavy N-frame to lug around if I wanted to take advantage of it.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

I've carried both a Python and a M-29. It really is a matter of horses for courses.. A .44 loaded with.44 Mid range "Keith type" Mags or .44 Specials is incredibly accurate, shot rings around my .357 even loaded .38 match wadcutters,. but then I had a heavy N-frame to lug around if I wanted to take advantage of it.

Heavy N frame. Yeah. I've got about 900 rounds through my Redhawk since I bought it new (3 months ago this past week), and, at times, I start to notice the 3 lbs just at the range. (I haven't carried it anywhere yet.)

 

[CraigC]

Ya dont have to have a 4k 5 shot. Any ruger 45 colt bisley or blackhawk will do. Plus u can run up over 40k psi in either cal in either gun want or a redhawk/super redhawk and the 45 will outpace the 44

If the .45's are 80% the strength of the .44's, then you're eating into the .45's safety margin but maintaining the .44's 100%. That's arbitrarily changing the rules so the .45 wins without stipulating the decrease in safety margin.

Yes, you can load them up to 50,000psi in the Redhawk and that is where the .45 begins to pull away but it's not dramatic. Not a whole lot of difference between a 340gr .44 or 360gr .45 at 1400fps. The difference was only dramatic when there was no high pressure .44 data to compare to.

 

[MaxP]

It pulls away at 36,000 psi, the .44’s SAAMI max. If we truly do put them on equal footing, the .45 simply has more. Again, I don’t care either way as I have graduated, but if I was forced to have one or the other, I would opt for the bigger of the two. But again, that’s just me.

 

[Tradmark]

I dont give a rip which one u use i use 454’s and 480’s/475’s and 460sw but its simple physics that the larger case capacity will always be faster with equal bullet weight and the guns being equal. Simple physics

 

[Tradmark]

That safety margin matters in smith and wessons, both are imminently safe in a fa83 or bfr with as much h110 as you can cram in it

 

[CraigC]

It pulls away at 36,000 psi, the .44’s SAAMI max. If we truly do put them on equal footing, the .45 simply has more. Again, I don’t care either way as I have graduated, but if I was forced to have one or the other, I would opt for the bigger of the two. But again, that’s just me.

So what you're saying is that the .45 outruns the .44 but only if you exceed the commonly accepted "Ruger only" levels of 32,000CUP and compare them to standard pressure .44Mag? Got it.

Sorry but if the guns are not equal, the loads cannot be equal.

The Super Blackhawk .44Mag exhibits catastrophic failure at 80,000CUP. So loads in the 40,000CUP range offer a 100% safety margin.

The Blackhawk .45Colt exhibits catastrophic failure at 60,000CUP, or approximately 80% of what destroys a .44. So loads in the 32,000CUP range offer a 100% safety margin.

Your suggested loads, for which no known data exists, would be an "equal" 40,000CUP, which yields a 50% safety margin. Is that something you want to endorse?

 

[CraigC]

That safety margin matters in smith and wessons, both are imminently safe in a fa83 or bfr with as much h110 as you can cram in it

Ok, if we're moving beyond six-shot Ruger single actions, then what I said about 50,000psi loads applies. Just as it does in custom oversized cylinder Rugers, Redhawks and Super Redhawks. Here we're comparing a 360gr at 1400fps to a 340gr at 1400fps. Sorry but this BS about how much better the .45 is than the .44 is only accurate when the .44 is hamstrung by some arbitrary, nonsensical limitation.

Yes, simple physics. Do so in a Ruger single action and you've cut your safety margin by HALF.

And everything supporting my argument is in print. Either Hodgdon's data or the Pearce data. Everything I've said here is supported by it.

 

[cp1969]

How does the .44 Mag stack up against the .454 Casull or .460 S&W? They're both .45 cal with published SAAMI max pressures.

We were talking calibers, not guns, weren't we?

 

[CraigC]

There's a recent thread for that somewhere.

For some reason somebody had to bring up the .45 in a .357 vs .44 discussion.

 

[tubeshooter]

Yeah...

...but nobody had to run with it...

 

[Tradmark]

If u dont run u wont get away.

 

[Walkalong]

"J frame 357mag is okay if your grip fits your hand."

lol, you can have it.

 

[farm23]

My children and grandchildren would vote 357 but what do they know.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

There's a recent thread for that somewhere.

For some reason somebody had to bring up the .45 in a .357 vs .44 discussion.

I stopped reading a long time ago. (Although...I'm guilty of much the same thing somewhere, sometime, I'm sure.)

 

[Walkalong]

Cabela's, Sportsman's BassPro, etc.

https://www.targetsportsusa.com/22-long-rifle-ammo-c-202.aspx#

 

[ACES&8S]

This is going to be a wandering question. Forgive me.

Which do you feel is the more versatile caliber-357 or 44 magnum?

How does the 44 compare to the 357 for a broad range of use? From a handloading standpoint, I know that 38 spl can be loaded way down for plinking and small game and that 357 can be loaded way up for self defense and deer hunting. Would 44 spl make a useful/practical cartridge for hares or is just way too much overkill. (As my teenage son says: "There's no kill like overkill.)

My purpose in asking is I'm thinking about buying a 357 revolver. I own lever guns in both calibers and a revolver in 44. Obviously, I carry the 44 as a bear defense gun. Because I already have the revolver in 44, I'm wondering if it will have that range of use or should I be looking at a 357. This would be a gun I would attach to a pack, possibly carry in the truck (highly unlikely), etc.

My concern is the 357 isn't big enough for a bear and the 44 is too big for almost anything else.

Since I reload it is easy to make both 44 & 357 very versatile as in both are wow or poppers.
Here is an easy answer for you , if you know you are going to have to confront a real charging heavy black bear while
hunting this year without any warning except this one. You would no doubt make your choice with stopping power today.
My choice would be the 44 magnum yours may be the 357.
Short story , back about 30 years ago I sawed off a thick telephone pole flat to about 5 feet tall & set it on a solid
surface, we shot it head high with 9mm-38 -357-44spl-44mag. I know it isn't a proof test but instead of telling the results,
try it, you will scratch your head on a couple.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

https://www.targetsportsusa.com/22-long-rifle-ammo-c-202.aspx#

https://www.targetsportsusa.com/t-bulkammofreeshipping.aspx

"We do not ship ammunition to Alaska and Hawaii."

It is simply not possible for me to buy ammo online. Local retailer is my only option. (So you guys living in California, I feel your pain.)

 

[Damon555]

Since you live in Alaska I'd say that the 44 mag is the obvious choice. I've got both and enjoy them both....I guess if I had to choose one over the other I'd still go with the 44.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Since you live in Alaska I'd say that the 44 mag is the obvious choice. I've got both and enjoy them both....I guess if I had to choose one over the other I'd still go with the 44.

Oh heck yeah. I have a 44 Magnum Redhawk. Apparently I didn't make my question clear enough, and I apologize. This was never supposed to be which one to buy, but more of a should I buy the 357 in addition to the 44 or spend my money elsewhere. (What I learned is spend my money elsewhere.)

Because...

I think of it this way: The .44 Magnum can do anything the .357 Magnum can do. The reverse is not true.

I may eventually, some day, pick up a 357 revolver if/when it falls in my lap at a good price (because I have a lever gun in 357), but it's not a priority as of now. I'll spend some time handloading some lighter bullets in 44 spl or magnum to see what that produces.

 

[CajunBass]

How about a 12 gauge shotgun, with a load of birdshot in the chamber for birds and bunnies, and a magazine full of slugs for the big stuff.

The biggest thing I've ever hunted was a Whitetail Deer, but that's what I did when I was "pot hunting," except I used buckshot rather than slugs.

Ok, no help at all to the original question. Sorry.

 

[MaxP]

Ok, if we're moving beyond six-shot Ruger single actions, then what I said about 50,000psi loads applies. Just as it does in custom oversized cylinder Rugers, Redhawks and Super Redhawks. Here we're comparing a 360gr at 1400fps to a 340gr at 1400fps. Sorry but this BS about how much better the .45 is than the .44 is only accurate when the .44 is hamstrung by some arbitrary, nonsensical limitation.

Yes, simple physics. Do so in a Ruger single action and you've cut your safety margin by HALF.

And everything supporting my argument is in print. Either Hodgdon's data or the Pearce data. Everything I've said here is supported by it.

Yet you’re comfortable hamstringing the .45 Colt based on this 80% of the strength of the .44 Mag claim. Put them on equal footing and the bigger cased round wins.

The .44 is a great and versatile round that can be dressed for success in many roles. However, on really big game, loaded correctly, it’s still an underachiever. It will get it done, but not as effectively as other and bigger calibers I’ve used. Ross was right (despite the bullet limitations he faced), on big game it was like sending a boy to do a man’s job.

Again, sorry for the thread hijacking. This will be my last post in this thread unrelated to the original topic.

 

[CraigC]

Yet you’re comfortable hamstringing the .45 Colt based on this 80% of the strength of the .44 Mag claim. Put them on equal footing and the bigger cased round wins.

The .44 is a great and versatile round that can be dressed for success in many roles. However, on really big game, loaded correctly, it’s still an underachiever. It will get it done, but not as effectively as other and bigger calibers I’ve used. Ross was right (despite the bullet limitations he faced), on big game it was like sending a boy to do a man’s job.

Again, sorry for the thread hijacking. This will be my last post in this thread unrelated to the original topic.

I'm confused, what does "this 80% of the strength of the .44 Mag claim" mean? That's not hamstringing, that's working within the limitations of the platform.

Of course the .45 wins if they're run at the same pressures, I've said that many times. However, in what guns is it deemed safe to run the .45 at .44Mag pressures? And in those guns where it is safe, is it not also safe to run the .44 at even higher pressure? I'm sorry but to compare the .44Mag and .45Colt at .44Mag pressures in the context of a Blackhawk/Super Blackhawk is bogus. The guns aren't the same strength and that is the core of the whole issue. The whole reason that "Ruger only" loads are 80% the pressure of .44 loads. The .45 doesn't operate at those pressures because it can, it does because it has to. As I said, to do so cuts the safety margin by half. I don't know anybody who thinks that is wise and yes, it is easy to get enough slow burning powder in the .45 case that a standard six shot Ruger is in peril. That's why we have five shots.

If you run them in guns that allow each to realize their full potential, which would be BFR's, FA's, custom oversized cylinder Rugers, Redhawks and Super Redhawks, then you're comparing top loads consisting of a 340gr .44 and a 360gr .45, both at 1400fps. In which case the .44 has a higher sectional density and less friction so it will penetrate deeper, as it usually does. That's theory that I intend to prove or disprove. From Ruger only levels on up to 50-55,000psi, all the two do is tap dance back and forth within 100fps of each other. No critter will ever know the difference. If you think a 365gr with a .335" meplat is going to somehow magically do better than a 355gr with a .340" meplat, then I have some Arizona swampland you might be interested in.

I have more respect and admiration for Seyfried than any other writer, past or present. However, his comments about sending a boy to do a man's job must be kept in proper context. When he wrote that (30yrs ago?), bullet selection was crap. A lot of things have changed since the Seyfried/Linebaugh collaboration but some folks refuse to accept it. Bullet selection is better and data is better. The chart pictured in your last book showing that the.44 penetrates measurably better than the .45Colt and the three head of 1800-2000lb critters taken in the last year and a half would seem to refute that "boy doing a man's job" nonsense. Not to mention Jack's comments about attempting a brain shot on elephant with the .44Mag Punch bullet. I think you, just like Parker, made up your mind a long time ago based on all this Linebaugh myth & legend and you won't be swayed by the facts. The difference you put so much faith in, simply doesn't exist. You have to keep in mind, I used to believe it all too. For a long time, it was an accepted piece of Sixgunnery Doctrine in Craig's mind. The revelation came with I found the Hodgdon heavy bullet .44 data. Then I ordered a bunch of bullets and tested it against theirs and Linebaugh's .45 data. Then I started looking at meplat diameters and found that the .45's was not always bigger and even when it was, it was out of proportion to the difference in bullet diameter. It all conflicted with what I had accepted as fact. Further testing just proved that everything we'd been led to believe about the two cartridges no longer held true, if it ever did.

That said, I'm going to do a lot more testing. I'll test the 45,000psi Garrett 405gr load, with its relatively small .335" meplat against the Beartooth 405gr. I'll push all the heavy .44 bullets in strong guns and see if the increased pressure/velocity yields anything meaningful. We'll get those 405's up to 50,000psi and see what happens. I don't expect any revelations because I don't think there's anything to gain with 400gr bullets but whatever happens, I'll post the results for all to see because unlike 'some', I don't care which way it falls.

 

[Wbblazer90]

This is going to be a wandering question. Forgive me.

Which do you feel is the more versatile caliber-357 or 44 magnum?

How does the 44 compare to the 357 for a broad range of use? From a handloading standpoint, I know that 38 spl can be loaded way down for plinking and small game and that 357 can be loaded way up for self defense and deer hunting. Would 44 spl make a useful/practical cartridge for hares or is just way too much overkill. (As my teenage son says: "There's no kill like overkill.)

My purpose in asking is I'm thinking about buying a 357 revolver. I own lever guns in both calibers and a revolver in 44. Obviously, I carry the 44 as a bear defense gun. Because I already have the revolver in 44, I'm wondering if it will have that range of use or should I be looking at a 357. This would be a gun I would attach to a pack, possibly carry in the truck (highly unlikely), etc.

My concern is the 357 isn't big enough for a bear and the 44 is too big for almost anything else.

I would say 357 magnum is pretty versitile and also fun to shoot. If you don't have a 357 mag and are a revolver fan, you should get one!