Michael Tinker Pearce
Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2016
- Messages
- 1,576
(deleted) I don't need to be in the middle of this. Carry on, gentlemen.
It's not theory. Folks have been hunting with the .357 for 80 friggin' years. There is nothing new here. Just some specialty pistol guys trying to make one out of a revolver, having no knowledge of what came before them. It might be new to Ernie and Chris but it's not new to the sport.When theory and results disagree it's never the results that are wrong.
I deleted that post because I see both sides and, more importantly, I don't have a dog in this hunt. I've been known to use a 6" model 27 in close terrain where 25-30 yards would be a long shot but that's the limit of my experience. Time for me to bow out.It's not theory. Folks have been hunting with the .357 for 80 friggin' years.
Used within that context, it works fine. I was going to use a 6" GP this season, after muzzleloader season. It's when ranges start exceeding 50yds that you start playing with fire.I deleted that post because I see both sides and, more importantly, I don't have a dog in this hunt. I've been known to use a 6" model 27 in close terrain where 25-30 yards would be a long shot but that's the limit of my experience. Time for me to bow out.
.It's not ballistic gel, it's SIMTEST. It's denser and tougher than a pronghorn and as such, a bullet can expand in it and not expand on live flesh. Here's a hint, a bullet that fails to expand in SIMTEST, isn't going to do any better on a live critter.
Back-channels discussion...Enjoy your chat times.