45 acp vs 357 mag: The Rebar Theory

[dubious]

This is not revolver vs auto… assume all bullets are good HPs fired out of the same gun.

I subscribe to the Rebar theory of handgun ballistics. Getting hit by a .357 bullet going below 1500 fps is like getting stabbed by a piece of .357 caliber rebar. Hydrostatic shock?! Remote nerve damage? The human body absorbs powerful shockwaves all the time. I scoff at your “energy dump”. MAYBE something funny will happen if you hit the bladder or kidney. Not with the consistency you need to plan a self defense scenario. As far as I can tell that only starts to happen well above 2000+ fps. So, shot placement being equal, all that matters is bullet diameter, the depth of penetration, and the amount of hollowpoint expansion… all totaling a volume of damaged tissue. The winner here is a bullet that expands the most and yet penetrates fully or just short of full penetration. The biggest piece of rebar wins: 45 acp.

Marshall & Sanow are outdated and have faulty limited datasets and no accounting for accuracy. Don’t believe the impressive temporary cavities you see on ballistics gel. The 357 is overpowered in a handgun but perhaps great in a carbine at 2000+ fps.

 

[rcmodel]

And an FN five-seven is like getting stabbed with a paper-clip!

rc

 

[dubious]

The FN is more like a screwdriver... I'll pass on being stabbed at all, thanks! If the FN was shooting full speed out of a rifle tho, that could be scary.

 

[gamestalker]

Last deer season my Son shot a deer with his Taurus 608 with a 125 gr. JHP XTP at around 100 yds. The loads were my own and had been chronographed at 1400 fps and some change. A kill zone shot through the heart and lung region caused a tremendous amount of hydrostatic shock. Entry was small and typical to what I've seen with high powered rifle's and instantly grew leaving a massive exit hole. The tissue and blood spray on the brush and ground on the exit side of the deer looked simular to what I've seen with high powered rifle kills.
I've been loading for the .357 mag. for decades and have performed many tests to see how this cartridge performs, and to see if it performs anything like the bullet manufacturer's advertise. In one test I lined an 18" cardboard box with a plastic liner, filled it with water and stuffed rolled up denim in it. After the denim had soaked up the water I fired a 158 gr. Gold Dot into it that had been chronographed at 1250's fps. and it penetrated through and through and stopped in the soft dirt birm I had put behind it. The bullet was completly and nearly perfectly mushroomed with peddles very evenly opened. The wound channel was very simular to what I saw with the deer. Small entry hole with a wound channel that grew in size very quickly and a massive exit hole.
I've never owned a 45 ACP and thus have not tested it or hunted with it. In all honesty, I wouldn't want to be on the recieving end of any bullet. But after hunting with the .357 mag. my greatest fears with regard to a self defense circumstances, would be having to cope with full penetration and collateral damage as a result.

 

[jon86]

Are we really doing this again? :banghead:

 

[06]

My hunting sidearm is a 5" barreled 357. I have no doubts that it will stop a deer or bear(the real reason I carry it). A 45 is not a hunting round but am sure it would kill one close up. Use the right tool for the right job. The 357 was originally a rifle round (like the 44 Mag) and some bright gent started making pistols for it. The highway patrol(NC) adopted it back in the 60s and used them till they went to the 9mms. Now they are primarily using 40s with some talk of going back to 45s. A 45 will put you on your backside quicker than most rounds as that was what it was designed to do way back in (guess when) 1911. It was used by the military for @ 70 years till the sissy brass decided they didn't want to hurt people anymore. (please don't throw rocks-lol).

 

[MtnCreek]

Dubious,
Why is a .357 exit wound often larger than the mushromed bullet?

 

[Haxby]

06 - The 357 and 44 Remington Magnums were originally rifle cartridges? You might want to check your facts on that.

Dubious - Between the 357 and the 45, as far as producing a quick kill, my money would be on the 357 every time.

 

[rcmodel]

The 357 was originally a rifle round (like the 44 Mag) and some bright gent started making pistols for it.

Rewriting history are we?

Both the .357 S&W Magnum and the .44 Rem Magnum were developed by Smith & Wesson as revolver cartridges. The first in 1935, and the second in 1956.

Smith & Wesson also introduced the .41 Rem Magnum cartridge in 1964.

None were intended for, or chambered in rifles until some time later.

rc

 

[earlthegoat2]

I dont want to be shot by either.

Ill take 380s all day though.

 

[codefour]

It does not matter which one..

There is always going to be this debate. Energy vs. velocity vs bullet diameter vs. bullet weight, etc.

The bottom line is, if you dod not hit a vital organ, i.e heart, lungs, brain, spine etc) the subject will not immediately bleed out. The human body has this great ability to clot. I have seen many gun shot victim over the years shot with all kinds of bullets. I have also been to a lot of autopsies. There is no wonder bullet. Now, I ave seen one single .25 auto round kill a human, but it is rare. It all depends on what area/organ is hit with the bullet.

So the .357 vs. .45 is kind of a mute point. I know I am going to get burned at the stake for this one.

 

[rbernie]

Moved to a more appropriate forum.

 

[dprice3844444]

they both will hurt like hell

 

[buck460XVR]

This is not revolver vs auto… assume all bullets are good HPs fired out of the same gun.

I subscribe to the Rebar theory of handgun ballistics. Getting hit by a .357 bullet going below 1500 fps is like getting stabbed by a piece of .357 caliber rebar. Hydrostatic shock?! Remote nerve damage? The human body absorbs powerful shockwaves all the time. I scoff at your “energy dump”.

Using your re-bar theory, the wound created by the .357 bullet should be very similar to being shot with a arrow. I've shot deer with both and I can guarantee there is very little similarity between the two......especially what happens when one hits bone. The .357 produces trauma much greater in size than a arrow/broadhead of the same diameter, even in soft tissue, when no bone is hit. There is no other explanation for this other than trauma created by shock.

 

[Sevenfaces]

being pierced by rebar isnt the same as being shot by a bullet. bullets are more or less orbs of lead flying at varying velocities rebar is cylindrical steel used in construction.

I don't personally give much credit to hydrostatic shock, but I do believe in wound cavitation, which is more severe in the faster bullets.

 

[easyg]

Getting hit by a .357 bullet going below 1500 fps is like getting stabbed by a piece of .357 caliber rebar. Hydrostatic shock?! Remote nerve damage? The human body absorbs powerful shockwaves all the time. I scoff at your “energy dump”.

Scoff all you like, but I'll tell you this....

I'm an "X-ray Tech" and I once X-rayed a lady who shot herself in the head....
She put a .38 special revolver against her right temple and pulled the trigger.

Guess what...
The bullet didn't exit the skull.
No, it made an entry would and traveled accross the brain and impacted the left side of the skull, causing the left side of the skull to break, but the bulllet didn't exit the skull.

But when examing the radiographs one quickly sees that the the right orbit is blown out.
And the skull is fractured along the coronal suture as well.

The right petrous ridge is also damaged.

So even thougth the bullet never actually hit the right orbit, or the top of the skull, those parts of the anatomy were fractured.

 

[Sturmcrow]

I try very hard to avoid sarcasm on the WWW, mostly because it rarely translates through text as well as it does through voice. That said, I feel that this may be the most sarcasm-deserving thread that I have read in awhile. Between the 357 and 44mag designed for rifles and the "don't believe in hydrostatic shock", which I read today was first described 70 years ago, I cannot help but smirking.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Haxby and RC model already covered the erroneous ".357 and .44 were rifle cartridges" claim, so I'll go after:

A 45 will put you on your backside quicker than most rounds as that was what it was designed to do way back in (guess when) 1911.

One, you're not knocking anyone down with a .45 (nor any other small arms projectile). Secondly, the .45 ACP was introduced in 1905 in the Colt model (guess what) 1905.

 

[ljnowell]

This thread is great. I would just like to add, with tongue in cheek, that if you shoot someone in the arm with a 45 it will spin them around, knock them down, and kill them.

 

[buttrap]

Go shoot a pissed off bear with a .45 acp and get back to me on how that works and if you have fingers left then go shoot one with a .357.

 

[AethelstanAegen]

I'll preface this with I love the .45acp, but this:

This thread is great. I would just like to add, with tongue in cheek, that if you shoot someone in the arm with a 45 it will spin them around, knock them down, and kill them.

had me in absolute stitches. Well done ljnowell.

 

[dnthmn]

My hunting sidearm is a 5" barreled 357. I have no doubts that it will stop a deer or bear(the real reason I carry it). A 45 is not a hunting round but am sure it would kill one close up. Use the right tool for the right job. The 357 was originally a rifle round (like the 44 Mag) and some bright gent started making pistols for it. The highway patrol(NC) adopted it back in the 60s and used them till they went to the 9mms. Now they are primarily using 40s with some talk of going back to 45s. A 45 will put you on your backside quicker than most rounds as that was what it was designed to do way back in (guess when) 1911. It was used by the military for @ 70 years till the sissy brass decided they didn't want to hurt people anymore. (please don't throw rocks-lol).

Er, what???? The .357 and .44 Magnums were both developed by Smith and Wesson FOR their revolvers. The parent cartridges are the .38 Special and .44 Special, both revolver cartridges.

Also the .45 ACP was developed in 1904 and the first gun chambered for it was the Colt 1905. And is still in use by the military though not standard issue.

EDIT: Sorry, rcmodel. I see you already cleared up the S&W part.

EDIT2: Dang, MachIVshooter, cover the Colt part too! I'll just shut up now.......

 

[PabloJ]

Never had much use for .357magnum. It's almost as useless as 10mm auto. Big slow heavy will do splendid job and will be much easier on my hand eyes (under certain circumstances) and ears. Years ago when I was in school and didn't have the money I have seen six-shot Performance Center revolver with short barrel and scandium frame in .45LC. That piece along with Corbon 200gr load would be my dream combo. The .45LC is better then .45ACP so sometimes older is indeed better.

 

[GLOOB]

all that matters is bullet diameter, the depth of penetration, and the amount of hollowpoint expansion… all totaling a volume of damaged tissue.

Rebar theory, eh? I submit to the "sometimes stuff hurts without causing a wound channel" theory. Punch someone in the gut, and there's no penetration, no wound channel, no bruising - no physical damage whatsoever. But do it right, and the recipient will be temporarily incapacitated due to the over stimulation to the nerve plexus just below the sternum, making it temporarily impossible to breath. I think a temporary wound cavity might stimulate some nerves.

Also, like you noted, there are some tissues which are more fragile. You mentioned the bladder and kidney. You left out spleen, liver, brain.

That said, I think 45 ACP is top notch for SD use. 357 has the advantage when it comes to hard barrier penetration. And for hunting, you can get deeper penetration with the right bullets.

 

[dnthmn]

Good counterpoint.