Based on what, energy figures? The .44Spl gets it done without making your ears bleed.
It's interesting how different opinions are based on perspective, be it in the context of self defense or hunting. In self defense, where your life is actually on the line but few people have any experience in killing, it's "the difference is marginal". In hunting, where your life is not on the line but most involved do have experience in killing (often considerable experience), there is a very significant and broadly accepted difference between .357's and .44's. I reckon hunters aren't able to hide behind preconceived notions and wishful thinking. Only results matter.
These seem to be conflicting statements.
That's not what the stats show. When cops went to the .357 years ago, the performance of the 125gr JHP was the ultimate in 1-shot stops. Energy was exceptional and the round was one of the only handgun rounds that would penetrate several of the well-known bullet-resistant vests. When my newspaper was considering publishing this, I called Massad Ayoob for confirmation. He reluctantly provided it, but besseched news organizations from publishing it as it would provide valuable knowledge to the criminal element and make the round a target for the same anti-gunners who wanted to publicize the steel-core bullets and outlaw them. We deferred from publishing it. Ayoob, however, has consistently heralded the 125gr JHP as one of the best, if not the best and effective man-stoppers on record.
Actually, even the military determined that hardball-to-hardball, there is no significant difference in manstopping ability between the .45ACP and 9mm. And whatever minor difference there may be, the penetration and trajectory of the 9mm more than made up for. Then, after adding twice the firepower, the 9mm was a no-brainer. Jeff Cooper always said if we made the transition to 9mm that we'd soon regret it. The truth is, no one really wants the .45 back.
So you're saying that a steel-core bullet does greater damage than the .357 125-gr JHP, which stays in the body? You can get exit wounds all day long with 158gr JHPs, but you'll never get the overall stopping power with it unless you're going after deer or need to stop a bear.
The 158gr JHP/JSP .357 will certainly do better than a .45ACP, in my opinion. No one would want to go bear hunting with either, but if one was out in the middle of nowhere and was being tracked by a black bear, I certainly wouldn't start writing a will if I had a .357! There are many more dead bears in the wilderness than dead people with either caliber.
confederate said:
I couldn't care less what the stats show. The studies they come from are usually outdated and limited in scope.
Like I said, hardball talk is irrelevant. You can't introduce it where it's irrelevant just because it supports your theory. Hardball is a terrible choice for self defense.
No, I never said that. Or anything remotely like it. I said I wanted an exit wound. Not that full penetration was the only thing important.
I'd hate to know I had to stop a bear with a 158gr .357.
And what is that opinion based on??? Because having actually used these cartridges on game, I'd take a ~250gr cast bullet .45ACP load, like the two linked below, over anything you can stuff in a .357Mag.
The statistics are the only thing we have to show. Anything other than that is conjecture. Massad Ayoob reported, for example, that many agencies in the 80s adopted heavier.357 loads like the 158gr JHP. Of that weight, he reported, "It zipped through a body almost every time with enough energy left to zip through another one, and it didn't transfer a whole lot of that power as a rule unless bone was hit ... and recoil was substantial." He also reported that one urban department with stopping power issues went to a 4-inch S&W .357, but that the heavier bullets it adopted only exasperated the problem. After extensive testing, Ayoob reported, the agency adopted Federal's 125gr JHP. "In ten shootouts since," he reported, "the round had delivered ten instant one-shot stops. Two of those were leg hits, while one was an arm shot. A gunman hit in the leg told police that he felt a breathtaking blow, and was totally disoriented from the moment of impact until his arrival at the emergency ward." He added: "All ten bullets stayed inside the bodies. Six were fatal."
No argument there, but the military's incredibly unwise decision to use it with non-signatories of the Geneva Convention is ridiculous. Those guys are seeing people on fire and saying heads off. Why shouldn't we be using fast jaceted ammo with gaping holes in them?
Hey, we're all comfortable with what we're comfortable with!
confederate said:
They're not conflicting at all. When the .357 was first developed, it was designed to fill the needs of the Highway Patrol. Their .38Spc revolvers were horrible for penetrating automobiles. The bullets not only wouldn't go through the heavy steel vehicles of the 1930s, they would bounce off of the tires the patrolmen were trying to shoot out. Upon its first demonstration, the highway cops were sold on the new caliber. They could now shoot at fleeing felons and actually have their bullets go in through the back of the car, through the seats and retain enough energy to take out the bad guys. In today's world, many of the .357s made will both penetrate hard and soft targets.
Unfortunately, comfort does not stop bears.
No, it's all YOU have to show and outdated at that. I could care less about any studies done in the 1980's.
I'm sorry but all this talk about 125gr loads or 158gr loads is irrelevant without reference to specific loads. Not all 158gr bullets work the same.
It is conflicting. First you said the 158's penetrate too much, then you said you wanted penetration.
Relevance???
