Better manstopper 357 Mag or 45 ACP?

[Pistol Toter]

Hey guys, just so you know, I was not defending or coming out for, or against any particular caliber or platform or gun. I thought that both the polls were interesting, and to lay them side by side was even further interesting. I came up with some reasoning as to gun sizes and weights, taking into consideration guns costs, munnitions costs and the Ti Sc materials of modern revolvers. When I chose what I wanted to carry, I picked a SP101 loaded with 125gr Golden Sabre and a Glock 21 loaded with 230gr Golden Sabre and they both work for me. You are just as apt to fnd me carrying one as the other. I like both, can conceal and hit the target equally, and have absolutly nothing against any of the other offerings. Shoot what you can control, hit with, and are able to discretely carry. I can't belive that I ever did it, but I carried a .38 derringer for years, what a dummy as was!!! Have a good day fellows. Pistol Toter

 

[JCB1911]

BOTH

I carry taurus 357 in my pocket and a 45 of some flavor on my sind in Mr. milt sparks

 

[bruss01]

I have tremendous confidence in the .357 - I have no doubt that anything I deliver a good solid hit with it is going down. I KNOW it's 100% reliable, as in it has never failed in any way, every single blessed time I pull the trigger it goes BANG and there is very little to go wrong with it... ever.

Now, having said that, it has it's drawbacks with regard to the platform. I only get six shots, it's slower to reload, and I DO have to think twice about my hearing before using it indoors for defense.

That's why my .45 is my primary go-to gun for the nightstand. I have *almost* as much confidence in the round, and slightly less in the gun (it's very reliable, but it's awfully hard to beat 100%). But do I really have any doubts it would send the fur flying in a home invasion situation. Nope, not at all. And that big BIG hole in the end? VERY intimidating. With the +P's I keep it gassed up with, I don't think a bad guy will ever know the difference.

 

[RustyShackelford]

.45ACP 230gr JHP/125gr JHP .357magnum loads

This is part of the point I made;

If 1,000s of sworn LEOs(federal agents, sheriff's deputies, police officers, state troopers, etc) used .45ACP pistols with 230gr FMJ or 230gr JHP rounds would the .45ACP have a better record in documented LE shootings? YES!

BUT, most US LEOs have used the 125gr JHP loads for duty use. They used S&W model 19s/66s and Ruger GP-100 .357magnums for years so this is where the 96% number comes from. KE, power levels, ballistics, etc may show that the .45ACP 230gr or 200gr JHP may be an improvement over the 125gr .357magnum JHP rounds but the LEOs did not use/carry these .45acp loads as much as the 125gr JHP .357.

Rusty

 

[Oregongundude]

I would think the .40 S&W would be a better round to compare to the .357 Magnum

Actually, you can hot load .40 S&W almost to the level of the .357 Magnum in balistics, and energy as well. The .45 acp is a great self defense handgun as well. I voted for the .357 magnum because I like the options available for that gun. I know the CHP in California moth balled the .357 and now are going with the .40 S&W as there main defense handguns. Now compare the 10 mm loads to the .357 magnum and you may be up against the wall a bit. 10 mm loads are more powerful with a lot more energy than both the .357 magnum and the .45 acp. And God forbid if the 10 mm magnum would have ever caught on.

 

[mpmarty]

357 vs 45

Agreed wholeheartedly Oregondude! I like the .45 so much when I won a gun at the GSSF match I picked a model 30. I like the 10MM so much I'm ordering a KKM 10MM barrel for it. Now I have a choice of packing my Witness full size 10MM, a G30 in .45 or a G30 in 10MM (like a G29) or my tried and true Taurus PT145 mil pro. All things considered, overpenetration is more a concern for CCW self defense than for police officers. I believe this because it is likely a police officer will take a shot at a perp who is firing at his partner and be aiming at the right or left side of the perp whereas in a pure self defense situation you are shooting at a perp who is facing you. The energy argument needs to be refined to explain that any projectile that exits the body of the perp does NOT deliver its foot pounds of energy to the perp in total. All it dumps is the energy equivalent (sic) of the difference of its entry velocity minus its exit velocity. Also interesting is the windshield penetration and deflection values of the various loads where the .45 acp seems to win hands down.

 

[James T Thomas]

cogitation

Does anyone know of a test where tenthousand rounds of 357 were fired through four layer denim, and the frequency of failed expansion? As a statistician can affirm, a dozen or so gelatin tests, does not make a reliable statistical sample, when the "population" is as large as it is.

For all down to earth, reality purposes, the 357 is an unknown! It is.

Seriously, though, just my hunch, but with the expansion of even the high energy 357 being not a "sure thing," I have more confidence in the round that is not a fast 38, that is the nearly sixty percent greater surface area bullet, and that is not considering it expanded -the 45ACP.

 

[Arcticfox]

Best caliber in the opinion of Bill Jordan

I wanted to add the view of Bill Jordan, an expert in firearms, and a Federal officer for 30 years.

In his book, "No Second Place Winner," I will quote his opinions in the matter. This book was written in 1965:

Although the .357 Magnum is a close approach, in my opinion, the ideal caliber...is not presently available in a suitable loading. The ideal, when presented, will be the 41 caliber loaded to between 1200, and 1300 FPS, with a 200 grain semi-wadcutter bullet.

Ironically, the .41 magnum, which matches those specifications, came out the same year of his writing.

He continues:

The .357 is presently the best cartridge available. with the 160 grain bullet in 4 -inch barrels it delivers slightly over 1200 f/s in the factory loading and an authoritative 500 plus foot/pounds of energy. while a little more shock power would be desireable, no other available cartridge is so near the ideal for police work.

Although I personally would prefer the .45ACP, Bill Jordan says they are realatively ineffective with factory loadings and full metal jackets.

Just wanted to share the opinion of a man who knows about gun fighting first hand.

 

[dragongoddess]

Somehow I always thought my leggs were Man Stoppers.

 

[fastbolt]

Somehow I always thought my leggs were Man Stoppers.

Like your comment and your handle ...

Most interesting posting in the thread ...

.357 Magnum v. .45 ACP? Been there, done that.

Which one does someone most accurately shoot, most consistently?

Which one offers the best compromise when it comes to recoil management and controllability?

How about which one comes in a platform most comfortable and familiar to the user/owner, and most easily presented and used, especially under potentially stressful, live-threatening situations?

Which one comes in the platform most suitable to the individual needs and desires of the user/owner regarding lawful concealment?

It's just a handgun, and either caliber can be considered one of the many popular personal defensive calibers available in the last 100 years.

Even when the .357 Magnum was a fairly common choice in 4-6" service revolvers, and the 125gr load was becoming commonly seen, there was still disagreement and contention regarding whether the 125gr JHP was really 'better' than the 158gr JHP (or one of the 140/145gr JHP's, for that matter). You wouldn't think so when reading some of the magazine articles in those days, though. There was even some disagreement whether it was 'better' than the .45 ACP (albeit mostly in FMJ, or a couple of the early JHP loads) back then, too.

Like it matters ...

I see this sort of subject as an occasionally interesting topic of casual conversation, for gentle distraction, but not nearly as relevant as some folks would like to think ...

Funny how the CHP has reportedly stated that they've enjoyed better 'success' with the 'lowly' 180gr .40 S&W than they did with their Magnums ... and I had a friend who was a weapons officer with the CHP for many years who agreed with that sentiment. He didn't miss his 6" revolver loaded with 125gr .357 Magnum ammunition at all after he started carrying a M4006. Of course, he especially didn't miss also carrying the W-W 110gr +P+ loads, at one point, either.

FWIW, I'm issued a full-size .45 ACP pistol for uniform use and an optional compact .40 S&W for plainclothes use ... and I carry the compact .40 S&W virtually all of the time. However, I'd be perfectly comfortable carrying a .357 Magnum revolver once again ... or an issued 9mm, for that matter.

It's just a handgun ...

I didn't vote in the poll, BTW. I'd have to go find a coin to toss to pick one.

I look for shooter skills, ability and competence, just to start ... before I get too wrapped up around the axle about caliber ...

Thanks for the Leggs memory dragongoddess ...

 

[MCgunner]

Does anyone know of a test where tenthousand rounds of 357 were fired through four layer denim, and the frequency of failed expansion? As a statistician can affirm, a dozen or so gelatin tests, does not make a reliable statistical sample, when the "population" is as large as it is.

For all down to earth, reality purposes, the 357 is an unknown! It is.

Seriously, though, just my hunch, but with the expansion of even the high energy 357 being not a "sure thing," I have more confidence in the round that is not a fast 38, that is the nearly sixty percent greater surface area bullet, and that is not considering it expanded -the 45ACP.

At 1500+ fps, I have no doubt the .357 will expand. I have killed with it. I have only killed paper with the .45. Okay, it was deer. I wasn't even using an expanding bullet either. One of 'em was an 80 yard lung shot and she dropped within fractions of seconds. I know the caliber works, no need to speculate. It has quite a record in law enforcement on human targets, too. The .45 will work, too, I'm sure. I just KNOW the .357 will because it has for me. I don't deer hunt with less, and the .45 is less. It is rather platform dependent, though. I wouldn't deer hunt with a 3" .357, either. Hunting performances starts in 6" barrels as far as I'm concerned. I'd rather think the .45 is MORE than the .357 if the .357 is fired out of a snubbie. .357 needs barrel length to perform. Think the 6" is good? Fire one out of a 20" carbine!

 

[boomstik45]

MpMarty, I LOVE the glock 30. Reliable as hell, more accurate than most people will believe and holds 10 + 1 of good ol' .45 acp. I have actually never fire the G29, but look forward to it. I've fired the G20 several times and liked it. Let me tell you, the 155 grain hornady is a screamer, but the 200 grain is the one you can feel when you cut it loose. That sucker means business! Unfortunately, it's a good bit cheaper to buy and shoot .45, and I'm not a reloader, so .45 or .40 tends to be my carry round. I like the .357 a lot, but in most applications, the gun is bigger than what I'd want to carry concealed, and although the snubbies are great, they're not my favorite by far. Compact .45 or .40 gives me more rounds of adequate power. Of course, right away people will scream about accuracy and hitting your target effectively. I agree. However, there's always the possibility (and in some cases, PROBABILITY) of multiple assailants (even if it's only two guys that's plenty worse than just one). Sorry, but I'd rather have a few more rounds at my disposal to begin with, and an extra mag is a lot easier for reloading for me (training) than a speed loader. For some people, it may be the exact opposite, which is fine. I wouldn't argue with that, if you are good with a snubby or other carry revolver and speedloader (if you need one) then consider yourself well armed. Better to carry what you're good with. And remember, not only is anything worth shooting once also worth shooting twice...it's also worth shooting as many times as necessary to stop the threat. Of course, some will always take that the wrong way and do the wrong thing .

I have to add that .357 makes more sense in the woods where your 4 legged problems are more prevalent. That's not to say that auto loader rounds won't work on various critters, but you have to have the right loading and bullet type. So, to help avoid that kind of problem, I prefer the 10mm above all other autoloader rounds for woods work. But with a revolver, you can shoot some really hot loads (even in .45acp) in .357, .41 mag, .45 Colt, and .44 magnum. All of these will handle a variety of critters, but again, you have to have the right load/bullet type to be effective against certain animals. For instance, here in Georgia (and South Carolina) the wild hog is a common and very dangerous foe. While a .357 magnum CAN take one down, a hot .45 colt or .44 magnum is better. In some cases, Wayyyyy better. When dealing with one that's 200lbs. or more, I'd definitely go with the larger bore pistol cartridge. Hell, .454 Casull or .480 Ruger won't be a bad idea either.

 

[fastbolt]

Well, if we're going to include consideration of a 'backwoods defensive handgun' as a criteria for selection ... I'll opt for the .357 Magnum.

It was always my favorite 'medium-bore' backwoods handgun ... for those instances when I didn't expect to 'need' the additional power of a .44 Magnum wheelgun.

If I were going to be carrying a .357 Magnum wheelgun as a service handgun again, and I could select my own ... I'd choose one of the new 8-shot 627's with a 5" barrel. The 4" barrels were a compromise intended to favor portability when it came to wearing them on duty belts all day. I knew more than a few guys that favored 6" .357's for service revolvers, though.

I was very reluctant to give up my .357 when we transitioned to 9mm pistols.

Life goes on, though.

 

[S&Wfan]

Hi,

I posted earlier that either caliber would be great, just use the one that you shoot best! For me, that's the .45ACP . . . in a revolver!!!


MCgunner wrote:

Why shoot .45ACP in a revolver the size of a .44 magnum?

Forgive me if I fail to quote your entire, excellent response! You bring up several great points.

Why a big "N" frame revolver in .45ACP? For me it is because I do my very best shooting with this revolver.

With someone helping me with a Pact timer and a LOT of practice, the best I can do out of a hip holster w/ my 5" Colt Combat Elite auto hovered around 1.15 seconds (from a position w/ each thumb touching the earmuffs in a surrender position). It took this long for me to react to the timer, draw and put a vital shot into a B-27 target at six feet.

CONSISTENTLY with this chopped barrel "N" frame Model 25-2 I would be under .85 seconds, with some draws under .8 seconds.

Also, I can reload my 25-2 as fast as I can my 1911s . . .and once won an area special tactical steel match using this revolver against nearly 40 other shooters . . . all who were using high cap. autos. There were 18 steel plates and poppers spread out over about a 40 degree area, from about 15-35 yards. All guns started unloaded in a pistol box . . . with ONE manditory reload. Needless to say, I had to load three times, not two, IF I didn't miss.

For some reason, I shoot double action revolvers better than the autos, and that day I didn't miss . . . and some of the Glock guys with their 33 round clips tried to go too fast . . . and they got frustrated the more they missed.

Yep, if the chips are all down for REAL one day, I hope I have this revolver in my hands.

However, I like autos for self defense. I do carry a revolver now and then, but most of the time it's an auto. I just shoot faster and reload MUCH faster with 'em. Besides square flat guns and square flat reloads tote easier concealed.

I took will usually be carrying an automatic, usually a Kimber CDP Ultra due to both size, weight AND flatness. If that's too much, it will go down to a Colt Agent six-shot .38 spl. snub. If that won't work, my little Keltec .32 can conceal most places but a nudist beach I imagine!

Still . . . in the winter when the bulk of my favorite "N" frame can be concealed, I'll be toting my favorite revolver with a couple of cylinders-worth of moon-clipped reloads!!!

T.

 

[boomstik45]

S&W fan, you and the revolver are made for each other, it seems. Also, shooting a glock is more or less simple, but some people don't consider the small differences that a fully-loaded 33 round magazine is going to make. Also, at least for me, there's a difference between factory glock sights and three-dot sights. I much prefer the 3-dot configuration. And, the match you had is a clear example of how the shooter is matched to the gun and should be evaluated that way. Why evaluate one gun vs. another when it's the shooter's level of skill and comfort that matters? Jerry Miculek with an 8 shot .357 is so much deadlier than 10 "range commandos" with glock 18s.

 

[remfield]

wheel vs clip

I hate keeping a clip compressed all the time in my dresser. I am just more confident in the ability of a wheel gun to fire. That said ill go with the 357 because its more common in good wheel guns. Plus you know a snubby is sexy.

 

[dragongoddess]

Worried about keeping a clip full. Just take 3 rounds out of it and that will release some of the tension on the spring.

 

[Oregongundude]

the lowly 180 grain .40 S&W round.

Funny how the CHP has reportedly stated that they've enjoyed better 'success' with the 'lowly' 180gr .40 S&W than they did with their Magnums

155gr. Speer Uni Core @ 1300 fps (582 ft. lbs.)
180gr. Speer Uni Core @ 1100 fps (484 ft. lbs.)
180gr. FMJ @ 1100 fps (484 ft. lbs.)
180gr. @ 1100fps / 484 ft/lbs- Glock 23 (4.0"bbl)
200gr. @ 1050fps / 490 ft/lbs- Glock 23 (4.0"bbl)



I added the 155 grain bullet as well, but i wanted to make a point about lowly 180 grain .40 S&W bullet. I think the CHP should rethink I don't that bullet is good enough to kill any BG's. And just for fun I added the 200 grain bullet for the .40 S&W just for fun. I wouldn't want to get hit by any of these lowly bullets.

The sources I used for this thread are www.buffalobore.com, www.doubletapammo.com

 

[fastbolt]

The CHP has used the standard, 'original' Winchester 180gr JHP load since they adopted their 4006's.

The same load is again on the state contract, as the RA40180HP, and the standard 180gr JHP offered by Remington is also on the contract and available as well, as the Express R40SW2C. I know of some LE shootings involving both rounds. We've used both loads off & on as training & qualification ammunition for the .40 S&W pistols, although we issue T-series for service use in various calibers.

I'd heard rumblings that the CHP had tried to rewrite the bid specifications a couple years ago so the Winchester T-series would be on the contract, since they were very impressed with the gel/barrier tests regarding the T-series. A local Winchester LE dealer said that if they had been successful the cost of the .40 S&W T-series would have dropped dramatically on the West Coast, but no joy ...

I used to carry the 165gr RA40TA, but switched over to the 180gr RA40T in my issued .40 S&W pistol.

 

[clarence222]

Either or

I must say that i like both of these rounds and have more than a couple of guns in each caliber. I carry a 45 most of the time when I carry simply because of the slimmer look and the high capacity mags that it takes. However if and when the SHTF ever happens and I am forced to leave my home with a limited number of guns per person I will be taking my 357's. The reasons I have for that are simple, I have 357's in revolvers as well as lever action rifles. If limited to one or two guns per person I can grab the rifle and my wife can grab the revolver and we can have two guns that shoot the same round yet are very simple to operate, plus the fact that I can look for 38' or 357 makes the caliber my choice when it comes down to it.


So I say it depends on the situation as to which one is best, they are both proven manstoppers and if properly trained withe the use of them neither should ewver disappoint you.

 

[boomstik45]

Good point, Clarence. If at all possible, one should indeed try to keep the ammo situation simple.

 

[Doggieman]

Originally Posted by doggieman
No dear, the reason the 357 is usually better than the .38 is because its extra energy allows it to make a bigger HOLE since it uses that energy to mushroom and penetrate whereas the 38 will tend to stop or not mushroom. The 45 generally has enough energy to penetrate fully, and modern bullets mushroom more than bullets of yore, generating larger HOLES.

Aaahh, so energy DOES matter after all?!

Well of course energy matters.. without energy the bullet would never come out of the gun. But energy doesn't matter directly, it only matters in that it
1) allows a bullet to pass into and sometimes through a person
2) allows a bullet of the proper shape to deform (mushroom) inside a person

Energy matters indirectly, in that it allows a piece of metal to make holes in people. The holes are what matter, the energy merely allows the metal bit to make 'em.

Since the .45 and the .357 have enough power to do both of the above (with modern ammo I would argue they do both equally well), then that variable falls out and the only difference we have left is the size of the hole that the energy has allowed the bullet to impart: .45" vs. .357". .45 wins.

I mean yeah if you're looking at *HP* .357 vs. *FMJ* .45 then I'd pick the 357, but the original hypothetical allowed you to pick any type of ammo, and I assume people would pick the best type of ammo. The best HP .45 ammo will open up as reliably as .357 ammo unless you're shooting through maybe car doors or something, but that wasn't in the hypo.

If the guy weighed 400 lbs then maybe I'd go with the .357 again. Or if the guy had 15 layers of clothing on, who knows. But the average situation on the average street against an average guy you're going to want to make BIG HOLES and the 45 will do that better in that situation.

And PLEASE let's not talk about "one shot stops" those "statistics" are completely nonsensical and have been debunked time and again.

 

[Dogbite]

Well, i would literally feel good with either one. If i was forced to chose one over the other, it would be the 357 mag in a good 125 grain loading. Bottom line--they are both BUSINESS.

 

[ugaarguy]

If the difference were large, it would be obvious. If it were obvious, there would be no debate.

I like what LightingJoe said. I agree with it, and felt it bore repeating.

 

[sm]

Either one will work as long as the day they are used on ends in the letter "y".

Can't vote on poll and won't. Too many variables, and there are no Holy Grails on Firearms and Ammo.

Some thoughts:

Revolver for defense, semi auto for offense -CRSam.
His preference was a .357 revolver for defense, and bone stock Gov't model for offense.

Gun Fit. Yep, I mentioned it again didn't I? Well it is that important. In assisting students, we started with .22 revos, then .22 semis. Transition to Revos in .38spl , for instance we had six exact Model 10s - except for stocks. Only difference were stocks. Students found a "gun fit" simply because of the stocks, and shot the same gun better.

Had a variety of Semis too. Again gun fit, some fit some folks better than others, some could reach controls, recoil in one platform worse in one, better than another due to gun fit.

Gun fit also includes caliber.

Fold a sheet of typing paper in half, folk again. Set this out 5yds. 5 rounds of ammo, and best if can do this from concealment, still low ready works.

At timer shoot 5 rounds.

Do that with any and all gun platforms [ revolver or semi] and all calibers a student has narrowed down "best for them".

The paper and times don't lie.

That paper informs that student which is the best for them.