madmike
Member
What's the consensus on .357 as a carbine defensive round?
(Consensus....right
)
(Consensus....right
)
Lever carbine
- Thread starter madmike
- Start date
- Status
dracphelan
Member
I own one, and it shoots real well. If a 357 round out of a handgun will take someone down, so will a round from a carbine. The only place it loses to other carbines is in speed of reloads and tacticool accessories. IMO, it does beat other non-revolver pistol caliber carbines (45 ACP, 9mm, 40) in range. I would trust a 357 out to about 150 yards. The semi-auto carbines out to 100 yards would be the distance I would trust them at.
For general information, I won both a Marlin 357magnum 1894 carbine and a Mechtech 1911 carbine conversion unit.
For general information, I won both a Marlin 357magnum 1894 carbine and a Mechtech 1911 carbine conversion unit.
madmike
Member
So, in a zombie/SHTF scenario, what range would you trust .357 against unarmored opponents?
for SHTF/Zombie/katrina I would definitely think well of .357 for the common expected uses from a carbine.
Add to the usefulness of the round in a revolver, the ability to digest .38 rounds and the likely commonplace ammunition and it looks like a pretty dang good prospect for a general purpose carbine.
but I am typing from a bias towards storing only one or two calibers of ammunition which can support a good range of uses.
Add to the usefulness of the round in a revolver, the ability to digest .38 rounds and the likely commonplace ammunition and it looks like a pretty dang good prospect for a general purpose carbine.
but I am typing from a bias towards storing only one or two calibers of ammunition which can support a good range of uses.
High Planes Drifter
Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
- Messages
- 1,204
I read here on THR that Buffalo Bore offers a load that, when shot from a carbine, produces velocities near that of a 30-30. IIRC velocities were over 2200fps at the muzzle. A .35" projectile moving at that speed is nothing to sneeze at. A handy little carbine would be a great choice for defense IMO.
. A .35" projectile moving at that speed is nothing to sneeze at. A handy little carbine would be a great choice for defense IMO.Stiletto Null
Member
I still wish someone would make a .44-.308 wildcat. I guess .429-.308 would be more correct.
Here is the Buffalo Bore ammo:
http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#357
Another plus of the .357: this heavy stuff will work fine in any standard revolver, as well as the Marlin 1894, if you don't mind a little heavy recoil.
http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#357
Another plus of the .357: this heavy stuff will work fine in any standard revolver, as well as the Marlin 1894, if you don't mind a little heavy recoil.
Rem700SD
Member
Stiletto,
what about the .35 whelen cartridge? is that close?
what about the .35 whelen cartridge? is that close?
Stiletto Null
Member
Is .35 short-action?
I just think it would be awesome to have something like a FAL firing what amounts to .44 SuperMag.
I just think it would be awesome to have something like a FAL firing what amounts to .44 SuperMag.
.35 Whelen is a necked-up .30-06 (a tad bigger than .338-06). Definitely not short-action.
It is, however, available in the new Remington 750 Woodsmaster semiauto rifle and carbine. And I've seen 10-rounders for it. So maybe not from a FAL, but you could put a few of 'em downrange pretty quick, from a light and compact little rifle.
It is, however, available in the new Remington 750 Woodsmaster semiauto rifle and carbine. And I've seen 10-rounders for it. So maybe not from a FAL, but you could put a few of 'em downrange pretty quick, from a light and compact little rifle.
Dave Markowitz
Member
.357 Magnum from a rifle is a good defensive choice, IMO. Factory loads have the same energy at 100 yards from a carbine as they do from a revolver at the muzzle.
I would stick with 158 grain bullets rather than the 125s, however. The 125s from a carbine may expand so much at close range that they give insufficient penetration.
I would stick with 158 grain bullets rather than the 125s, however. The 125s from a carbine may expand so much at close range that they give insufficient penetration.
Ben Shepherd
Member
As posted above:
With careful workup you can run a 158 grain 357 slug faster than a 30-30 runs a 150.
The 357 won't shoot as flat as the 30-30 however, due to the lousy B.C. of the pistol slug.
With careful workup you can run a 158 grain 357 slug faster than a 30-30 runs a 150.
The 357 won't shoot as flat as the 30-30 however, due to the lousy B.C. of the pistol slug.
True.
I think you can sight in the rifle for +/- 3" out to 150 yards or so for the .357, but a tad past 200 for the standard .30-30 (new Hornady plastic tips shoot flatter).
I figure 150 yards is as far as I'd ever shoot an iron-sighted carbine defensively, or at most game. With some holdover, it'll shoot farther.
Interestingly, because of the BC of pistol slugs, a .44 Magnum carbine doesn't shoot any flatter than the .357, and runs out of energy just as quick. Up close, it packs a bit more punch, though that's really only an issue with big game or attacking bears.
madmike
Member
I'm asking partly because that's my wife's preferred round and action. Heavier recoil she can handle but doesn't like.
So, anyone think .357 isn't powerful enough for self defense to 150 yards? Is a longer range desireable or practical with something else?
So, anyone think .357 isn't powerful enough for self defense to 150 yards? Is a longer range desireable or practical with something else?
Stiletto Null
Member
Well, 150yd starts to be a bit much for .357 bullets (low BCs)...ever consider an SKS?
madmike
Member
She's not a fan of semi, and the SKS is waaay to nose heavy. What about a lever gun with 7.62X39?
Heavy Metal Hero
Member
Defense....out to 150 yds? Why would need anything further? I would hope that at 150 yds you would be trying to escape rather than fight.
Ben Shepherd
Member
For your stated purpose it's a perfect choice.
It has enough power to 150 easy enough, and ballistically at 150 it's ok. Past 150 is a different matter however.
The biggest reason it's a winning choice?
SHE likes it. What me, you, or any of our fellow internet commandos say doesn't matter. If she likes it, she'll shoot it. The more she shoots it, the more confident/comfortable she'll become.
That, my friend is THE key factor.
My wife?
EXACT same thing: Yugo's way too nose heavy. So what'd she pick?
My 16" octagon barreled, fancy stocked, 94 trapper with the "traditional" curved buttplate, and gold bead buckhorn sights. I'm not happy with it, but she is. And she said I can have a new rifle(within reason) for Christmas!!
It has enough power to 150 easy enough, and ballistically at 150 it's ok. Past 150 is a different matter however.
The biggest reason it's a winning choice?
SHE likes it. What me, you, or any of our fellow internet commandos say doesn't matter. If she likes it, she'll shoot it. The more she shoots it, the more confident/comfortable she'll become.
That, my friend is THE key factor.
My wife?
EXACT same thing: Yugo's way too nose heavy. So what'd she pick?
My 16" octagon barreled, fancy stocked, 94 trapper with the "traditional" curved buttplate, and gold bead buckhorn sights.
I'm not happy with it, but she is. And she said I can have a new rifle(within reason) for Christmas!!sm
member
What's the consensus on .357 as a carbine defensive round?
Positive
Positive
7.62x39 is nearly identical to .30-30. Might as well just get a .30-30; they're easy to find.
A lever carbine is designed to fill the niche between a pistol and a "real" rifle, like a .30-06 with a scope and a bipod. For that, MPBR +/1 3" at 150 yards, and 200+ yard effectiveness is more than plenty!
A lever carbine is designed to fill the niche between a pistol and a "real" rifle, like a .30-06 with a scope and a bipod. For that, MPBR +/1 3" at 150 yards, and 200+ yard effectiveness is more than plenty!
Brian Williams
Moderator Emeritus
Absolutely
madmike
Member
I was already convinced because she likes it and it is a good stopper.
The second part I was curious about (Send in the flames!)
Is, if .357 from a carbine is considered a good stopper, why is MORE POWERFUL 5.56mm considered not by so many people?
I know the ballistics, I know what they'll do, I know how both handle...so is it just the "but that's a LITTLE .22!" thing I heard so many times on active duty? Or some other psychological block?
(And since her snub and 6" are both .357, it makes stocking ammo for SHTF REALLY easy...as well as the ARs and M4s we both have and were military trained on.)
The second part I was curious about (Send in the flames!)
Is, if .357 from a carbine is considered a good stopper, why is MORE POWERFUL 5.56mm considered not by so many people?
I know the ballistics, I know what they'll do, I know how both handle...so is it just the "but that's a LITTLE .22!" thing I heard so many times on active duty? Or some other psychological block?
(And since her snub and 6" are both .357, it makes stocking ammo for SHTF REALLY easy...as well as the ARs and M4s we both have and were military trained on.)
It has more energy because it's moving faster.
Terminal performance, however, can be quite different. 158 grains of slug is going to have a different effect on a target than 55 grains of spitzer.
Some argue that slower but bigger and heavier makes for a better "stopper."
I think that we'd all agree that a bowling ball, rolling slowly, is more likely to knock you off your feet than a tennis ball, at any speed you want.
That's the theory of the "slow and heavy" proponents. I can't say what's right.
Now I don't think that anyone thinks an EXPANDING .223 bullet at 150 yards or less is ineffective on a human attacker. That's not what the military uses, nor is it the longest range you might expect in battle -- not personal defense or law enforcement, but a military battle.
Apples and oranges, all 'round.
- Status
