practical advantages of .357 over .38?

[pps]

I was waiting for someone to mention Marshall & Sanow. Since no one did, I will - at the end of the day we need some data to answer OP's question. Of course there was a lot of arguing about it but AFAIK that's the only data we got...

Now, as long as you believe they've done a good job (I think they have), the answer is right there in their tables. Best 357mag load - 96% one shot stops; best 38spl+P+ load - 80%. That's a big difference

If that were one of my student's thesis papers I'd have given him a C. The method of data collection was poor. They exclude data where there were multiple com hits with failure to stop. While their apologists argue, "but it's real life data" my reply is, "so is all of the useful data on failures to stop that they simply threw out."

I am not impugning their motives, just their data collection methods.

 

[hoptob]

PPS,

I also know nothing about their motifs (if any) and on the surface this exclusion sounds wrong. But I think I can see where they were coming from.

Clearly, if multiple hits failed to stop the attacker so failed the first hit. But if they chose to include these cases they would have biased their data towards failures. Why? Because they would be selecting cases based on the very result they were trying to score and that's a no-no.

Suppose they had 300 cases of one hit shootings and 700 cases of multiple hits shootings (I am making up the numbers). Including only failures from 2/3 of the cases would have created a clear bias. One has to either include all 700 cases or exclude all but he can't "pick and choose". They could not include all 700 because if attacker did stop, it'd be often impossible to know if it was the first shot that stopped him (e.g. shooter double tapped). So they opted to exclude. Not sure if there was a better way...

I don't know these gentlemen and have no stakes in the debate. Just thinking out loud.

Mike

 

[pps]

They could not include all 700 because if attacker did stop, it'd be often impossible to know if it was the first shot that stopped him (e.g. shooter double tapped). So they opted to exclude. Not sure if there was a better way...

The better way would be to make ALL the raw data available to the public for some actual statistical analysis and peer review. Lets say that a particular round M&S said had 96% "one shot stops" of the data they included, but threw out 70% of the raw data where multiple hits were involved, and half of those were failures to stop.

What now? We have, in that scenario, 35% failure to stop with multiple hits, that were thrown out with the 70% of the time where the cops continued to service the threat until hostilities ceased. People reading the "96% one shot stop" might falsely look at a round and think "cool, there's a 96% chance that any given round to center of mass will end a conflict."

Simply because of the collection methods used, the data is damn near meaningless.

 

[hoptob]

Yes, I think you are right, pps. Inclusion creates one bias, exclusion creates a different bias. I haven't seen raw data and don't know which is worse. I certainly agree with you that failure to release all data for review is a very damaging argument against M&S. It doesn't mean they forged their data (just as confession doesn't proove guilt) but it raises lots of hard questions and doubts for sure. Pitty that noone bothered to repeat their study and publish all data.

Mike

 

[Oyeboten]

My own appreciation, is that a .357 offers advantages of handling more powerful Cartridges than a .38 Special...

How any specific Carridge's Bullet kind and Bullet Weight and FPS will behave out of what Barrel Length, and with what Target, are subsets of the comparison.


Probably, for that matter, an original 158grn RNL Black Powder load .38 S & W Special round of 1898, when out of a 6-1/2 inch Barrel, would be on par with many +P+ or 'lite' Magnum loads of today...far as whallop for the recipient goes...


And, Magnum wise, a 148 grn LHBWC, loaded 'backwards', and going say 1100fps, would be a good non-over-penerating close range round, with plenty of damage-making.


As has been said many times and in many ways, conventional Hangun wise, a Bullet of whatever Calibre or kind which hits the Spine or Brain, will tend to stop the recipient.

A Bullet of whatever kind which does not strike the Spine or Brain, may not stop the recipient.

 

[Old John]

In Indiana They allowed Pistol calber Carbines

Last year, they Allowed the Pistol Caliber Carbines, for Deer hunting.
They allow .357 magnums but not .38 specials.
They don't allow any semi-auto cartridges either.
So the .45 Colt is legal, but not the .45 acp.
It must be because of the Cartridge length, hunnh.