Ruger LCR .357 vs. .38 +P?

[george burns]

Is there a substancial difference between a 357 and a 38+P, using the best ammo for a snub nose revolver. Or is this a falacy. Will the 357 make that much of a difference in an under 2" barrell?
Please don't tel me to shoot myself with each and find out, this has always interested me, and some say yes others say no. I really don't know, so please inform me. We are talking defensive handgun ammo.
I carried a 38 for 20 years in NY, and it never bothered me no matter what I shot out of it, from lead to hollow points, having been 30+ yrs ago, I don't remember what the heck I was using at the time. But most were my uncles hand loads that were hot.
Is a 357 that much worse? And is it worth the pain?

 

[Alte Schule]

Review these charts and compare the two.

http://www.ballistics101.com/357_magnum.php

http://www.ballistics101.com/38_special.php

I have a Ruger .38+P LCRx 3". With holster and ammo the entire rig weighs 20 ozs. Recoil is moderate with Gold Dot ammo.
My Ruger SP 101 .357 with a 2.25" barrel weighs a bit over 31 ozs with ammo and holster. Recoil can be harsh with this snubbie depending on ammo. Follow up accuracy is much better if I use .38+P. I travel occasionally to the desolate areas of SW Texas. Its loaded with .357 Gold Dot on those occasions.
My EDC carry is a LCR in .327 Mag. Six shot, versatile ammo selection and an excellent trigger.

 

[Confederate]

This is a great topic and it's something I've wondered about, too.

The whole idea behind the LCR .357 (top) is that it's a defense gun. If forced to shoot in close quarters, you're not likely not to complain about recoil. In practice, expect sharp, loud bursts, but stay concentrated on your front sight and the target. If you're shooting a paper target at close range, you may see the force of the blast blow the bottom of the target away from you. This happened when I shot a .357 derringer some years ago, and that was a unique experience. But a lightweight .357 revolver would certainly be far better if the barrel was 2.75-3 inches. Two inches is simply far too short of a barrel for the .357 round. It's like using compressed air and not using the included plastic hose.

 

[Sergei Mosin]

George,

Short answer is, yes, there's a substantial difference between .38 and .357 loads out of a snubnose. See http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=725698&highlight=KLCR for a good discussion of the subject.

 

[Confederate]

Review these charts and compare the two.

http://www.ballistics101.com/357_magnum.php
http://www.ballistics101.com/38_special.php

Fine, but this is fiction in short barrels. I don't know what barrel lengths are used in these figures but it's not stated. Shooting the .357 round out of a revolver with a 1.82-inch barrel not only will belch forth flame and thunder, it most likely will fail to deliver the desired stopping power as well as making a racket.

 

[Sergei Mosin]

Fine, but this is fiction in short barrels. I don't know what barrel lengths are used in these figures but it's not stated. Shooting the .357 round out of a revolver with a 1.82-inch barrel not only will belch forth flame and thunder, it most likely will fail to deliver the desired stopping power as well as making a racket.

Nonsense. Barrel length is irrelevant - the .357 will always outperform the .38. The data bears this out (refer to the thread I linked above for one example). Obviously the gap widens as barrel length increases, but it's still there even at snubnose lengths.

Whether that extra performance is worth the extra recoil, flash, and blast is a separate question. I think it is - up to a point, anyway. You won't find a full house load such as the Federal 357B in my LCR; my preferred load is the Remington Golden Saber, which is a mid-range magnum load, something of a .38+P+, if you will. It runs about 250 fps faster than the equivalent .38+P load in the same gun. For no more recoil/flash/blast than it adds, I'll take the extra horsepower.

 

[Confederate]

Yes, it will will always outperform the .38, all other things being equal. But the flash, noise and recoil will exact a terrible price for the modest increase between a 6-inch .38 Spc and a 2-inch .357. I'm a great believer in the .357 round, even out of a 2.5-3-inch barrel; but you reach a point of diminishing marginal return. There's an adage to the effect that even if you miss someone with a 2-inch .357, the exuding fire, heat and blast will burn them to a crisp.

So even though you're shooting a .357, the amount of velocity you're giving up by going to a 2-inch or shorter barrel is just too much of a price in my view. You'll get an increase with no barrel at all, but in my view you're giving up too much critical stopping power.

 

[Sergei Mosin]

Comparing the performance of a 6-inch .38 with a 2-inch .357 isn't particularly useful. I can't put a 6-inch anything in my pocket. But I can and do pocket a 1.875-inch .357 LCR all the time. Sure, it gives up a fair bit of power compared to my 4.2-inch GP100. But it does a lot better than a .38 LCR - and the LCR can go just about anywhere with me, while the GP100 is limited to winter concealed carry or open carry in the field.