The .357 Magnum Legend....

[dannyd]

My, 357 magnum rounds are loaded using 38 special target data, but they have been able to defeat my two adversaries; Mr. Paper and Mr. Cardboard.

 

[Riomouse911]

Again, back then. a revolver didn’t have 7-8-9 shots in reserve, so much more emphasis was put into marksmanship. When I started in 1991 the last revolver holdouts were still sending cadets to the academy with revolvers. (Of the 45-ish in my class we had 6 revolver shooters from 3 different agencies.) Range training then was geared towards having an initial 6-shots, even though I had 16 in my 5906 (ugh! Not my fav), a friend had 14 in her squeeze- cocker H&K and the others had everything from 8 in a .45 ACP 1911 on up. We spent hours focusing on stance, grip, draw and the first two shots; basically firing two, having two for an immediate follow up, and the last two in reserve.

Throughout the decades that followed it became more of a “just get them through” philosophy for most agencies, with minimal emphasis on form, function, etc. No range movement, static targets, just 30-40 shots a trimester was about it.

I did spend 11.5 years on SWAT/SRT and spent a lot of time and ammo focusing my training on what matters every month. If you shoot twice, you will have a sight picture for three; shoot and hit until the threat stops, etc. is the mantra we followed because of the dangers posed by people not falling to the magic bullet or getting back into a fight after initially being counted out. Having 18 immediately on tap in my Glock 34, with another 34 shots in reserve, is a far cry from 6 and 12 in a Model 19/66.

Just my observations, they are worth no more or less than anyone else’s.

Stay safe..

 

[WrongHanded]

This says a lot in itself.
The problem with collecting data around stopping power and cartridge/bullet effectiveness is collecting the data.

Excellent point.

Data collection on real world shooting seems to rarely be available to the general public, if it is even collected at all. So when someone says modern 9mm drops most people with one shot (or something to that effect), I'm given to wonder how anyone would known that, given most recorded police shooting involve multiple hits.

In other words, where's the data to back such a statement? One could claim M&S, but others would decry it as falsified or otherwise no good. So then upon what data exactly is the conclusion drawn that a single hit from 9mm or any of the modern service cartridges is usually enough to stop a threat?

 

[Charlie Martinez]

Since buying my first 357 Magnum revolver in 1972 my shooting buddies and I have shot just about every nonliving object imaginable with it including wet phone books, iron frying pans, washing machines, TV's and car engines, etc. and I have no doubt that it would be horribly damaging to a human. However the muzzle blast is so intense w/o ear protection that regardless of its potential as a manstopper I have ruled out the 357 for SD.

Someone posted that Bill Jordan said he closed his eyes the first time he fired a 357. Bill Jordan was a big, tough dude very capable of handling the recoil of a 357 Magnum so I am nearly 100% sure that it was due to the effect the unexpectedly unpleasant muzzle blast had on his hearing. Being as tough as he was I'm sure Bill kept on shooting anyway but most of us wouldn't want to "get used" to the muzzle blast by damaging our hearing. I read that discussions involving the old time shooters like Elmer Keith, Jack O'Connor, etc. were loud as hell because none of them could hear very well. Jordan probably would have felt right at home with these guys.

I have no doubts that the legendary reputation of the 357 Magnum as a manstopper is true but IMO the muzzle blast makes it impractical for SD. When I carry a 357 Mag revolver for SD I load it with 38 Special P+.

 

[doubleh]

.45 ACP would stop an adversary with one shot 95% of the tim

Even before then a hit anywhere with a 45 ACP was reputed to be deadly. A hit in an arm would tear it completely off. Recoil was said to be fierce and very hard to manage.

Back in the day before the company I worked for decided having a gun in your vehicle was too dangerous and banned them I carried a DW 15-2 VH 8 in a gunrug and had earmuffs along with it. I would take back roads home and hunt varmints with it. One day I was out in the back of the yard building mud anchors and the assistant foreman drove up, He looked in my truck and saw the gun, got it out, closed the door and leaned against the truck to fire 6 rounds at empty barrels in the dump pit about 75 yards away. He did not don the earmuffs and when finished he put up the pistol.said," You couldn't pay me enough money to shoot that thing again", got in his car and drove off. I have always wondered how long it took for his ears to quit ringing.

 

[C-grunt]

Excellent point.

Data collection on real world shooting seems to rarely be available to the general public, if it is even collected at all. So when someone says modern 9mm drops most people with one shot (or something to that effect), I'm given to wonder how anyone would known that, given most recorded police shooting involve multiple hits.

In other words, where's the data to back such a statement? One could claim M&S, but others would decry it as falsified or otherwise no good. So then upon what data exactly is the conclusion drawn that a single hit from 9mm or any of the modern service cartridges is usually enough to stop a threat?

My statements come from experience of 16+ years as a street cop for a department that average 20 officer involved shootings a year, 180+ murders a year, and hundreds of non fatal shooting assaults a year. I've seen a lot of people shot with all of the duty handguns and a few of the odd balls.

 

[WisBorn]

My statements come from experience of 16+ years as a street cop for a department that average 20 officer involved shootings a year, 180+ murders a year, and hundreds of non fatal shooting assaults a year. I've seen a lot of people shot with all of the duty handguns and a few of the odd balls.

To dangerous for me I think I will stay in Central Wisconsin

 

[WrongHanded]

My statements come from experience of 16+ years as a street cop for a department that average 20 officer involved shootings a year, 180+ murders a year, and hundreds of non fatal shooting assaults a year. I've seen a lot of people shot with all of the duty handguns and a few of the odd balls.

Good to know. But it's still the word of one anonymous person on the internet. And ultimately not very useful without specifics. For example, what percentage of officer involved shootings result in the suspect being hit by more than one round from an officer? How many hits is an average? How many rounds are fired per incident on average? What percentage of people are actually stopped by a single hit? Do you see what I'm saying?

You "know what you know". But is what you "know" the reality or is it subjective? And if it is the reality, how can you be sure? Now, if you can tell us that you have a data collection system to analyze all these shooting and work out those numbers, that would be a different matter entirely. Is that how it is?

 

[dannyd]

If your chasing the Legend, best place to start is with Mr. Sharpe's handloading guide.

 

[Old_Grouch]

Even before then a hit anywhere with a 45 ACP was reputed to be deadly.

I wish I could have bought Chuck Taylor's "Knockout Factor" for what it was worth and sold it for what he thought it was worth.

 

[C-grunt]

Good to know. But it's still the word of one anonymous person on the internet. And ultimately not very useful without specifics. For example, what percentage of officer involved shootings result in the suspect being hit by more than one round from an officer? How many hits is an average? How many rounds are fired per incident on average? What percentage of people are actually stopped by a single hit? Do you see what I'm saying?

You "know what you know". But is what you "know" the reality or is it subjective? And if it is the reality, how can you be sure? Now, if you can tell us that you have a data collection system to analyze all these shooting and work out those numbers, that would be a different matter entirely. Is that how it is?

I never collected that specific data because it is useless. All these one shot stop percentages and the like are pure marketing BS. Outside of high central nervous system shots, the person being shot plays the biggest part in how quickly they stop. Drug and alcohol effect, age, overall health, muscle density, bone density, athletically active, state of mind, do they want to die, etc... There is a big difference between a 25 year old athlete being shot and a 65 year old diabetic cigarette smoking couch potato who takes meds daily for multiple health issues.

Also you should note that my original reply didn't say "one shot" it said "one good shot". Peripheral hits rarely change the outcome unless the bad guy gives up because of pain or fear. Which many times they do. But we dont train people to expect that behavior.

Ive seen people take good COM torso hits and still be up and ambulatory (at least for a long enough time to still be a threat) after being shot with 9mm, 40, 45, 357 Mag, 223, 5.56, 7.62x39, and 7.62 NATO. The rifle rounds were shorter time frames and all died a short time later except for one guy who died at the FOB hospital hours later, but he was out of the fight quickly. All of the handgun rounds I have seen people take very grievous hits from and survive.

 

[dannyd]

Well, I am going to see how well the A/C works at the indoor range and pursue my two adversaries; Mr. Paper and Mr. Cardboard

 

[C-grunt]

Well, I am going to see how well the A/C works at the indoor range and pursue my two adversaries; Mr. Paper and Mr. Cardboard

That's far more effective at making sure someone survives a gunfight than worrying about stop percentages and trying to find a magic bullet.

 

[Pat Riot]

I have no doubts that the legendary reputation of the 357 Magnum as a manstopper is true but IMO the muzzle blast makes it impractical for SD. When I carry a 357 Mag revolver for SD I load it with 38 Special P+.

Back in ‘92 my friends and I got into a discussion about home defense and the sound of a gun going off indoors and what it would do to your hearing. We all worked together and took lunch together and this discussion was off and on over a few days time.
I decided to do a an experiment with my personal handguns. It was a stupid thing to do, but over a period of a few days I fired a .22 LR - 6” Bbl, a .22 Magnum -4” Bbl, a .32 Magnum - 2.5” Bbl, a .38 Special - 2” Bbl and a .45 ACP - 5” Bbl. All indoors in my bedroom. I fired each gun into a milk crate full of phone books leaning at a 45 degree angle on the floor leaning against the wall.
.22 LR is a lot louder than expected and very sharp.
.22 Magnum very loud and very sharp.
.32 Magnum painfully loud and sharp.
.38 Special loud but more tolerable than the .22 or .32 Magnums.
.45 ACP was more like a loud pop.
Out of those cartridges for home defense the .45 was the most tolerable and both the .38 and .45 were the least disorienting.
I wouldn’t even consider trying that with a .357 Magnum.
I didn’t have a 9mm at the time, but I’ll bet it ranks with the .32 Magnum in noise.
I can’t imagine a 12 gauge or a 5.56/.223 indoors.

It was a stupid test and I am sure it impacted my hearing negatively as did lots of other things when I was younger, dumber, tougher and bullet proof. But I did learn something and that was my goal.

 

[WrongHanded]

I never collected that specific data because it is useless. All these one shot stop percentages and the like are pure marketing BS. Outside of high central nervous system shots, the person being shot plays the biggest part in how quickly they stop. Drug and alcohol effect, age, overall health, muscle density, bone density, athletically active, state of mind, do they want to die, etc... There is a big difference between a 25 year old athlete being shot and a 65 year old diabetic cigarette smoking couch potato who takes meds daily for multiple health issues.

Also you should note that my original reply didn't say "one shot" it said "one good shot". Peripheral hits rarely change the outcome unless the bad guy gives up because of pain or fear. Which many times they do. But we dont train people to expect that behavior.

Ive seen people take good COM torso hits and still be up and ambulatory (at least for a long enough time to still be a threat) after being shot with 9mm, 40, 45, 357 Mag, 223, 5.56, 7.62x39, and 7.62 NATO. The rifle rounds were shorter time frames and all died a short time later except for one guy who died at the FOB hospital hours later, but he was out of the fight quickly. All of the handgun rounds I have seen people take very grievous hits from and survive.

But do you not realize that if you have no actual basis of data to work from, saying something akin to "one good shot with a 9mm or .45acp is enough to stop a threat in most cases", simply holds no real weight? Particularly so if the majority of your department's officer-involved shooting result in the suspect being hit more than one time.

 

[Riomouse911]

Round and round we go. Someone please remind me, why do we have these debates again?

Stay safe.

 

[dannyd]

That's far more effective at making sure someone survives a gunfight than worrying about stop percentages and trying to find a magic bullet.

I am practicing to shoot my first USPSA match this fall, with a revolver at 66 years old. It will interesting to say the least.

 

[WrongHanded]

Round and round we go. Someone please remind me, why do we have these debates again?

Stay safe.

Well let's put this into context. I asked about the legend of the .357 Magnum and if it was based in reality. Someone else made some big claims about the efficacy of single "good" hits with service cartridges. I ask for evidence to support it. None is given.

I'm perfectly happy to go back to discussing the how the legend was made.

 

[C-grunt]

But do you not realize that if you have no actual basis of data to work from, saying something akin to "one good shot with a 9mm or .45acp is enough to stop a threat in most cases", simply holds no real weight? Particularly so if the majority of your department's officer-involved shooting result in the suspect being hit more than one time.

Like you've stated before there is no data to work with. Like Ive stated before, the data would be useless if compiled. Im just stating what Ive actually observed to counter your statement:

"It appears the .357 Magnum didn't need 4 or 5 or 6 or more hits to stop a threat. That seems not to be the case today, with modern service handguns and ammunition."

A statement you are making yet admit have no data to back it up. The reason why cops and soldiers today are taught to shoot until the threat stops is because of lessons learned from guys with 6 shot revolvers. These things werent just made up out of thin air. I started this job in the mid 2000s. A lot of the old salty guys carried 357s for a good part of their career, which for many of them included the crack times in the 1980s. While they all had good things to say about their Model 19s and Model 66s, they all had the same advice. Only good hits count and more good hits are better.

 

[C-grunt]

Well let's put this into context. I asked about the legend of the .357 Magnum and if it was based in reality. Someone else made some big claims about the efficacy of single "good" hits with service cartridges. I ask for evidence to support it. None is given.

I'm perfectly happy to go back to discussing the how the legend was made.

I told you how it earned it's reputation.

"The 357 Magnum earned it's reputation because it could drive the old hollow points fast enough. With it's power it drove a heavy enough hollow point fast enough to get good expansion and good penetration. It still does it today. It's a fantastic round, but has a lot of recoil."

Back in the hey day of the 357 the hollow points were much more low tech. They required speed to open up well. Many rounds wouldnt get reliable expansion or would have to use softer materials to get expansion which would limit penetration through bone and tissue. The 9mm Silver Tip in the Miami shootout is a very good example.

The 357 could drive a heavier and/or stronger hollow point to speeds where it expanded well and still had the strength and mass to penetrate well.

 

[WrongHanded]

I told you how it earned it's reputation.

You certainly gave me your opinion. Perhaps we can hear from some others now.

 

[Riomouse911]

Well let's put this into context. I asked about the legend of the .357 Magnum and if it was based in reality. Someone else made some big claims about the efficacy of single "good" hits with service cartridges. I ask for evidence to support it. None is given.

I'm perfectly happy to go back to discussing the how the legend was made.

You are asking to pet a unicorn. No one anywhere has an actual “it was me” answer to your Q, or it would’ve been put to bed decades ago.

Is the lore of the .357 true or just marketing BS? Dunno. But it, and similar efficacy debates surrounding any of a dozen calibers, gets repeated over and over and over across gun counters, campfires and forum boards.

Stay safe.

 

[WrongHanded]

You are asking to pet a unicorn. No one anywhere has an actual “it was me” answer to your Q, or it would’ve been put to bed decades ago.

I'm sure that's true. It is however very disappointing. Particularly considering the amount of money and time that has been spent on shooting blocks of gelatin and pretending it's science.

 

[AJC1]

I love my 357 and I'd use it no question for SD. If I could choose I'd want my 20kpsi loads because they are easily manageable and I'm very accurate with them. I don't notice the difference in muzzle blast using medium burn rate powders, but a max load of a slow powder let's you know. I'd pick my 45acp over my 357 if I had to shoot factory max loads because of that shock wave and muzzle flash. I own one box of factory for the 45 and none for the 357... they are getting what's handy....

 

[ECVMatt]

The adage "Experience is the best teacher; reading provides the roadmap" underscores the distinct yet complementary roles that experiential learning and reading play in the process of acquiring knowledge and understanding.

While reading equips individuals with a comprehensive framework of theoretical concepts, historical context, and expert insights, experiential learning engages the senses and facilitates a deeper, firsthand comprehension of the subject matter. Reading offers a structured foundation by presenting a curated collection of ideas and perspectives, thereby serving as a roadmap to navigate complex subjects.

However, experience brings a dynamic and multifaceted dimension to learning, allowing individuals to apply theoretical knowledge in real-world scenarios, adapt to unexpected challenges, and internalize lessons through trial and error. In essence, this saying acknowledges the synergy between intellectual preparation gained through reading and the practical wisdom gleaned from active engagement, illustrating that both avenues contribute indispensably to a holistic and well-rounded education.

While I recognize the merits of both approaches, I hold a higher regard for practical experience as opposed to theoretical concepts presented in writing. In my view, individuals who possess genuine hands-on involvement offer invaluable insights that stem from personal encounters with the subject matter. The depth of understanding that comes from encountering real-world challenges and engaging in experiential learning cannot be replicated solely through reading about theoretical constructs.

The authentic wisdom gained from firsthand experience adds a layer of authenticity and depth to comprehension, enabling us to navigate complexities with a heightened level of adaptability and nuanced awareness from actual results derived from real life encounters.