As not to Hijack the 45ACP vs thread I started this one.

Before I ever had a handgun of my own I read all of my dads hunting magazines.

I can still remember the S&W ad that showed a 6" Model 19, calling it the 3 best handguns a person could own;
1. For targetshooting with wadcutters.
2. For Self Defense.
3. For big game hunting.

I knew some day I would have one.

However my first centerfire handgun was an Accurized Match Hardball 1911 in 45 ACP.

And since my first centerfire rifle was a Ruger 44 mag Deerstalker, my second centerefire handgun was a 44 Magnum.

I found I could do anything I needed to with a 45 ACP or a 44 magnum.

Now I have owned a few 357 Mag handguns over the years, but I just never warmed up to them...

I have tried to like them, and several of my friends over the years have used them, and just last year I recommended to a couple of guys at the deer lease that they should get a 357 Mag handgun for a "General Purpose Field" handgun, and they could use it for a Home protection gun as well. They got them and they like them a lot.

The 357 Mag is a very versatile cartridge, IMHO.

quote:

I have tried to like them, and several of my friends over the years have used them, and just last year I recommended to a couple of guys at the deer lease that they should get a 357 Mag handgun for a "General Purpose Field" handgun, and they could use it for a Home protection gun as well. They got them and they like them a lot

It is IMHO one of the best General purpose feild calibers out there. A mid size 357 is easy to carry easy to shoot easy to reload for.

Plenty of power to get the job done not ideal for selfdefense on the largest bears {but no hand gun is) but with good bullets well work and sure beats a sharp stick.

It is high on the list I recommend for frist time handgun owners. A mid size double action 357 is just a great gun to carry and used.

Bullet selections for the job is very important fast opening hollow points while are among the tops for human self defense. They are not the best for hunting or bear defense.

Many thousands of pages have been written on why it works so well.

No need to go and on.

IMHO, the 357 is a good all around caliber. It would be an excellant first centerfire handgun. Use 38 Specials for practice and 357 Mags. for self defense and hunting. I carry one in my truck.

N E 450 No2

I think I know what you're talking about with the .357 Mag. My first foray into handguns was a cheap German .22lr revolver that looked like a Ruger and it served it's purpose in college well.

One of the first handguns I bought when I could afford one was a Ruger .22 auto that I wished I still had but alas it was sold/traded for .................oh well. After being in love with .22lr revolvers I bought a Colt Buntline 7.5 New frontier 22/22Mag what was incredibly accurate and for some insane reason, I'm really embarrassed to admit this, I traded it for a Ruger Blackhawk .357 4.75" barrel and that trade has haunted me all my days.

It was cool to have a MAGNUM and it roared and kicked and I couldn't hit anything with the darn thing. It shot patterns of about 6-7" at 25 yards but I think part of that was me.

As the career moved forward and the funds began to come in I decided that I didn't want any what I called "compromised" calibers. My thought was I didn't want a .243 for a varmint and a deer rifle but I would get a 22-250 and a .270, and on and on. Same with pistols and shotguns. Some will say that the best shots are the lads with one gun and that can be true.

I found a .357 difficult to warm up to also. Just seemed like it did a lot of little things ok but none of them great. I've never looked back at the .357 with any remorse, other than that stupid trade of the Colt to get it.

I have the dies to reload a .357/.38 now but those are for the S&W 60 2" with the bobbed hammer and Hogue grips and a super slick trigger job by a wonderful gunsmith for my wife. However she shot a Glock 19 that I have and thought she would shoot better with that shooter and she does.

My handgun calibers are .22lr(many of these), a .380, many 9mm's, many 40's, many 45ACP's, a 44Mag, and many 45Colts. Just never found a niche that I had that a .357 could fill that another caliber or a firearm with a higher capacity couldn't fill better, especially when I reload. It seems to me that a lot of the .357Mag owners are the lads that only own that one handgun but there are others who dearly love that caliber. Just wasn't a fit for me.

I would rather carry a firearm that was better suited to a worst-case scenario situation and I find the .357 a bit light in that respect. Sure, if you place your shot well, it will do the job (assuming it is loaded correctly). Just too light for my taste. I prefer the .45 Colt as an all-arounder.

I carry a 357 maggie a great deal every summer, and I also shoot it a great deal. Probably not the ideal caliber for many applications but I've had one for 47 years & never felt like it was out of place. I don't prefer one for deer, elk, bear or antelope but just like having one around. I have 2 favorite loads that shoot great for me. The first is 5.2 grs of 231, I've taken at least a million & a half (just kidding) ground squirrels, rabbits, frogs, armadillos, possums, skunks, snakes, badgers, turtles, prairie dogs, foxes, coyotes, rock chucks & grouse with one. I've also taken deer & mountain lion with one using 13.5 grs of 2400, all in 38 special brass & its always held up its end of the bargain. Cheap to shoot, always accurate & zero recoil. Never had to use one in a hairy situation except for the lion at 5 feet but still a superb field gun. Stoke it with the #358156 or the Keith #358429 & you are well armed.

Dick

Many years ago...when I was just starting to get into handgun hunting, the best option I had at that time was a 6" Colt Python for Tennessee Whitetails. Only took that out for one season. Never got a shot at a deer...but I can tell you it works REAL WELL on Squirrels. Ate more Squirrels that year than Venison.

What's your thoughts on 180s out of a 4" ? What would you call max range ? Ability is tennis ball groups, mostly smaller at 25 yds .

Tacksmacker

I lost a deer one time hit just a little bit too high behind the shoulder. Very sparse blood trail, it was found several days later by some other hunters. It had traveled close to a 1/2 mile. My personal minimum now is the .41 mag. With the .41 my success has been 100%. Personally I can't notice any difference between the .41 and .44 mags. There undoubtedly is some difference between the two, but I haven't been able to notice it.

I own and use several 357's. Great all around caliber. Perfect for self defense and target shooting.
I don't really consider it a hunting cartridge, however. I've shot deer with it, and all were one shot kills. But I've never had a pass through, even when shot behind the shoulder on a doe at 50 yards. Bullets are always found either under the off skin, or somewhere in the middle of the vitals. None of these were really big deer, and I just can't get the penetration I desire with this cartridge. It is just on the very bottom end of effective cartridges for small deer sized animals, and I prefer more power and penetration.
I've moved on to 41, 44, and 45 colt, with far superior results.
Bill

There is nothing a 357 can do that a 44 can't do, but there are things the 44 can do that the 357 can't. 44 magnum or 45 Colt are the best "do all" cartridges for revolvers.

My first hunting revolver was a 357 and I killed quite a few hogs with it. I used the old Speer 160 grain 1/2 jacket. Never got an exit if memory serves but killed quite well when the bullet was directed to the proper location

The 357 will serve well as a trail gun for most ocassions. If were are talking about treking in the boonies of Alaska with the big bears, well then I am going for one of my BBIG BORES at that point

I later tried a "souped-up" .357...the .357/.44 Bain and Davis on Impala. Worked fine, when I could get close enough. I've since made the .41 mag. my personal minimum also.

My first handgun was a .357 Mag (Colt Python) and I still have it. For the lower 48 it would be tough to beat a quality .357 revolver. It covers everything from self-defense to big game short the dangerous four legged variety. I do a lot of backpacking and my carry load utilizes the Hornady 180 XTP.

quote:

I lost a deer one time hit just a little bit too high behind the shoulder. Very sparse blood trail, it was found several days

Poor shot location does not make for a bad caliber or bullet.

I seen critters shot poorly with a lot bigger guns the 357 and get away.

Started out with a used "Highway Patrolman" 6 inch .357. I used it for everything until I bought a new 29-2 about 2 years later. Been carrying the 6 1/2 inch .44 for 33 years now.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
Poor shot location does not make for a bad caliber or bullet.

I seen critters shot poorly with a lot bigger guns the 357 and get away.

No it doesn't, but that pipsqueak doesn't leave much margin for error. Now if that is good enough for some folks, so be it. I'll happily take a .45 Colt or better. But that's just me......

I can't warm up to a 357 for hunting but my old Dan Wesson 4" 15-2 was the best revolver I ever owned. But the cartridge itself is as loud as a .41 Magnum without the power, has horrible muzzle blast at full power and kicks almost as much as my .41. The ammunition and components are only marginally less costly.

OTOH, the 38 Special is a shooter's cartridge, fun cheap and accurate. And better for small game considering the low velocities, recoil management and less meat damage. I know the 357 can be loaded down but I have no use for it loaded up.

I'm not that conversant on self defense technologies these days; I know its a good man killer but I really don't like the little pocket revolvers in 357. Hard enought to control with +P 38 Specials. I'll take a hot 9 or 40 S&W in a medium frame auto first.

When hit in front of the diaphram, behind the shoulder, anywhere between the brisket and the spine any reasonable caliber will result in a kill. Not so with the .357. That deer that I hit and lost with the .357 would not have gone 100 yards hit in the same place with a .41 or .44, and would have left a decent blood trail.

quote:

Originally posted by David Craig:
My first handgun was a .357 Mag (Colt Python) and I still have it. For the lower 48 it would be tough to beat a quality .357 revolver. It covers everything from self-defense to big game short the dangerous four legged variety. I do a lot of backpacking and my carry load utilizes the Hornady 180 XTP.

If Colt had come out with a Python-quality 41 or 44 Magnum, I'd own a dresser drawer full of them. Caliber is the only thing that kept me from keeping that much money tied up in a Python. I had a 4" nickel and a 6" blued version at different times.

quote:

Originally posted by swampshooter:
When hit in front of the diaphram, behind the shoulder, anywhere between the brisket and the spine any reasonable caliber will result in a kill. Not so with the .357. That deer that I hit and lost with the .357 would not have gone 100 yards hit in the same place with a .41 or .44, and would have left a decent blood trail.

I'm not sure how you know this to be true. If your shot was high enough but still below the spine the same result would have happened with a rifle IME

That is the draw back with a 357 when things don't go as planned, it is big enough with perfect placement but as mentioned there is very little room for error.
When hunting medium/big game yes it will work but there are many other calibers that work better. The perfect broadshide shot only happens on occasion, other times that deer is turned a bit, or steep downhill or unhill & then you have a choice to make.
A step up to a bigger caliber is a much better choice, to me there's very little actual difference between the 41 & 44 until you get above 250 gr bullets, then its no contest. The 45 however is a much bigger bullet than the 357 or 41, with lots of case capacity & the ability to handle any job.
Very seldom does a bigger caliber make up for bad shooting, in fact many times thats what causes bad shooting.

Dick

JWP, I've hit several deer in the same spot with my 7x57 and my 41 &44 mag. Didn't have a problem with them. My normal hold is the center of the body behind the shoulder and if zeroed a little high at that range, then that's where I hit. Most hunters I know use the same hold unless shooting from a very steady rest. I've never heard of anybody losing a deer shot close behind the shoulder and under the spine with anything other than a mouse gun. I've taken close to a hundred deer and it definitely hasn't happened to me.

I am going to dissent here, as I often do... here goes:

Quite a few years ago my now departed father shot a TX whitetail buck at about 70 yards with one of my hard cast and handloaded 158s out of his DW Model 15. The buck was below him at a pretty good angle looking up, and Dad shot him in the white patch.

When we processed the buck, I was amazed at the damage that projectile caused... it went through the neck and pulverized one vertebrae, exited the neck and re-entered the front part of the buck's body high on the shoulder, cut off almost the entire set of ribs on the left side, and I found the bullet lodged in the left ham.

I still have that bullet somewhere at home. It looks like a full wadcutter somebody gashed with a small hatchet.

Now, I ask you two things: how much more penetration do you have to have, and please provide me a single scenario short of full head on where that bullet cannot be expected to completely transverse the body...

Doubless, hitting the vertebrae in the neck he would have been killed with a .22. Does that make a .22 a good deer pistol? Nobody doubts the penetration of a hard cast 158 out of a .357.

My favorite is my 45 Colt.
But I have a couple 357s and I think they're pretty good. I don't have alot of killing time with them though.
If the 357 was the only gun I had, I'd be okay with it.
Keep your hunting shots close and you should be good. Match the bullet to the game.

I've killed a few deer with my .357s. If you keep the range short, a .357 is perfectly adequate for deer. I'll freely admit that I like my .44 mag better, but if I had to pick one handgun caliber for all purposes, it would be a .357, mostly because a medium-framed .357 is a lot nicer to carry than any of my .44s are.

Swampshooter, that wasn't the point... this thread has stated more than once that the 357 leaves little margin for error... the point of my post was that the penetration AFTER pulverizing the neck vertebra calls all of that into question.

The real error would be shooting for the neck, hoping to hit vertebra, in my estimation...

My point is this: the 357 will shoot "plumb through" deer and black bear sized game on anything reasonably resembling a broadside shot, and will do so at any reaonable handgun range. To say otherwise is nonsensical, at least to me.

The problem arises that after shooting through your game and it runs a half mile with very little blood trail you are probably not going to find it. I like to hunt for my game before I shoot it.

A whitetail properly shot through the boiler room (heart/lung area) with a .35 caliber bullet will not run a half mile.
Handgun hunting requires knowing your gun and your limitations.
Taking a improper shot or one farther than you or your cartridge is capable of will result in a miss or worse yet a wounded animal.

quote:

The problem arises that after shooting through your game and it runs a half mile with very little blood trail you are probably not going to find it. I like to hunt for my game before I shoot it.

You haven't shot much with a handgun, have you?

There are an infinite number of deer shot every year with a .243. Tell me what the difference is between a .243" wound that expands to 1-1/2 calibers and a full-diameter hole from a .358" projectile. I'll wait while you do the math...

I don't think much of the .243 either, but the high velocity greatly increases the wound diameter. Apparently you don't know the difference between the wound channel of a rifle and that of a handgun. They aren't the same. You're argument is very thin. I'm done with it.

Way back when they came up with the 357...it was King.
They killed damn near everything on the planet with it.
Nowadays people say it's marginal for Jackrabbits!
As always, shot placement is EVERYTHING!
A bigger gun doesn't make you a better hunter.
If you can shoot a 357 well and a 475 like crap...carry and kill stuff with your 357!

quote:

Originally posted by Ammohouse:
Way back when they came up with the 357...it was King.
They killed damn near everything on the planet with it.

You're of course right, but we have progressed IMO.

If placing bullets with surgical precision were always possible under field conditions we would all be elephant hunting with 7x57's.

As far as the 7x57mm and elephants, "Karamojo" Bell killed about 800 with that exact caliber.

I've taken a lot of hogs with the 357 in the 70's and I certainly would not call and open sighted revolver a weapon of sugical precision.

For single action work, I have no problem with the .40+ bores. However, with my hands, the double action trigger reach of any N frame or larger sidearm makes the smooth roll of a tuned DA trigger less than ideal. Frankly, I shoot a well tuned L frame better in double action than single action under field conditions.

The reality of where and how one hunts has a lot to do with selecting a field gun. Given that virtually all of my hunting is done in the coastal South, the game sought comes down to deer and feral hog. Most shots are taken in thick cover at under 50 yards, often at moving targets of opportunity.

My favorite outdoor sidearm is a 4" 686, filled with WFN 180 grain hard cast, heat treated bullets loaded to 1200 fps. With a .280 meplate (the same as the meplate on the original 250 gr. Keith .44), the .357 gives complete penetration from almost any angle on available game, the .357 is enough gun. Particularly so if breaking the shoulders is the goal of primary shot placement.

I handle and shoot this 40 ounce sixgun regularly, compete in local bowling pin shoots, and enjoy practicing on targets attached to tires rolled down hills at the local dirt pit. It rides almost unnoticed in a Pancake type belt holster and the Hogue grip screw can be quickly swapped out for a lanyard ring when needed. Did I mention this is my favorite field gun?

Oh, almost forgot to mention, 180 grain WFN loads don't have the extra loud muzzle blast that lighter bullet full power loads have!

Here is an interesting article by James Gates on why the .357 works from the perspective of "gut pile analysis."

http://dixieslugs.com/images/3...ard_cast_bullets.pdf

Also here is a pragmatic "field test" from the "swamp crawler" crew a few years back:

http://www.beartoothbullets.co...archive_field.htm/12

357 is fine ya already have one but id def go with a 44 or 45 colt loaded mellow. Even loaded down theyre by far more effective and recoil less imho when theyre in a larger gun

Remember, there is a Difference between a Primary hunting hand gun, and a Field Handgun, or a rifle hunters Handgun.